The Jewish Moral Corruption of Germany and America
/Corruption of Twentieth Century Germany and America
Jewish Film and Literature
Magnus Hirschfeld and other Jewish collaborators Arthur Kronfeld and Friedrich Wertheim founded the Institute of Sexual Science (Institut für Sexualwissenschaft) in Berlin in July 1919, one year after World War I ended. Hirschfeld himself saw that World War I created “a moral vacuum,” particularly in Germany, “where experiments could be carried out.”[1] Although Hirschfeld began advocating for the legalization of homosexuality in 1897 through the founding of the Scientific Humanitarian Community,[2] it has been historically posited that the establishment of the Institute of Sexual Science marked the inception of the sexual revolution or subversion in Germany. Laurie Marhoefer—an eminent scholar of the gay and transgender movement who does not consider “homosexuality, prostitution, gender non-conformity, and obscene media, as well as birth control and abortion” immoral[3]—declares: “It was in the Weimar era that several characteristic components of twentieth-century gay and lesbian liberation were first put to use in the context of mass democracy.”[4]
Dr. E. Michael Jones persuasively argued in Libido Dominandi more than twenty years ago that sexual liberation—or “mass democracy”—is a form of political control, and Hirschfeld was essentially using his sex ideology to sexualize, corrupt, and then control much of the German nation, particularly Berlin. Hirschfeld was named “the Einstein of sex”[5] largely because he embraced the doctrine of “sexual relativity.”[6] It is therefore safe to say that Hirschfeld was the man who put sexual revolution on the map in the 1920s in Germany, which unquestonably contributed to the rise of Nazi Germany. “Hirschfeld himself linked sexual murder with alcoholism and epilepsy, a combination of hereditary and acquired disorders that supposedly generated extreme violence.”[7] In order for Hirschfeld’s sexual revolution to take place (he called it “Sexual Reform”), Hirschfeld had to attack the traditional teaching of the Church and, by implication, any society that was docile to that teaching. He said:
The Christian supporters of the idea that any intercourse not serving procreation ‘is sinful fornication’ are not always proceeding logically. Otherwise, they would not only have to reject contraceptives but consequently would also have to forbid intercourse with a woman from the beginning of pregnancy up to the end of the nursing period; thus the man who soon after the wedding impregnated his spouse should not touch her for a year and half.[8]
Hirschfeld spent a large part of his 1,200-page book The Homosexuality of Men and Women deconstructing the traditional view of sex and religious morality. In fact, “90 percent of all cases at the Institute’s clinics concerned contraception and abortion queries. The clinic, which was first run by the venereologist Ludwig Levy-Lenz, and from 1927 by Max Hodann, adapted contraceptive device to individual needs.”[9] Right after World War I, Hirschfeld began to produce controversial films that challenged the moral code of Germany. Films such as Sinful Mothers, Prostitution, and Different from Others “challenged the German state’s right to legislate sexual behavior.” Prostitution, for example, ended with these lines: “Prostitution is acquitted. We want to help to relieve need, to create humane laws, for we have no right to judge.”[10] Because of his Jewish ideology, Hirschfeld could make neither heads nor tails of moral reasoning, despite the fact that he was also trained in philosophy, philology, and medicine. If Hirschfeld believed he “had no right to judge,” why did he critique the German penal code, specifically Paragraph 175, which deemed homosexuality, bestiality, and other sexual deviances as morally wrong and thus criminal?
In any event, it was no coincidence that Hirschfeld and his followers found themselves in opposition to German culture, a culture that predominantly adhered to the moral and social order. Even doctors like Waldemar Schweisheimer, in his 1920 study, argued that Prostitution ignored the obvious connection between prostitution and venereal diseases.[11] In fact, Hirschfeld initiated his sexual revolution or sexual reform “at a time when to do so meant to compromise not only his reputation but also his safety.”[12] Marhoefer concurs that the decline of religious morality aligned with the ascension of Hirschfeld’s Institute of Sex Research.[13]
Hirschfeld used “science” as the cornerstone of his movement, contending that sexual variances such as homosexuality were “purely biological, not pathological.” He further argued that the laws against homosexuality in Germany contradicted scientific understanding. “What is natural cannot be immoral,” he postulated. Hirschfeld propagated the idea that religious morality should become obsolete as it conflicted with “science,” advocating that “science” itself should serve as the guiding principle for society.
