Female Orgasm Depends on Surrender

marie.jpg

Dr. Marie N. Robinson’s 1958 book, The Power of Sexual Surrender, explains that women need to surrender to a loving man in order to have a satisfying orgasm.  By encouraging women to become “strong”, “independent” and wary of men, feminism is blocking their sexual fulfillment. As result, women become frustrated, angry, and compensate by becoming masculine.

In their crusade to destroy European Christian civilization, Cabalists (satanist Jews and Freemasons, i.e. Communists) exploit every division. When they couldn’t foment class war, they turned woman against man. 

Under the guise of women’s, gay and tranny “rights,” heterosexuals are victims of a vicious satanic attack on their human identity. They are being re-engineered and they don’t even know it.  A woman’s love of husband and child is divine. Only demonically possessed people would destroy it. 

The Illuminati’s ultimate aim is to induct society into their satanic cult and to impose a veiled Communist police state.

Satanic cults are designed to exploit their members by corrupting and making them sick.

“The foundation of the Christian family is the sacrament of matrimony, the spring of all domestic and public morals. The anti-Christian societies [i.e. Illuminati] are opposed to the principle of home. When they have destroyed the hearth, the morality of society will perish.”  Benjamin Disraeli (Lothair, 1870)

(Revised from July 25, 2015 and June 10, 2017)

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

Marie N. Robinson MD, a Cornell-educated psychiatrist devoted her New York City practice to the treatment of frigidity. Her book, The Power of Sexual Surrender (1958) online here, is a revealing study of the feminine psyche. It is out-of-print. Why? It is politically incorrect.

Dr. Robinson says that millions of American women suffer from frigidity. While she explores many different causes, she notes that frigid women universally adopt the feminist view. This view, that a career as a wife and mother is demeaning and men exploit women, creates an “emotional logjam” that obstructs sexual response and psychological development.

Dr. Robinson writes that a woman’s identity lies in an “essential feminine altruism.” Her self-expression and power are based on making her husband and children her first priority. Similarly, her sexual satisfaction and spiritual fecundity depend on self-surrender.

FEMININE DEVALUATION AND SELF-HATRED

Robinson writes that “to millions of women, hostility towards the opposite sex seems almost a natural law. Although modern women may pay lip service to the ideal of a passionate and productive marriage to a man, underneath they deeply resent their role, and conceive of the male as fundamentally hostile to her, as an exploiter of her. She wishes in her deepest heart, and often without the slightest awareness of the fact, to supplant him, to exchange roles with him.” (emphasis mine 56)

Robinson says that if feminism had brought women happiness, the game might have been worth it.

“But it hasn’t been. The game has brought frigidity and restlessness and a soaring divorce rate, neurosis, homosexuality, juvenile delinquency all that results when a woman in any society deserts her true function.” (56)

Dr. Robinson writes that once the emotional “log jam” is removed, a woman’s natural instincts will flow and health will be restored. Essentially this involves “allowing herself to trust her husband in a very deep sense. It means that she finally realizes that she no longer has to fear or oppose his strength, but that she can rely on it to protect her, to give her the secure climate necessary for the full flowering of her femininity.” (153)

For a profound vaginal orgasm, Robinson writes, “The excitement comes from the act of surrender. There is a tremendous surging physical ecstasy in the yielding itself, in the feeling of being the passive instrument of another person…” (158)

On the other hand, the woman who mistrusts her husband’s love and, as a consequence, her own femininity has a “difficult, painful, frenetic” approach to life. She is at war with herself. In bed, she has to feel “in control all the time.”


Dr. Robinson says there is nothing in life more important than love. She believes marriage is the key to human development. The power of love is felt in the world through this relationship.

“Love means, in its very deepest sense union; union between individuals…It is the most basic and profound urge we have and its power for good is illimitable… the lover partner becomes as important as oneself…This fact is why real love never leads to domination or to a struggle for power…” (129)

 GENDER DIFFERENCES


Robinson says men and women are different by nature. Men are designed for mastery of the external (physical) world, and women for mastery of the internal (spiritual) world and the home. These are not social stereotypes, as feminists argue.

