…by Jonas E. Alexis
I got an email just a few days ago from Crystal Wright, a self-proclaimed “conservative black chick,” celebrating the publication of her new book, Con Job: How Democrats Gave Us Crime, Sanctuary Cities, Abortion Profiteering, and Racial Division. In the email, which was sent out to numerous other people, Wright writes in part,
Poor Wright truly believes that the issue hinges on whether a person is either a Democrat or Republican, a false dichotomy which has crippled the moral and intellectual maturity of female “conservative” chicks (a synonym for political prostitutes) like Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Deneen Borellim, Kirsten Powers, Sarah Palin, Dana Loesch, Michelle Bachmann, Katie Pavlich, etc.
Malkin in particular wrote a New York Times bestselling book last year entitled Sold Out: How High-Tech Billionaires & Bipartisan Beltway Crapweasels Are Screwing America’s Best & Brightest Workers. Guess how many times she exhaustively confronts “high-tech billionaires” like the Rockefellers and the Koch brothers, people who are really cheating the system?
Zero! She mentions Goldman Sachs obliquely.
I asked Wright if she would like to be engaged in a written debate with me on some of the issues she raises in her book from a purely scholarly standpoint. I’m still waiting.
Crystal Wright is a new Ann Coulter on the block. You can even perceive this in the very introduction of her book. She states that the Democratic Party “feeds off and exacerbates the very worst things in America, and still has broad appeal.”
It really pains me to beat a dead horse here, but Wright is forcing me to do so. The worst things that ever happened to America in the twenty-first century are the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and now in Syria. The Iraq war alone will end up sending a six-trillion dollar bill to the American people.
The so-called “war on terror” is on its way to cost five trillion dollars. Wright cannot dump this on so-called Democrats. In fact, the war was neither “liberal” nor “conservative.” It was essentially a Neoconservative war.
If Wright did mention that the Neoconservatives were behind the wars in the Middle East, her book would not have been published by Regnery, which has progressively displayed a Neoconservative outlook.
Wright whines about how so-called Democrats are responsible for the immigration problem. But Wright again would not want to look at the following headlines by one of the leading Jewish journals in America: “Jews Unite Behind Push for Immigration Reform;” “Immigration Reform Is Our Jewish Responsibility;” “For Jews, a Permanent Stake in the Immigration Debate;” “Immigration Debate Prompts Growing Jewish-Latino Ties;” “Jewish Groups Slam White House for ‘Baby Step’ on Syrian Refugees.”
More interesting headlines: “Jewish Groups Lead Push To Crack Open Doors to Syria Refugees;” “Jews Unite To Defend Policy on Syrian Refugees — With a Few Exceptions.” The Times of Israel tells us: “British Jews lay groundwork for influx of Syrian refugees.”
What is so disgusting about all this is that those Jewish groups do not push the same ideology in Israel. As we have documented in previous articles, Benjamin Netanyahu in particular refused to accept so-called Syrian refugees. It gets even more interesting: “Poll shows few Israelis willing to take in Syrian refugees.” It was reported that “Israel is building a wall to keep Syrian refugees out.”
Because of fear, dumb Goyim like Angela Merkel thoughtlessly embraced Barbara Spectre’s and Anetta Kahane’s destructive ideology in Europe, while ignoring Israel’s corrosive policy. Merkel seemed to have recoiled from that a little at the end of 2015. But her hands are still handcuffed because she seems to think that resisting the New World Order in Germany is like embracing Nazism again.
Now the real question is this: will Crystal Wright unpack this political puzzle for us? Does her book provide a serious analysis of what is happening in the political firmament? Is it logically coherent enough so that it could be correct metaphysically? Sadly, no.
Like Ann Coulter, Wright pepper-sprays her book with a lot of good things. For example, she does say that the Black Lives Matter movement is a total disaster from top to bottom. But BLM, compared to the major issues which Wright ought to unpack, is just a footnote. Wright needs to address the fundamental problem and stop living in a system where practical reason is essentially a relic of the past. Wright writes,
“Time and time again, Democrats have come to the defense of the abortion industry, fighting for even the most gruesome late-term abortions.”
But again, Wright cannot tell us the real difference between abortion in the United States and slaughtering civilians in the Middle East by the Neoconservatives. Metaphysically, there is no difference, since the end product is death and suffering.
