How did the West Forget it's Been at War with Judaism for 2,000 Years?

I call it the 2000 Year War, a moral/cultural/spiritual war between Judaism and Christianity that goes back to the days of Christ. The problem? Christians forgot the war was on, but Jews didn't.

Cato Dezorra

I’m no amateur when it comes to being criticized, attacked, or threatened online for expressing my controversial views. I say a lot of things that are “anti-establishment,” but I don’t rant and rave – I bring all the receipts, with quotes from famous scholars and statesmen and passages from published books across history, and tie things together into a sequence of events and patterns.

Nevertheless, the one thing I never escape (and at this point, don’t even try to) is being labeled as “antisemitic.”

It’s a powerful label. One that can easily end a political career, get you blacklisted from any position of public prominence, and can even cause personal friends and family to turn against you. Personally, I’ve never had that visceral reaction that so many people do to the “antisemite” label (especially Christians, it would seem.) Eventually, that became a benefit to me as a serious conspiracy researcher.

Because as I studied hundreds of books, historical documents, and films between 2020-2023, vacuuming up sources and going wherever the evidence took me in uncovering the truth behind all the evil in today’s world, I discovered: throughout Western history, Jews have very often been behind or involved in almost all of it.

That’s not a crazy claim. In fact, there are reasons for this that make perfect sense once you study the Jewish religion and its prophecies, their collective worldview, and most importantly, their “inverted” form of morality (taken mainly from the Talmud.)

I’ve spent hundreds of hours reading the Talmud, rabbinical writings throughout history, and many related sources, and the truth is - once you gain a comprehensive understanding of the Jewish worldview and how it drives Jewish behavior and organized Jewish actions - you inevitably discover: Jews see themselves as not only superior to, but in an everlasting “moral war” against every other civilization – especially white, Western, Christian civilization.

Artist Carl Wilhelm Schleicher’s depiction of Jewish Talmud scholars analyzing the complex Jewish legal compendium, the Talmud. Though its a very intimidating project, the Talmud is one of the best sources on the “Jewish Question” there is, because it exposes the “inverted morality” of Judaism, which is as fundamentally anti-Christian as it gets.

What is even more remarkable is that when you look back at historical sources going back centuries, you realize: basically all our European ancestors were perfectly aware of this conflict!

You could ask an American in the early 1900s, or a German in the 1800s, or a Frenchman in the 1700s, and they could all tell you: not only were Jews causing a lot of problems for their society in a multitude of ways, but that those ways were remarkably consistent across time and space.

And many Jews themselves – who have always been prolific documenters of their own legal and spiritual views – actually corroborate those same narratives.

For example, some chief criticisms of Jews throughout history are:

• They intensely loathe Jesus and Christians

• They perceive themselves to be inherently superior to every other race

• They purposely segregate themselves and refuse to assimilate

• They see it as “fair game” to swindle and defraud gentiles through legal and financial manipulation

• Full text: https://catodezorra.substack.com/p/how-did-the-west-forget-its-been 

  The most shocking thing about all this, and what challenges me most as someone on a crusade to bring all this knowledge forth, is that the entire West has developed a collective amnesia about all of this history - which used to be perfectly common knowledge.

Apocalypse yesterday - by Julian Macfarlane - (Self-strangulation in broad daylight - by formerly known as Western Civilization - CL)

 https://julianmacfarlane.substack.com/p/apocalypse-yesterday-c59?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=837411&post_id=207424660&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=y7h5a&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email 

A simultaneous closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab el-Mandeb would trigger the most severe energy crisis in modern history, likely driving crude oil prices well past $150 to $200+ per barrel within days.

The Strait of Hormuz handles roughly 20% of global petroleum liquids consumption (~20 million barrels per day).

Closing both routes instantly traps nearly one-quarter of the world’s daily oil supply, and spot prices for Brent and WTI crude would experience an immediate, unprecedented spike—a baseline jump to $150/bbl, with immediate risk of soaring past $200/bbl if the closures last more than a few weeks.

Diesel, gasoline, and jet fuel prices would skyrocket .

Normally, Saudi Arabia can bypass the Strait of Hormuz by pumping oil via its East-West Crude Pipeline to the Red Sea port of Yanbu, but tankers leaving Yanbu could not head south toward Asia, and heading north through the Suez Canal would only supply Europe, stranding the rest.

Almost all oil tankers would be forced to reroute around Africa, adding 10 to 14 days travel time, depleting global shipping capacity, and skyrocketing freight insurance rates.