“Women are designed for duties different from those of the marketplace, another kind of stress entirely,” writes Robinson. They “tend to lose their essential womanliness if they stay [in the marketplace] by choice.” (149)

According to Robinson, “the feminist credo thoroughly discredited feminine needs and characteristics and substituted male goals for female goals.”(53)

“The depreciation of the goals of femininity, biological and psychological, became part and parcel of the education of millions of American girls. Homemaking, childbearing and rearing, cooking, the virtues of patience, lovingness, giving ness in marriage, have been systematically devalued. The life of male achievement has been substituted for the life of female achievement.” (55)

CONCLUSION

The significance of The Power of Sexual Surrender is profound.

By coercing women to abandon their femininity and usurp the male role, feminism throws a spanner in the natural heterosexual mechanism of humanity. Women have been deprived of their natural biological and social roles and condemned to loneliness and frustration. Similarly, men are deprived of the role of protector and provider essential to their development and fulfillment.

The triumph of such a wrongheaded ideology, and the suppression of the truth, signifies that control in the world has passed to a malignant force.

Robinson confirms my view that heterosexual union is based on an exchange of female power for male power expressed as love. A woman who seeks power is neutering herself and her husband. She will not receive love from a man whose identity is based on power. She cannot love someone she competes with. He cannot love her. This is the dilemma of feminists today.

As Marie N. Robinson confirms, a woman loves by entrusting her power to the right man, her husband. He uses it to champion her interests. Thus she both empowers him and channels male power in a socially constructive direction. A woman’s real power is love, the power of self surrender. 
—–

NoteSex therapist Kim Anami writes:  “The game-changing factor that separates the girls from the women (or the clitoris from the vagina) is the ability to open up, drop your guard, and surrender. If you can’t do that, you won’t get there. These deeper, internal orgasms call on the deeper, internal parts of you. Your vulnerability, your authentic self–they need to be present. You can’t hide behind a wall. That’s why these orgasms are less likely to appear in casual sex situations. Or, if you have unresolved issues in the space between you and your partner. If anything is holding you back, you won’t get there.

Related The Ego Epidemic Attacking Young Women 

Makow  – Womyn’s Protest Plea for Male Love

—————  The Effect of Fatherlessness on Women

————— Having Sex is Not Making Love

https://www.henrymakow.com

“Objective” vs. “Subjective”: What’s the Difference?

Parker Yamasaki

Parker Yamasaki

Updated on August 17, 2023 · Writing

Objective and subjective are two common—and commonly confused—words used to describe, among other things, information and perspectives.

The difference between objective information and subjective information is that the former is based on facts, while the latter is based on feelings or opinions.

Below, we’ll talk about the difference between objective and subjective, how to use them in writing, and when each one is appropriate.

Give your writing extra polish

Grammarly helps you communicate confidentlyWRITE WITH GRAMMARLY

The difference between objectiveand subjective

The basic difference between objective and subjective information is that objectiveinformation is based on facts, while subjective information, or a subjective perspective, is based on opinion, emotion, or feelings.

The line between the two seems simple on paper, but in practice, their meanings can blur. Why? The main reason is that people who use these words are just that: people. And people have backgrounds, experiences, emotions, and biases that can show up in subtle ways. Often, even if we think we’re being objective, there may be subjective influences at play.

Definition of objective

Objective means not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering or representing facts.

An objective perspective refers to a viewpoint or approach that is unbiased, impartial, and based on facts and verifiable evidence.

For example, this is an objective statement:

Water boils at 212 degrees Fahrenheit. 

Water has an objective temperature that it must reach in order to boil, which can be quantified, tested, and proved over and over again.

What is objectivity in writing?

In writing, objectivity is found in works that present facts and their verifiable evidence. Examples of objective writing are research papers, instruction manuals, and academic essays. These types of writing strive for accuracy and to create a foundation of knowledge.

Definition of subjective

Subjective means based on, or influenced by, personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. A subjective perspective can also be called a personal perspective or an individual point of view. Subjective views do not have to be provable or grounded in fact, though they may incorporate facts. For example:

The frosting on that cake makes it too sweet. 

This is a subjective take on cake. What one person considers “too sweet” is based entirely on their personal preferences. The cake might not be sweet enough for some and just right for others.