You see, in the Neoconservative world, simulated drowning isn’t torture at all, as Ted Cruz himself has declared. It’s just another way of showing prisoners of war how to swim.
Wright cannot deny that the Neocons and their puppets are playing with words here. We have already seen how the war in Iraq has cost millions of precious lives. But one individual who promiscuously attempts to answer the Iraq challenge is Walter E. Williams of George Mason University. He writes:
“It’s a tragic commentary to be able to say that young black males have a greater chance of reaching maturity on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan than on the streets of Philadelphia, Chicago, Detroit, Oakland, Newark, and other cities.”
Why does Williams have to invent a false dichotomy here? Why can’t he address the issues in Detroit and then Iraq and Afghanistan in a serious fashion? Could it be that Williams has been working for the oligarchs, namely, the capitalists and usurers?
The answer is yes. That is why he can write things like “I love greed” and then defend “greedy capitalists” like David Rockefeller. In fact, George Mason University has received at least “23,030,497 between 1985 and 2002” from the Charles G. Koch Foundation.
Wright again will never tell her readers that the Rockefellers, who were literally promoting abortion and contraception at an astronomical scale in the United States, a wicked activity which helped destroy the moral fabric of institutions like the University of Notre Dame, were not “Democrats.”
Wright will never have enough guts to document that oligarchs like the Koch brothers, who had been caught in spreading covert operations and who had funded the Tea Party movement, are “GOP mega donors.”
Wright can never openly declare that the Koch brothers bought politicians and so-called conservative clubs like Rick Perry, Joe Barton, Paul Ryan, Ted Cruz, John Boehner, Fred Upton, Mitch McDonnell, the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the Republican Governor’s Association, the Heritage Foundation, American for Prosperity, Reason Foundation, the Cato Institute, etc. Even Justice Clarence Thomas benefitted from the Koch brothers.
Last year, Jim W. Dean argued that “The Koch brothers humiliate America again by staging another dancing seals show of Republican presidential candidates… Koch brothers [are] publically putting $1 billion on the line to literally try to buy a Republican presidential candidate that they feel is not best for the country but best serves their interests.” As an alternative, Dean declared then:
“Resistance folks! Please. Show some Resistance! I apologize for anyone who thinks this is too crude, but I view this as their going to Vegas to perform a political sex act in public.”
Charles Lewis, the founder of the Center for Public Integrity, said in 2010 that the Kochs “have a pattern of law-breaking, political manipulation, and obfuscation. I’ve been in Washington since Watergate, and I’ve never seen anything like it.” Charles Koch himself wrote that
“Ideas do not spread by themselves; they spread only through people. Which means we need a movement. Our movement must destroy the prevalent statist paradigm.”
Charles strongly believed in “political subterfuge.” And by the 1970s, it was widely viewed that he “was not going to be satisfied with being the Engels or even the Marx of the libertarian revolution. He wanted to be the Lenin.”
In order to be “the Lenin,” Charles focused his attention on “attracting youth” precisely because “this is the only group that is open to a radically different social philosophy.” Jane Mayer writes that
“the fiercely capitalist Koch family owes part of its fortune to Joseph Stalin. Fred Koch was the son of a Dutch printer who settled in Texas and ran a weekly newspaper. Unable to succeed at home, Koch found work in the Soviet Union.
“In the nineteen-thirties, his company trained Bolshevik engineers and helped Stalin’s regime set up fifteen modern oil refineries. Over time, however, Stalin brutally purged several of Koch’s Soviet colleagues. Koch was deeply affected by the experience, and regretted his collaboration.”
When Fred died, he left his fortune to his four sons: Frederick (Freddie), Charles, and twins, David and Williams. By 1977, the family ended up funding “the nation’s first libertarian think tank, the Cato Institute. According to the Center for Public Integrity, between 1986 and 1993 the Koch family gave eleven million dollars to the institute.”
But over the next twenty years, the fantastic four ended up in slandering and indicting each other over their father’s fortune, even including accusing older brother Freddie of being gay. Later, Frederick told biographer Daniel Schulman that “Charles’ ‘homosexual blackmail’ to get control of my shares did not succeed for the simple reason that I am not homosexual.”