Marhoefer writes that Hirschfeld “called on his allies in the new government, the Social Democrats, to quickly repeal the sodomy law.”[14] Between 1918 and 1933, the Weimar Republic became a lab experiment for the sexual revolution. “The Weimar Republic relaxed restrictions on media about sexuality, which proved crucial for the formation of mass political organizations of gay men, lesbians, and ‘transvestites…’ All of these reforms proceeded from the principle that rationality and science, not religious morality, ought to guide the state’s response to sexual behaviour.”[15]
The Rise of Nazi Germany
This leads us to a central point: the existence of Nazi Germany largely hinged on the presence of Jewish subversive movements. In other words, it is within the realm of the historical data to assert that Nazi Germany became a sort of defense mechanism—a counter-response to Jewish revolutionary activities perceived to be dangerous for Germany and much of Eastern Europe. Several Jewish scholars and historians agree on this point. For example, Martin Bernal mentions that from 1920 to 1939, “Anti-Semitism intensified throughout Europe and North America following the perceived and actual centrality of Jews in the Russian Revolution.”[16] Sarah Gordon declares:
Hitler’s hatred of the Jews was based on his belief that they fomented wars that were against the national and racial interests of the countries involved, and that Jews were the only gainers from these ‘unnatural’ wars that resulted from conspiracies of ‘international Jewry.’ To Hitler Jews were not merely ‘diverting’ other nations, but they were a positive threat to both their internal and external security…According to Hitler, the failure of nations to recognize their true interests by waging war against the Jews would result in apocalyptic consequences. As he put it, “If the Jew with his Marxist creed remains victorious over the nations of this world, then his crown will be the wreath on the grave of mankind, then this planet will once more, as millions of years ago, move through the ether devoid of human beings.”[17]
Magnus Hirschfeld at Institute for Sexual Research, 1920
Even Lucy S. Dawidowicz would somewhat agree. Hitler, according to Dawidowicz, “had discovered that Jews dominated the liberal press in Vienna and the city’s cultural artistic life, that they were behind the Social Democratic movement—Marxism. Triumphantly he had at last found an answer to the original question he had posed about the Jew: ‘The Jew was no German.’”[18] To quote Hitler, “In my eyes the charge against Judaism became a grave one the moment I discovered the Jewish activities in the press, in art, in literature and the theatre.”[19] He later described how the Jewish elite in the theatre were corrupting the morals of the culture. He also complained that some of the materials produced in the theatre were of a pornographic nature.[20] Nazi Germany wasn’t formulating these theories without evidence; they had ample support to substantiate their claims.
Theatre in Germany began to produce films such as The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920), directed and written by Jewish producers Robert Wiene and Hans Janowitz. Other films of the same genre included Carl Mayer’s The Last Laugh (1924), Maedchen in Uniform (1931), and Kuhle Wampe (1932).[21] Maedchen in Uniform was an explicitly pro-lesbian film, something that was completely contrary to the Prussian education system at the time, and many of the cast in the movie were Jewish. Film scholar Richard W. McCormick of the University of Minnesota declares that this film “threatened the status quo” of the Weimar Republic in the 1920s.[22] McCormick continues, “Madchen in Uniform is a film that is implicated within a number of progressive and emancipatory discourses of the late Weimar Republic: the movement for homosexual rights and the flourishing of urban, queer subculture; ‘New Objectivity’ and other avant-garde tendencies in the arts and popular culture; and the intersection of modernity, the movies, and the democratic egalitarianism.”[23]
Paul Johnson tells us that films like Blue Angel were so corrupt that they “could not be shown in Paris. Stage and night club shows in Berlin were the least inhibited of any major capital. Plays, novels and even paintings touched on such themes as homosexuality, sadomasochism, transvestism and incest; and it was in Germany that Freud’s writings were most fully absorbed by the intelligentsia and penetrated the widest range of artistic expression.”[24] Many of these films were labeled “decadent” as soon as Hitler rose to power, and many of the producers fled Germany.