What is subjectivity in writing?

In writing, subjectivity refers to the expression of a writer’s personal opinions, feelings, beliefs, and perspectives.

Subjective writing often involves first-person pronouns (Imemy) and emotional language, as the writer shares their thoughts and reactions openly. It can be found in various forms of writing, including personal essays, memoirs, creative fiction, and opinion pieces.

Here are examples of subjective writing elements:

Personal pronouns:

  • I believe
  • In my opinion
  • From my perspective

Evocative adjectives

  • The painting evoked a sense of peace for me.
  • The novel was thought-provoking.

Value judgments:

  • That was the best movie of the year.
  • That concert was disappointing.

In grammar, subjective means related to the subject of a sentence. That’s a different definition from the one we’re using here. You can read more about subjective and objective cases in grammar here.

How to use objective vs. subjective

Being able to tell the difference between objective and subjective information will make you a better communicator, decision-maker, and problem-solver. Depending on what industry you’re in, you may lean more heavily on one type of information than the other.

Objective information is important in fields that rely on facts and evidence, such as scientific research, journalism, and law.

It’s important to note that achieving complete objectivity is a difficult task, since everyone is informed by their backgrounds and experiences. While people in these disciplines should strive for objectivity, they should also consider how their experiences may affect the product of their work.

For example, members of a jury are instructed to analyze a case objectively and base their conclusions only on the facts presented. However, the court system can’t avoid the fact that jury members are human beings, and every human brings their own experiences and biases to a situation. That’s why courts have a jury selection process that attempts to eliminate jurors whose personal experiences may cloud their judgment.

Subjective perspectives, on the other hand, play a vital role in art, literature, and therapy, since these disciplines allow, or even require, individuals to share their unique experiences and emotions.

Examples of objective vs. subjective

The art critic acknowledged that the only objective parts of his assessment were the painting’s title and the artist’s name, while everything else was subjective, influenced by his extreme distaste for the color green.

The tourism survey aimed to collect both objective data, like what time of year the participant visited, and subjectivefeedback, like whether they had a good time, to gain a comprehensive understanding of their experience at the resort.

When discussing controversial topics, it’s essential to remain objective so you don’t let subjective biases influence your argument.

In the book review, the critic provided an objective summary of the plot and style, while also sharing their subjectivethoughts on the novel’s emotional impact.

The journalist strived to present the news objectively, reporting only the facts she collected without injecting subjectiveopinions or interpretations.

Objective vs. subjective FAQs

What do objective and subjective mean?

Objective means verifiable information based on facts and evidence. Subjective means information or perspectives based on feelings, opinions, or emotions.

What are examples of subjective and objective?

This is an example of subjective information: Lemon cake is the best dessert in the world.

This is an example of objective information: Lemons have high concentrations of vitamin C.

When should you use objective vs. subjective?

Use objective when presenting facts that you can prove with irrefutable evidence. Use subjective when presenting a point of view, perspective, or opinion.

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/objective-vs-subjective/?utm_source=SFMC&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2023-08-21_GC-LCM-GCA-ALL-CUST-ENG-STATS_WAU-Core-grammarlygo-launch_1X&utm_content=email

Understanding the Cabalist Jewish “Left vs Right” Charade

(left, Otto Kahn, 1867-1934) 

“We Control Both Left & Right” — Kuhn Loeb Banker 

In a candid dinner conversation after WW1, Kuhn Loeb partner Otto Kahn 
was asked why the Capitalist bankers supported Communism. 
He replied they both have “an identical purpose, 

the remaking 

of the world from above by the control of riches, [Right] 

and from below by revolution [Left.]” They are all Freemasons (Cabalists.) 

Their final goal is the deification of the Rothschild banking cartel posing as 

representatives of the Jewish people. 
Hence we have the Communist faction on the Left (globalist, homosexual, migration, US Demonrats, Canada, EU, Sweden) and the  

Zionist faction on the Right (nationalist, heterosexual, US GOP, Brazil, Hungary.) Israel is at the fulcrum. No nationalist is ever critical of Israel. 