Charles obviously did not mention this diabolical plan in his 2007 book The Science of Success. The public should have been aware of this behavior as well when the Koch Industries was spending thousands upon thousands of dollars on the candidacies of George W. Bush and other people of the same ilk. It has been argued that the Koch brothers have been working against the interest of the vast majority of the “public sector” from time immemorial.
These issues are unexplainable from a “Democrat-Republican” matrix. They are also incomprehensible from a racialist or “white” point of view. If it is racial, then the racialists have no choice but to support people like the Rockefellers and the Koch brothers and people who have a history of suppressing the economy.
From a Darwinian point of view, it is understandable because the strongest survives and the weakest must be eliminated. As it has been argued, Darwin would have long been placed in the dustbin of history had it not been for capitalism, which is another word for “state-sponsored usury.”
As E. Michael Jones rightly points out, this racialist “pseudo-identity” was created to “keep people enslaved.” This pseudo-identity always ends up handcuffing its children morally and intellectually because it is not based on practical reason.
If Crystal Wright cannot discuss these issues in a rational fashion, then we have every reason to say that she is exhibiting symptoms of moral and intellectual malnutrition—and even dishonesty. One can also argue that she has been dumped into a worldview which she doesn’t seem to understand. Whether she knows it or not, she is an actress playing out the Neoconservative script.
Wright does give some indication that she has been working for the powers that be. For example, in the acknowledgment, she credits “David Frum, who published my first blog post, in 2009, and embraced my unique perspective.” Who is David Frum?
A flaming Jewish Neocon and former speech writer for George W. Bush. Frum also “serves on the board of directors of the Republican Jewish Coalition.” In 2003, Frum co-wrote An End to Evil with “Prince of Darkness” Richard Perle, a book which actually praised the Iraq war and advocated regime change in countries like Iran and Syria.
Again, was Wright following the Neoconservative script? You bet. There is more.
Neoconservatives, flaming Neocon Michael Joyce tells us, need to “package for public consumption…dramatic stories,” where citizens are depicted as “plucky Davids fighting gallantly against the massive, statist, bureaucratic Goliath.”
In other words, what you see in public is different from the way things really are. Libertarians tell us ad nauseam that they are fighting for truth and morality, but they always deliver something completely different.
For example, the Libertarian Party, which ran by Ed Clark and which got financial backing from David Koch, promoted, among other things, “the legalization of prostitution, recreational drugs, and suicide.”
We have enough evidence which conclusively shows that the legalization of prostitution inexorably leads to human trafficking. But this practice cannot really be shut down in a capitalist society because the oligarchs would not allow that to happen? Why? Because it brings forth billions upon billions of dollars. The pornography industry for example has a $97 billion revenue every year.
The big question again is this: did David promote the legalization of prostitution? Well, he would almost certainly deny this claim in public. But financially and ideologically, it can be argued that David Koch runs a prostitution ring. Let us hear from the man himself:
“If we’re going to give a lot of money, we’ll make darn sure they spend it in a way that goes along with our intent. And if they make a wrong turn and start doing things we don’t agree with, we withdraw funding.”
Keep in mind that David supported Libertarian Party, which promoted the legalization of prostitution. This brings us to an inexorable truth: unfettered capitalism, prostitution or pornography, and corruption are basically concentric circles. In those circles, criminals like Lloyd Blankfein, Chief Executive Cephalopod of Goldman Sachs, can walk around telling people how to vote.
That capitalism and prostitution go side by side is inescapable. Veronica Vain (real name Paige A. Jennings), a graduate from the University of Florida “with a passion for financial analysis,” actually discovers this truth the easy way. She quit her Wall Street internship to pursue a career in the porn industry. Her justification is simple:
“Intellectually speaking, I love financial analysis and thinking. However, I found that I was not cut out for the politicking required to be successful, and sitting at a desk for eight or more hours a day really sucks the life out of you… So I started exploring other options that weren’t so stringent structurally…
“I just left a job on Wall Street for a porn career because I can’t stop masturbating at work and have an affinity for jizz showers.”
When the Daily Beast asked Vain, “Are there any similarities between your porn career and former job on Wall Street?,” she responded,
“[Laughs] Um, no. Either way you’re screwing somebody.”