Magnus Hirschfeld
Maedchen in Uniform became a symbol for feminist movements in the 1970s,[25] one of the weapons used against the existing culture. Actor and director Paul Wegener understood how to change the cultural landscape by changing its arts. “The real creator of the film must be the camera,” he said. “Getting the spectator to change his point of view, using special effects to double the actor on the divided screen, superimposing other images—all this, technique, form, gives the content its real meaning.”[26] Cinema was widely used as a form of subversion of the German culture, traditions, and mores. Even Eric D. Weitz declares that during that period in Germany, “Many artists, writers, directors, and composers jumped at the chance to work in the new media precisely because they signified a break with the past and provided one more way to express rejection of pre-1918 imperial Germany with its kaisers, generals, nobles, and stuffy, rigid and outmoded art academies.”[27]
Johnson writes that during the 1920s in Germany, “The area where Jewish influence was strongest was the theatre, especially in Berlin. Playwrights like Carl Sternheim, Arthur Schnitzler, Ernst Toller, Erwin Piscator, Walter Hasenclever, Ferenc Molnar and Carl Zuckmayer, and influential producers like Max Reinhardt, appeared at times to dominate the stage, which tended to be modishly left-wing, pro-republican, experimental and sexually daring.”[28] Art is one of the main vehicles that would later be used to bring about what Nietzsche would call the transvaluation of all values. Films and movies were one of the largest business enterprises in 1920 Germany.[29]
There’s no denying that Jews played a significant influence in undermining German culture during the Weimar Republic. Jewish scholar Dagmar Herzog is in denial when she writes that “the idea of Jews as the main advocates of sexual liberalization was also a racist, right-wing construct.”[30]
Given the clarity of historical documentation with respect to Jewish participation in subverting the moral and social order during the Weimar Republic, Herzog’s assertion holds no credibility. Herzog admits that “many of the Jewish physicians active in various sexual-rights campaigns were also leftists,” therefore it was
simple for Christian conservatives and Nazis alike to assimilate the phenomenon of sexual rights activism to the larger phantasmagorical menace of ‘Judeo-Bolshevism.’ Even the founder of psychoanalysis, the Austrian Sigmund Freud, decidedly not a leftist, was portrayed as part of the same pernicious conspiracy. Freud’s purported proclivity for seeing sex everywhere and at the root of all individual and social phenomena (an interpretation of his work that Freud categorically rejected) became a constant motif for Nazi authors.[31]
Herzog’s query boils down to a fundamental question: Should the disproportionate influence of a specific ethnic group in any subversive movement be disregarded?
Hitler, throughout Mein Kampf, seems to have been aware of Jewish revolutionary activities, and even declared that
the part which the Jews played in the social phenomenon of prostitution, and more especially in the white slavery traffic, could be studied here better than any other West-European city, with the possible exception of certain ports of Southern France…A cold shiver ran down my spine when I first ascertained that it was the same coldblooded, thick-skinned and shameless Jew who showed his consummate skill in conducting that revolting exploitation of the dregs of the big city. Then I became fired with wrath.[32]
This anger began to escalate after World War I when he saw what was happening in the press and theatre in Germany, when art in general was being used to denigrate the German culture. What perhaps moved Hitler’s anger to a new height was that the Jews were less than three percent of the population, yet they largely controlled the theatre and were promoting what he would call “filth” and “pornography.”[33] For Hitler, these acts “must have been definitely intentional.”[34]
As we have already seen, Hirschfeld built his own system of “the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee, the first organization anywhere devoted to the protection of homosexual rights.” Jewish scholar Mel Gordon of the University of California himself writes that Hirschfeld was also
the primary inventor of marriage counseling, Gay Liberation, artificial insemination, surgical gender ‘reassignment,’ and modern sex therapy… His goofy persona and conscientiousness transformed Sexology from an anthropological curiosity into a popular German science. The Berlin monthlies, starting in the mid-twenties, referred to Hirschfeld solicitously as ‘the Einstein of Sex.’[35]