“We shall purify the idea [of God] by identifying it with the nation of Israel, which has become its own Messiah. The advent of it will be facilitated by the final triumph of Israel… ” by Henry Makow Ph.D.
(Revised from Oct. 19, 2011, and June 12, 2021) 

Otto Kahn, (1869-1934) was a partner with Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg in America’s most influential investment bank Kuhn Loeb . 

AugusteComtedeSaintAulair251h.jpg
obamahitler.jpg
gaither.jpg
goldman-destruction.jpg

Thus, it is worth recalling what he said about the Illuminati’s Jewish strategy.

In his book Geneva Versus Peace (1937,) the Comte de St. Aulaire, who was the French ambassador to London from 1920-24, recalled a dinner conversation with Otto Kahn which took place shortly after WWI. This shocking expose is fast disappearing down the memory hole.  

Asked why bankers would back Bolshevism, a system supposedly inimical to private ownership, Kahn tugged on his enormous cigar and explained that the bankers create apparent opposites to “remake the world” according to their specifications:

“You say that Marxism is the very antithesis of capitalism, which is equally sacred to us. It is precisely for this reason that they are direct opposites to one another, that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and allow us to be its axis. These two contraries, like Bolshevism and ourselves, find their identity in the International. [Presumably, he means the Comintern.]

“These opposites … meet again in the identity of their purpose and end in the remaking of the world from above by the control of riches, and from below by revolution. 

“Our mission consists in promulgating the new law and in creating a God, that is to say in purifying the idea of God and realizing it, when the time shall come. We shall purify the idea by identifying it with the nation of Israel, which has become its own Messiah. The advent of it will be facilitated by the final triumph of Israel…

“Our essential dynamism makes use of the forces of destruction and forces of creation but uses the first to nourish the second…Our organization for revolution is evidenced by destructive Bolshevism and for construction by the League of Nations which is also our work. 

“Bolshevism is the accelerator and the League is the brake on the mechanism of which we supply both the motive force and the guiding power.  

“What is the end? It is already determined by our mission. It is formed of elements scattered throughout the whole world, but cast in the flame of our faith in ourselves. We are a League of Nations which contains the elements of all others…Israel is the microcosm and the germ of the city of the future.”   

 People who presume to take the place of God are Satanists. Satanists redefine reality and morality, turning them upside down. They seek a worldwide political, economic and cultural monopoly institutionalized in a world government. 

This is achieved by a Hegelian dialectical process of creating adversaries (thesis-antithesis) and achieving a synthesis that corresponds to their goals. In the process, potential opponents are eliminated.

COMMUNISM-CAPITALISM

In the Red Symphony revelation, insider Christian Rakovsky showed how Communism and Capitalism were part of this dialectical process. In each case, the Illuminati Jewish banking cartel controls all wealth and power. 

“In Moscow, there is Communism: in New York capitalism. It is all the same as the thesis and antithesis. Analyze both. Moscow is subjective Communism but [objectively] State capitalism. New York: Capitalism is subjective, but Communism objective. A personal synthesis, truth: the Financial International, the Capitalist Communist one. ‘They.’ “

In the USSR, the State owned the corporations and the bankers owned the State, i.e. State Capitalism. The US also has Communism objectively because the same bankers control most of the corporations.

Of course, this is consistent with the famous 1954 quote from Rowan Gaither, 1909-1961, (left) President of the Ford Foundation: “We operate here under directives which emanate from the White House… The substance of the directives under which we operate is that we shall use our grant-making power to alter life in the United States such that we can comfortably be merged with the Soviet Union.” 


CONCLUSION

We are in the final stages of a long-term conspiracy by Cabalist Jewish bankers and their Masonic lackeys to erect a world police state and to control us by fraud and force (their watchwords.)This has been achieved by a contrived “dialectical process” best exemplified by World War Two and the Cold War where they fabricated and financed the adversaries.  

Domestically, the Illuminati dialectic is mirrored by George Soros who funds the left, and the Koch Brothers who fund and control the right.  
Both are Illuminati Jews. The radical Left and Islam are also funded by corporations through the Tides foundation.  You can bet that this funding extends to media control through ownership or advertising. It also extends to universities, foundations and think tanks. 