She quickly corrected herself by saying, “No, on Wall Street it’s not like everybody is ripping off everybody. Wall Street is much more corporate and lawsuit-cautious.”
Here Vain indirectly (but unintentionally) ends up saying the same thing that Dante articulated hundreds of years ago: sodomy and usury are screwing people up, which is why Dante places them in the same circle in hell.
In the fourteenth century, the poet had the moral insight to delve into some of the deepest and darkest areas of human activities. Dante would not be upset if we replace or substitute sodomy with pornography, and he certainly equated usury with theft or cheating the economy. To give you a modern example,
“Between 1976 and 2006, mortgage debt [in the United States] increased from $517.0 billion to a staggering $10.055 trillion.”
How did that come about? Did the economy work that fast? The answer is no. The magical word for what really happened is again usury, which is mathematically impossible.
Vain was again asked: “Did you have any Wolf of Wall Street experiences? Any wild office parties?” She responded,
“I knew those people but it wasn’t in connection with my job. They exist. There is a lot of money there and when you take those kinds of dudes with the financial power and resources and libido and testosterone and you give them everything on a silver platter chaos will ensue.”
Yes, indeed. Chaos always ensues when morality and practical reason are out of the political and economic system.
 Chrystal Wright, Con Job: How Democrats Gave Us Crime, Sanctuary Cities, Abortion Profiteering, and Racial Division (Washington: Regnery Publishing, 2016), kindle edition.
 David Lazarus, “Iraq war cost: $6 trillion. What else could have been done?,” LA Times, March 18, 2013; Jim Lobe, “Iraq, Afghanistan Wars Will Cost U.S. 4-6 Trillion Dollars: Report,” Inter Press Service, March 30, 2013; “The $6 Trillion Wars,” The Nation, March 29, 2013; “Iraq War Cost U.S. More Than $2 Trillion, Could Grow to $6 Trillion, Says Watson Institute Study,” Huffington Post, May 14, 2013; The Iraq War Could Cost More Than $6 Trillion,” Business Insider, March 14, 2013.
 Mark Thompson, “The $5 Trillion War on Terror,” Times, June 29, 2011.
 For those who are new to this topic, see for example Murray Friedman, The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005); Stephen M. Feldman, Neoconservative Politics and the Supreme Court: Law, Power, and Democracy (New York: New York University Press, 2013); Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004); Peter Steinfels, The Neoconservatives: The Origins of a Movement (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2013).
 Paul Craig Roberts, The Neoconservative Threat to World Order: Washington’s Perilous War for Hegemony (Atlanta: Clarity Press, 2015).
 Rex Weiner, “Jews Unite Behind Push for Immigration Reform,” Jewish Daily Forward, June 26, 2013.
 Gideon Aronoff, “Immigration Reform Is Our Jewish Responsibility,” Jewish Daily Forward, May 17, 2011.
 Morris J. Vogel, “For Jews, a Permanent Stake in the Immigration Debate,” Jewish Daily Forward, October 20, 2010.
 Nathan Guttman, “Immigration Debate Prompts Growing Jewish-Latino Ties,” Jewish Daily Forward, January 27, 2010.
 “Jewish Groups Slam White House for ‘Baby Step’ on Syrian Refugees,” Forward, September 21, 2015.
 Nathan Guttman, “Jewish Groups Lead Push To Crack Open Doors to Syria Refugees,” Jewish Daily Forward, June 25, 2015.
 Nathan Guttman, “Jews Unite To Defend Policy on Syrian Refugees — With a Few Exceptions, Jewish Daily Forward, November 25, 2015.
 Renee Ghert-Zand, “British Jews lay groundwork for influx of Syrian refugees,” Times of Israel, December 23, 2015.
 Barak Ravid, “Netanyahu: Israel Is Too Small to Absorb Syrian or African Refugees,” Haaretz, September 6, 2015; Herb Keinon, “Netanyahu: Israel not indifferent, but can’t absorb Syrian or African refugees,” Jerusalem Post, September 6, 2015.
 Josefin Dosten, “Poll shows few Israelis willing to take in Syrian refugees,” Times of Israel, September 7, 2015.
 Sarah Lazare, “Israel Is Building A Wall To Keep Syrian Refugees Out,” MintPress News, September 8, 2015.