A prolonged shutdown would trigger a massive wave of global stagflation, forcing central banks to hold interest rates high.

The U.S. and International Energy Agency (IEA) nations would be forced into an emergency, coordinated release of their Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) to stabilize local refineries. Many nations in Europe and Asia would have to implement emergency fuel-rationing .

Even if closure was not complete, insurers would refuse to cover ships in these waters due to active combat, with the same effect as an actual military blockade.

Economic Armageddon!

Now, you understand why Iran is going slow.

Steel Over Paper: Iran’s Civilizational Rebirth - How Tehran lost its victory - (DaJudas factor! - CL)

 The Memorandum of Understanding was not a diplomatic breakthrough; it was the formal admission of forty years of failure, signed by a superpower that had been outmanoeuvred, outranged, and outlasted.

At the peak of this strategic momentum, with escalation dominance firmly in Iranian hands, a faction inside Tehran stopped the advance. The men who brought the catastrophic JCPOA, the Zarif school, a tendency that under pressure created the diplomatic offramp necessary for Trump to save face and disguise his strategic defeat before the electorate, are now incarnate in Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. They froze all of Iran’s advantages in a piece of paper. This is the same liberal tendency that has held the presidency for more than three decades, and whose record is a continuous chain of national trauma. ......

https://www.multipolarpress.com/p/steel-over-paper-irans-civilizational-rebirth 

.....Nuclear capability, the demonstrable capacity to deliver a nuclear payload, is the only guarantee of sovereignty in an age where the coalition that bombs schools to test a nation’s will operates with complete impunity. It is not a preference; it is an existential necessity. The Reformist offered the NPT as a badge of respectability. The people have seen where respectability leads: to Minab, to hospitals and sports complexes reduced to rubble, to refineries and power plants laid waste. They will not accept a cage when the predator is already within. This is the same calibrated treachery that Russia has endured, the same pattern of negotiation as sedative and paper as the prelude to encirclement. Against this design, neither Iran nor Russia can prevail by playing the Western game at the Western table, by accepting the procedural traps of an institutional architecture built to neutralize the independent. The only answer is to refuse the table itself.

The Supreme Leader is gone, but his warning remains, and his funeral has proved that the people are its executors. The guardians have spoken. The streets have voted with their millions. The restoration of deterrence is no longer a strategic option; it is the will of a civilization that has chosen the sword over the ledger, and the immutable over the negotiable. The funeral has buried the liberal illusion. The missiles over Bahrain and Kuwait have buried the truce.

A New Iran and a New Russia must emerge, drawing on the deepest roots of their civilizational identity, not as supplicants seeking recognition from a dying order, but as sovereign poles that reestablish true deterrence through the cold grammar of realist logic: capability, geography, and the demonstrated will to impose costs. The closure of the dual straits, the exit from the treaty cage, and the redefinition of the nuclear redline are not policy options; they are the minimal architecture of a state that has chosen the immutable over the negotiable. The age of paper is over. What begins now is the age of steel.

Devlin Talks Sex – The Occidental Observer

 What follows is an interview conducted by James Edwards with Dr. F. Roger Devlin, author of Sexual Utopia in Power.

* * *

James Edwards: You have dedicated a great deal of your work to offering a sociobiological critique of radical feminism and the so-called sexual revolution of the 1960s, which you have argued is a utopian experiment that clashes with reality and leads to chaos. Why is this a topic that people should be more focused on?

Roger Devlin: Nations and races, like individuals, must perpetuate themselves sexually. But men are more inclined to focus on politics than on families, which they view as women’s natural concern. This works as long as women are in fact upholding the family by insisting on marriage and being faithful to their own vows. When they forsake that role to indulge in frivolous divorce and the chasing of sexual excitement for its own sake, men have no choice but to step in and restore order. This is difficult for us, both because most men do not understand women very well and because we have an extremely strong natural bias in their favor.

Edwards: Today’s society suffers from a lack of morals, confused sexual roles, high divorce and celibacy rates, childlessness, and widespread unhappiness, which you contend is linked to the breakdown of monogamy. In what ways are monogamy, family, and sexual discipline essential for societal stability?

Devlin: European man is a K-selected organism, to use the evolutionary terminology. This means that he is not very fertile, but invests heavily in the offspring he does have. A family with a father in residence is the necessary setting for such investment, which includes the transmission of a complex civilizational patrimony. The breakdown of stable pair-bonding cheats children of this inheritance and amounts to a return to barbarism.......