Mass protests like Occupy Wall Streetare part of this false dialectic. This would be real if they demanded 1. Nationalizing the Fed, creation of debt-free currency and disowning that portion of the national debt created by book entry. 2. Independent investigation of 9-11 and prosecution of those responsible for the attack and the cover-up. 3. All national political campaigns be publicly funded.  For the price of one battle cruiser, we could have real democracy. 4. Media monopolies be broken up. 5. NATO (Rothschild) Interventions be stopped. As is, popular resistance is a banker Punch and Judy Puppet Show.     

The Libertarian Movement and the anti-Communist movements of the 1950’s were similarly motivated. We have no real political freedom, just as we have no real culture. Everything is designed to advance the NWO agenda, a total economic, political and cultural monopoly by the Illuminati bankers. 

See part two – “We Will Dissolve All Nations”

Related– Who are the One Percent?
————-  The Cabalist Conspiracy Behind Covid 

NOTE

Otto Kahn also exemplifies how these bankers create reality by controlling what passes for culture. Kahn financed many movies and virtually created New York’s Metropolitan Opera. He was responsible for introducing Stanislavski, Nijinski, the Abbey Players, the Moscow Art Theater, and practically every other important personage and event in the most vigorous era of American theatrical history. He subsidized, sponsored, and had close relationships with Toscanini, Caruso, Chaliapin, Pavlova, Pirandello, Eugene O’Neill, Paul Robeson, Grace Moore, and hundreds of other artists whose names are now part of that history.

Apparent to all with eyes to see, their satanic agenda includes destroying marriage and family and mainstreaming satanism, homosexuality, pornography, promiscuity, pederasty, and incest.  

Related: Makow:   Our Illuminati Reality Bubble
Makow   Libertarianism Created to offset Communism
The Hidden Agenda beyond Occupy Movement

Freud – Don’t Get Fooled Again 

The Marxist Nature of the Occupy Movement

https://www.henrymakow.com

Brainwashing children into homosexuality.

A California school teacher sent me this today, he was given this by the teachers union.

A friend of mine is a teacher, this is the guidance he received from the teachers Union.

I’m receiving the following guidance from the teachers union:

  1. Put a rainbow flag in my classroom, and posters with obvious connotations and messages in support of homosexual and transgender students.
  2. Introduce myself by announcing my pronouns. Instruct my students to introduce themselves by announcing their pronouns.
  3. Explicitly ban any language in my classroom that might be perceived by anyone to potentially be racist, misogynistic, or anti-homosexual / anti-transsexual.
  4. Post personal pictures of family and friends that show homosexuals and transsexuals.
  5. Visit Web sites such as GLSEN and TREVOR Project, and implement their curriculum ideas.
  6. Use story books for younger students that have homosexual, transsexual, and interracial parents and adults, and adopted and foster children.
  7. Advocate for a school “coming out plan” in coordination with administrators.
  8. If a student “comes out” to me, assure that student that he or she is “safe” and that you’ll only share this with his or her parents or other staff with his or her permission. Be careful about which pronouns are used with respect to that student when communicating with parents.

ADL (Anti-Defamation League) doesn’t like me, that’s great, since they were started to defend Leo Frank, who murdered and raped 13 year old Mary Phagan in 1913!

Made the Major Leagues!!

Very excited!

The ADL doesn’t like me! Since it was founded to protect Child rapist and child murderer Leo Frank, I am ecstatic to have them as my enemy!

https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/antisemites-racists-and-other-bigots-are-hijacking-public-meetings

I strongly disavow the racial slurs and profanity used by others mentioned, including John Minedeo.

I am not associated with Proud Boys, Neo-Nazi’s, skinheads, GDL, or White Lives Matter. While I agree with some of what they say, I don’t know most of their leadership.

ADL tries to call us all “anti-semites, bigots, racists, white supremacists, Nazis” and will not allow any discussion.

Guess who funds the ADL? Jews, since 1913. You are not allowed to criticize Jewish wrongdoing in America.

At least they honestly repeated what I stated. Notice how they try to hide Jewish councilwoman Kaplan’s name in Sacramento.