 Kim Hjelmgaard, “Germany’s Merkel vows to curb refugee numbers,” USA Today, December 14, 2015; Lianna Brinded, “Merkel is shutting the door on Germany’s ‘open-door’ refugee policy,” Business Insider, December 14, 2015; Andreas Rinke and Joseph Nasr, “German Chancellor Angela Merkel Wants To ‘Drastically Reduce’ Number Of Refugee Arrivals,” Huffington Post, December 13, 2015; “Angela Merkel wants to ‘drastically reduce’ refugee arrivals in Germany,” Guardian, December 14, 2015; Natalie Ilsley, “Is Angela Merkel Going back on Germany’s Refugee Policy?,” Newsweek, December 15, 2015.
 Ibid. For a serious examination of who is really behind abortion, see E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2008), 941-946; 1020-1024; 1036-1038.
 Tom McCarthy, “Donald Trump: I’d bring back ‘a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding,’” Guardian, February 7, 2016.
 Walter E. Williams, American Contempt for Liberty (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 2015), 132.
 Walter E. Williams, “I Love Greed,” Jewish World Review, January 4, 2012.
 Walter E. Williams, “Does it count?,” Jewish World Review, June 19, 2002.
 For a cultural history on this, see E. Michael Jones, Libido Dominandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control (South Bend: St. Augustine’s Press, 2000); Is Notre Dame Still Catholic (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2009).
 See Jane Mayer, Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right (New York: Random House, 2016).
 Jane Mayer, “Covert Operations,” New Yorker, August 30, 2010; see also Tim Dickinson, “Inside the Koch Brothers’ Toxic Empire,” Rolling Stone, September 24, 2014.
 Dana Bash, “Democrats take on the Koch brothers,” CNN, May 16, 2014; see also Kate Zernike, “Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead,” NY Times, October 19, 2010.
 Eric Lichtblau, “Common Cause Asks Court About Thomas Speech,” NY Times, February 11, 2011.
 Mayer, “Covert Operations,” New Yorker, August 30, 2010.
 Quoted in Mayer, Dark Money, 54.
 Cited in ibid.
 Cited in ibid., 56.
 Mayer, “Covert Operations,” New Yorker, August 30, 2010.
 Mayer, Dark Money, 47.
 Ibid., 48.
 Mayer, “Covert Operations,” New Yorker, August 30, 2010.
 For a recent study on this, see E. Michael Jones, Barren Metal: A History of Capitalism as the Conflict Between Labor and Usury (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2014).
 I challenge any serious scholar or writer to agree to do a written debate on this very issue. As I have suggested in an earlier article, written debates allow arguments and counter-arguments to be studied more carefully than oral debates, which sometimes can turn into a mess of pottage. Written debates also allow readers to weigh the substance of an argument more carefully.
 Mayer, Dark Money, 88.
 Mayer, “Covert Operations,” New Yorker, August 30, 2010.
 Donald L. Hilton and Clark Watts, “Pornography Addiction: A Neuroscience Perspective,” Surgical Neurological International, February 21, 2011.
 Matt Taibi, “The Vampire Squid Tells Us How to Vote,” Rolling Stone, February 5, 2016. This is one reason why prostitution was banned in Cuba. It was quickly viewed as “a vestige of capitalism…During the 1990s, along with market capitalism, the prostitute seeped through through the cracks of the revolution via street and film.” Malissa Hope Ditmore, ed., Encyclopedia of Prostitution and Sex Work, Vol. 1 (Westport: Greenwood Press, 2006), 245.
 Christopher Hooton, “Wall Street Intern Quits Finance to Become Porn Star, Offers Quite Stunning Justification,” The Independent, January 16, 2015.
 Aurora Snow, “The XXX She Wolf of Wall Street,” Daily Beast, February 7, 2015.
 More recently, the Times of Israel tells us that “Leaked files implicate over 6,000 Israelis in massive bank scandal.” “Leaked files implicate over 6,000 Israelis in massive bank scandal,” Times of Israel, February 9, 2015.
 Cited in E. Michael Jones, Barren Metal: A History of Capitalism as the Conflict between Labor and Usury (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2014), 1370.
 Snow, “The XXX She Wolf of Wall Street,” Daily Beast, February 7, 2015.
Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the new book Zionism vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology is Undermining Western Culture. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.