TA and the JQ

Lessons from the world of bacteria for answering the Jewish Question (JQ).

Can the following hypothesis be part of the solution to the Cofnas conundrum, the issue of “right-wing” Jews and the idea that not all Jews go into anti-White activity? True enough, the "good Jews" are relatively few in number, and there are many, many more anti-White, leftist Jews (even controlling for “anti-Semitism”), but the Stephen Miller types demand an explanation. Therefore, what can we say about Cofnas' idea that as long as an entity is not explicitly "anti-Semitic," high-IQ Jews will rise to prominence solely due to their ability, not because of any Kevin MacDonald-style explanation? If one rejects Cofnas' hypothesis, as I do, given the tropism of most Jews toward destructive behavior, and the self-interested nature of (relatively rare) Jewish "good" behavior, is there an alternative? Is there another possibility, one that rejects Cofnas' perspective, but which also looks at the JQ from a fresh evolutionary perspective, using an example from biology that MacDonald did not consider in his work on this subject? Can we look to nature for a model to explain why Jews get involved in different sides of every issue, and why some Jews seem to oppose the destructive activities of their co-ethnics? Let us consider together.

See this, on the toxin-antitoxin (TA) system in bacteria. Bacteria can carry plasmids, which are circular, extrachromosomal pieces of DNA that encode genes. In the TA system, consider a plasmid that carries one gene that codes for a stable toxin protein that can kill the bacteria and another gene that codes for an unstable antitoxin protein that prevents the toxin from killing the bacteria. As long as the plasmid replicates and is inherited into bacterial daughter cells (bacterial cells produced when the original bacteria replicate), all is well for the bacteria. The unstable antitoxin, being continuously produced by the plasmid, protects the plasmid-carrying bacteria from the stable toxin. But if the plasmid is not inherited by the bacterial daughter cells, those daughter cells will not have the protective antitoxin produced by the plasmid, since the plasmid is no longer present. Since the antitoxin is unstable, and thus rapidly degraded, if there is no plasmid present continuously producing it, the antitoxin is not there to protect the bacteria from the toxin. Why is the toxin still there when there is no plasmid present to produce it?  Remember - it is stable. Thus, even though the toxin is also not being produced in daughter cells that lack plasmids, because it is stable, it will still be present in those cells at levels that are high enough to kill the bacteria (i.e., when the original plasmid-containing bacteria replicate, the stable toxin is still there to be passed down to the daughter cells even if those daughter cells do not inherit the plasmid).

Any bacterial daughter cell that does not contain the plasmid will be killed by the left-over stable toxin. This ensures that the plasmid must be present; there is selective pressure for the plasmid to be retained because without it the bacteria die. Thus, the TA system forces the bacteria to become “addicted” to the plasmid; by producing the stable toxin, the plasmid ensures that only through its (genetic) continuity can the bacteria survive.

Likewise, Jews produce stable cultural and biopolitical toxins (memes, multiracialism, etc.) for their host societies. Thus, the continuous presence of “right-wing” Jews, with their unstable efforts to detoxify the destructive culture produced by their co-ethnics, is required; their efforts are required for societal survival.  Jews in general produce the stable toxins, while a subset of Jews produce the unstable anti-toxins that attempt to mitigate the effects of the toxins produced by Jewry, toxins produced by what James Bowery termed “Jewish virulence.” For example, Jews as a group promote mass migration into White lands, which is a stable toxin manifested through long-term sustained Jewish efforts, while a few "right-wing" Jews then step in, as does Miller, providing a short-term effort (anti-toxin) to address the demographic and cultural damage of the Jewish toxins.

As long as the toxins are present, the anti-toxins are needed; hence, Jews force the host to maintain a Jewish presence in the hope that one set of Jews can at least temporarily mitigate the damage done by other Jews. Thus, “right-wing” Jews are a temporary solution to the stable, intractable problem caused by Jews in general. Of course one does not have to assert that all of this is always planned and intentional; in some cases, it can be an emergent property of complex Jewish behavior. However, in some cases it may in fact be intentional (even if only at some generalized, incoherent, "hive mind" level).