Werner Sombart – Jews Built the USA

250px-Nicola_Perscheid_-_Werner_Sombart_vor_1930.jpg

(left, The distinguished German sociologist Werner Sombart, 1863-1941)

In his book “The Jews & Modern Capitalism,” (1911) German sociologist Werner Sombart credits Jews for the rise of capitalism as the most dynamic force in the modern world. 

In the excerpt below, he says Jews built the USA to become the epitome of capitalism: 
“Americanism is the Jewish spirit distilled.”

“Nineteen [families] were equipped with plow and scythe, ready to clear the forests and till the soil in order to earn their livelihood as husbandmen…The twentieth family opened a store…Accordingly, it may be said that American economic life was from its very start impregnated with capitalism. And who was responsible for this? The twentieth family in each village. Need we add that this twentieth family was always a Jewish one, which joined a party of settlers or soon sought them out in their homesteads?”
(from The Jews & Modern Capitalism, 1911, pp.35-39)
May 1, 2012

pedlar.jpeg
JESSE.jpeg

By Werner Sombart
(henrymakow.com)

For what we call Americanismis nothing else, if we may say so than the Jewish spirit distilled. But how comes it that American culture is so steeped in Jewishness? 

The answer is simple — through the early and universal admixture of Jewish elements among the first settlers. 

We may picture the process of colonizing somewhat after this fashion. A band of determined men and women —  let us say twenty families — went forth into the wilds to begin their life anew. Nineteen were equipped with ploughs and scythes, ready to clear the forests and till the soil in order to earn their livelihood as husbandmen. 

The twentieth family opened a store to provide their companions with such necessaries of life as could not be obtained from the soil, often no doubt hawking them at the very doors. 

Soon this twentieth family made it its business to arrange for the distribution of the products which the other nineteen won from the soil. It was they, too, who were most likely in possession of ready cash, and in case of need could therefore be useful to the others by lending them money. 

Very often the store had a kind of agricultural loan bank as its adjunct, perhaps also an office for the buying and selling of land. So through the activity of the twentieth family, the farmer in North America was from the first kept in touch with the money and credit system of the Old World. 

Hence the whole process of production and exchange was from its inception along modern lines. Town methods made their way at once into even the most distant villages. 

Accordingly, it may be said that American economic life was from its very start impregnated with capitalism. And who was responsible for this? The twentieth family in each village. Need we add that this twentieth family was always a Jewish one, which joined a party of settlers or soon sought them out in their homesteads?

EXAMPLES

Such an outline is the mental picture I have conceived of the economic development of the United States. Subsequent writers dealing with this subject will be able to fill in more ample details; I myself have only come across a few. But these are so similar in character that they can hardly be taken as isolated instances. The conclusion is forced upon us that they are typical.

Nor do I alone hold this view. Governor Pardel of California, for example, remarked in 1905: “He (the Jew) has been the leading financier of thousands of prosperous communities. He has been enterprising and aggressive.”

Let me quote some of the illustrations I have met with. In 1785 Abraham Mordecai settled in Alabama. “He established a trading-post two miles west of Line Creek, carrying on an extensive trade with the Indians, and exchanging his goods for pink-root, hickory, nut oil, and peltries of all kinds.” 

Similarly in Albany: “As early as 1661, when Albany was but a small trading post, a Jewish trader named Asser Levi (or Leevi) became the owner of real estate there.”

Chicago has the same story. The first brick house was built by a Jew, Benedict Schubert, who became the first merchant tailor in Chicago, while another Jew, Philip Newburg, was the first to introduce the tobacco business.

In Kentucky, we hear of a Jewish settler as early as 1816. When in that year the Bank of the United States opened a branch in Lexington, Mr. Solomon, who had arrived in 1808, was made cashier. In Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania it is on record that Jewish traders were among the earliest settlers, though nothing is known of their activity.

On the other hand, a great deal is known of Jews in Texas, where they were among the pioneers of capitalism. Thus, for example, Jacob de Cordova “was by far the most extensive land locator in the State until 1856.” 

The Cordova’s Land Agency soon became famous not only in Texas but in New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, where the owners of large tracts of Texas land resided. Again, Morris Koppore in 1863 became President of the National Bank of Texas. 