Full text:

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2026/06/11/devlin-talks-sex/ 

Devlin: Where men are in charge, women have babies; where women are in charge, they fornicate and abort — as we have learned by putting women in charge for a few decades. The solution should be obvious: put men back in charge of the family! Women may be left free to choose a husband, but only subject to two constraints: 1) that the man not already have been chosen by another woman, and 2) that they stick to their choice for life — and not just until they get bored or imagine they could do better on a second try (seldom true in any case).

Sexual equality in the workplace simultaneously lowers men’s wages by increasing the supply of labor, and raises women’s expectations of how much a man ought to earn in order to be a “good provider.” Moreover, the women who best succeed in the world of work are those who can suppress their natural femininity and remain childless. It is thus a complete disaster for Western civilization. Sexual discrimination in employment should be not merely legal but mandatory....

There’s More to the Gospel than 'Just Preach the Gospel' - The American Vision

 “Just preach the gospel.” How many times have you heard pastors and critics of social and political action scold Christians concerned about the moral direction the world is headed? The gospel is more than a life insurance program or a “Get Out of Hell Free” card. It is to transform everything we think about and act on. There is no neutrality, nor are any areas off-limits to the application of God’s Word.

The gospel renews a life for service in God’s kingdom — an ever-present reality — via a changed heart and changed mind (Rom. 12:1-2). What are we to do with these two renewals? Wait to be taken to heaven in something called a “rapture,” live in the world God created and called “good” (Gen. 1:31; 1 Tim. 4:1-4) and allow the enemies of God to exercise dominion over it, claim that since Jesus didn’t get involved in politics that Christians should follow His example, or learn how the Bible applies to every area of life and make it our life’s work to transform every part of it.....

....It is true that the law does not save anyone, nor does keeping a list of commandments make us holy, but this does not mean that God’s law is irrelevant. Paul writes the following to Timothy:

But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted (1 Tim. 1:8-11).

Note how the law and the gospel are not mutually exclusive because the proper use of the law is determined by the law and is “according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which [Paul] had been entrusted.”

Like God’s creation, the Law is good. God’s commandments are good. Jesus said to His disciples, “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments” (John 14:15). John writes, “For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3). R. J. Rushdoony writes:

Lawless Christianity is a contradiction in terms: it is anti-Christian. The purpose of grace is not to set aside the law but to fulfill the law and to enable man to keep the law. If the law was so serious in the sight of God that it would require the death of Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, to make atonement for man’s sin, it seems strange for God then to proceed to abandon the law! The goal of the law is not lawlessness, nor the purpose of grace a lawless contempt of grace.[3]

Without an appreciation of God’s law, there is no way to combat lawlessness and the redefinition of everything from abortion to same-sex sexuality. Many of today’s churches have accepted homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle choice and twist the Scriptures to justify their position. And why not? Christians have been taught that God’s law (just some of it) is either (1) just for the church or (2) grace supplants biblical law. It’s a double whammy, making the Christian message irrelevant this side of heaven.

https://americanvision.org/posts/theres-more-to-the-gospel-than-just-preach-the-gospel/?_kx=QPOQfLulfjqaVcgfnjDLpWuZlIWRM_1Oi_IfIKxJ91I.Psh6Fs 

....Dr. Gary North pointed out the problem:

To escape this inherent despair, fundamentalists have turned to their own version of the humanists’ escape hatch: an upper-story universe. This upper story is the world of faith, expectation, and hope: the heavenly realm. It is a hope in heaven — a world above and beyond this world of Christian powerlessness and defeat.

*****

Fundamentalism’s lower story is the world of work, economics, professional training, art, institutions, authority, and power, i.e., the “secular” realm. This realm is governed, not in terms of the Bible, but in terms of supposedly universal “neutral reason” and natural law.[9]

And that’s the problem. It didn’t used to be this way. Every area of life was seen as a place to apply God’s Word, even among those who did not embrace Jesus as Lord and Savior. The world worked the way it did because God made it that way. As a result, Western Civilization flourished. In time, however, many people came to believe that the impersonal cosmos was good enough to develop a moral worldview. Of course, natural law advocates used their understanding of Special Revelation to read Nature, otherwise “Nature, red in tooth and claw,” would have been the outcome.

Darwinism killed any lasting vestige of a link between nature and God. God was not needed in an unwound clockwork universe. Apparently, a blind watchmaker was in charge. That would be like having Stevie Wonder or Ray Charles drive a taxi. The Christian response was to reformulate theologically. A sacred-secular divide was developed, coupled with an eschatology that made this time and world irrelevant, anticipating a rapture at any moment to relieve them of the task and responsibility of cultural change.