Therefore, Jews ensure their continuity in their host societies because the host believes it requires one set of Jews to deal with the problems from another set of Jews. Further, the host society, or at least its elite class, becomes “addicted” to the abilities and expertise of Jews and does not wish to deal with the problem by simply ridding itself of the parasite. Indeed, the host may wrongly consider the parasite to be a beneficial, mutualistic symbiont. In addition, even if the parasite is removed, if the cultural toxins are stable they may still remain in the host society even after the parasite is gone. Therefore, the cultural and biopolitical damage done by Jews may remain even if Jews are expelled from society; the question remains if the host alone can repair the damage. If they cannot, or merely believe that they cannot, then the host will maintain the Jewish parasite in the hopes that the parasite, or one fraction thereof, will undo (at least some) of the damage it created.

And if the host does decide to get rid of the parasite, and even if they can, by themselves alone, repair the parasite's damage, then they may be attacked by another host desperate to defend its own faux-"beneficial" parasites (World War II can be viewed through this lens). Of course, the extended phenotype paradigm comes into play here as well; host behavior can be viewed as the extended phenotype of the parasite and the parasite’s genome. Indeed, the various behaviors at play here are too complex to be modeled by just one biological paradigm.

There is no doubt that there can be different permutations of this scenario, and as stated, the TA scenario itself is only one part of the problem.  And, even when looking at the human TA-like scenario itself, there can be some differences to the bacterial situation, human societies are much more complex. One can argue that Gentiles can provide their own anti-toxins – is National Socialism an example?  But then we go back to the issue of multiple paradigms - National Socialism in the Hitlerian sense was destroyed by the Allies acting as extended phenotypes of the Jews. There is a lot going on here. 

Let us consider National Socialist Germany again from the TA hypothesis perspective. One could argue that the assistance of Jewish atomic scientists (anti-toxin) could have helped Germany win the world war ultimately caused, in the last analysis, by the pernicious effects of the Jewish presence in Germany and in the White world as a whole (toxin). What about other examples? Jews brought the toxin of communism to Russia - a stable toxin that lasted for decades and resulted in incredible levels of suffering and death - while providing unstable anti-toxin assistance to the USSR via continuing attempts to subvert the West during the Cold War (complicated by the defection of some Jews to American neoconservatism). In addition, Jewish atom bomb spies provided some help (anti-toxin) to the Soviet Union that their co-ethnics helped to create (toxin). We have already considered the situation in America, as "right-wing" Jews are considered by some Whites to be anti-toxin "allies" in the fight against the problems (mass immigration, the "civil rights" agenda, "woke" ideology, multiculturalism, cultural anti-Whiteness, etc.) caused by the toxic Jewish presence in America.

Throughout history, Jews were expelled from one nation after another, because of the stable toxicity they created, and because that toxicity continued after they left, foolish elites, "addicted" to the presence of Jews, would invite the Jews to return, in order to provide unstable anti-toxin help to undo the toxic damage originally done ("help" typically performed, for example, by attempts to revitalize the economy through Jewish banking and money-lending, which created even more toxic problems, and thus requiring even more attempts at anti-toxic "remedies"). We observe the historical narrative of Jews always being on both sides of an issue, with the preponderance of effort toward activities harmful to the host society and a few Jews attempting to be "helpful" - toxin and anti-toxin. We always observe one set of Jews providing "solutions" to intractable problems introduced by the overall Jewish presence in the host society.

Therefore, there is utility for the TA=JQ analogy. Scientists state that host-parasite co-evolution is fundamental to life. The evolution of the White host has been significantly altered and deformed (Yockey's culture pathology) by the Jewish parasite.

Hopefully, others can comment on this hypothesis, attempt to test it, to either falsify it or defend and extend it if it survives attempts at falsification, and if it proves useful, with explanatory power, students of the Jewish problem can incorporate it into a greater understanding of the JQ.