Henry Castro was an immigration agent; “between the years 1843-6 Castro introduced into Texas over 5000 immigrants . . . transporting them in 27 ships, chiefly from the Rhenish provinces. . . . He fed his colonists for a year, furnished them with cows, farming implements, seeds, medicine, and in short with everything they needed.”

Sometimes branches of one and the same family distributed themselves in different States and were thereby enabled to carry on business most successfully. Perhaps the best instance is the history of the Seligman family. There were eight brothers (the sons of David Seligman, of Bayersdorf, in Bavaria) who started a concern which now has branches in all the most important centers in the States. 

Their story began with the arrival in America in the year 1837 of Joseph Seligman. Two other brothers followed in 1839; a third came two years later. The four began business as clothiers in Lancaster, moving shortly after to Selma, Ala. 

From here they opened three branches in three other towns. By 1848, two more brothers had arrived from Germany and the six moved North.

In 1850, Jesse Seligman opened a shop in San Francisco — in the first brick house in that city. 

Seven years later a banking business was added to the clothing shop, and in 1862 the house of the Seligman Brothers was established in New York, San Francisco, London, Paris, and Frankfort.

In the Southern States likewise, the Jew played the part of the trader in the midst of agricultural settlers.

Here also (as in Southern and Central America) we find him quite early as the owner of vast plantations. In South Carolina indeed, “Jew’s Land” is synonymous with “Large Plantations.”

It was in the South that Moses Lindo became famous as one of the first undertakers in the production of indigo. 

These examples must suffice. We believe they tend to illustrate our general statement, which is supported also by the fact that there was a constant stream of Jewish emigration to the United States from their 
earliest foundation. It is true that there are no actual figures to show the proportion of the Jewish population to the total body of settlers. But the numerous indications of a general nature that we do find make it pretty 
certain that there must always have been a large number of Jews in America.

It must not be forgotten that in the earliest years, the population was thinly scattered and very sparse. New Amsterdam had less than 1000 inhabitants.

That being so, a ship full of Jews who came from Brazil to settle there made a great difference, and in assessing Jewish influence on the whole district we shall have to rate it highly.

Or take another instance. When the first settlement in Georgia was established, forty Jews were among the settlers. The number may seem insignificant, but when we consider the meager population of the colony, Jewish influence must be accounted strong. So, too, in Savannah, where in 1733 there were already twelve Jewish families in what was then a tiny commercial centre.

That America early became the goal of German and Polish Jewish emigrants is well known. Thus we are told: “Among the poorer Jewish families of Posen there was seldom one which in the second quarter of 
the 19th century did not have at least one son (and in most cases the ablest and not least enterprising) who sailed away across the ocean to flee from the narrowness and the oppression of his native land.”

We are not surprised, therefore, at the comparatively large number of Jewish soldiers (7243 ) who took part in the Civil War, and we should be inclined to say that the estimate which puts the Jewish population of the 
United States about the middle of the 19th century at 300,000 (of whom 30,000 lived in New York) was if anything too moderate.

RelatedJews and their Temperament—Jewish Banking Dynasties Founded The Fed, by Karl Haemers – The Unz Review

https://www.henrymakow.com

Another letter to Sacramento City Council

41,000 views for the mayors stunt last Tuesday.

https://twitter.com/MillerStream/status/1692205962122412444

I don’t agree with condemning all Jews. But, the Talmud is a pretty hateful book.

The mayor and Ms. Kaplan aren’t even real Jews.  You aren’t blood related to the original 12 tribes, you are likely Ashkenazi imposters, and you definitely don’t obey the Torah, which has severe penalties for homosexuality.

So even if you are Jews, you are massive hypocrites.

The lies about me being “racist,” “bigoted,” and “anti-semitic,” are inflaming your thugs, hoodlums, and hooligans at City Hall, mayor, and soon they are going to be exposed.

When they unleash violence and murder at City Hall, as they’ve been threatening, you are going to be blamed for it.

And lastly, stop trying to silence the truth, Mayor. It isn’t bigotry to suggest that the Federal Reserve and money is controlled by Jewish bankers, it’s a fact.

https://messanonews.com/2023/08/jewish-banking-dynasties-founded-the-fed/