While basic biology makes it clear that there are only two sexes—male and female—Hirschfeld postulated another doctrine, one more congruent with his revolutionary ideology. Hirschfeld “wrote that it was ‘unscientific’ to speak of two sexes. Between ‘full man’ and ‘full woman’ was an infinite string of sexual/gender possibilities.”[36]
Hirschfeld actually put his doctrines into practical use.[37] This began to take place in 1919 when Hirschfeld opened the Institute of Sexology in Berlin. Gordon tells us that the institution “quickly became one of the city’s most curious attractions. The Institute’s buildings, including a former mansion, were divided into areas for lectures, consulting offices, study rooms, laboratories, medical clinics, and a museum space devoted to sexual pathology.”[38] Paul Johnson commented,
The Foxtrot and short skirts, the addiction of pleasure in ‘the imperial sewers of Berlin,’ the ‘dirty pictures’ of sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld or the typical man of the times took on in the minds of the average citizen a repugnance that is difficult to recall in hindsight without some historical effort. In a number of highly celebrated provocations, the stage of the ‘20s dealt with topics like patricide, incest and other crimes and the deepest inclination of the times tended to self-mockery.[39]
A number of Jewish icons such as George Gershwin, Ben Hecht, Douglas Fairbanks, and Sergei Eisenstein visited the school.[40] Eisenstein “enjoyed the Institute’s collection of sailor-dolls—homemade paper toys that German homosexuals fashioned during the Great War.”[41] The library of the school,
which contained the largest sex and pornographic book collection in Europe, remained accessible to all readers…Politically, the Institute provided a forum for progressive lawyers and government officials who sought to eradicate the laws against homosexuality and defend Germany’s legal abortion rights from the growing onslaught of fascist and religious parties. Most of the legal work involved suits protecting gay men against threats of petty blackmail….The Institute itself was a font of sexological activity. Pediatric care, abortions, ‘sexual rejuvenation’ and sexual ‘correction’ operations were conducted on the lower level of the main building.[42]
The building contained all sorts of sexual devices in order to advance the sexual revolution in Berlin.
Glass cases of fetishistic objects and sex aids from preliterate, Asian, and European cultures filled two other rooms. In the open counters and boxes were collections of Mandigo dildos that squirted a milky solution, Moche water bottles with penis-shaped spouts, Sanskrit sex manuals, miniature shoes worn by bound-foot Chinese courtesans, medieval chastity belts, torture instruments from a German brothel, sadistic drawings and assemblages created by Lustmord convicts, an entire picture window of ankle boots donated by a local fetishist, antique steam-driven vibrators, fake rubber breasts and vaginas taken from transvestite prostitutes, lacy panties found on the corpses of von Hindenburg’s heroic officers, and other such incontrovertible evidence of Hirschfeld’s new calculus of desire.[43]
This was the sexual decadence of the Weimar republic during the early years in the twentieth century before Nazi Germany, where sexual fetishism of all sort was widespread.[44] Even D. H. Lawrence, himself a proponent of sexual liberation, knew that the Weimar Republic had become a place for sexual debauchery, writing in a letter that “at night you feel strange things stirring in the darkness…There is a sense of danger… a queer, bristling feeling of uncanny danger.”[45] Later, Christopher Isherwood, a homosexual and proponent of sexual liberation, went to Berlin to immerse himself in the gay bars, writing later, “There was terror in the Berlin air.”[46] During that era, the Weimar Republic
stimulated all the external tics of sexual perversity. In the center of Europe, mesmerized audiences were warned, sits a nightmare municipality, a human swamp of unfettered appetites and twisted prurient proclivities…With Babylon and Nero’s Rome, Weimar Berlin has entered into our topological thesaurus as a synonym for moral degeneracy.[47]
Gordon goes so far as to say that during that period Berlin “would have to be considered as one of the most faithless—or heathen—cities in the Western world.”[48] Why? Because sexual decadence and perversion were widespread—so widespread in fact that Jewish revolutionaries used a “scientific” pretension to promote pornography. Gordon writes, “Clinical studies of sexual perversion, such as von Krafft-Ebing’s Psychopathia Sexualis (Leipzig, 1901) and [Wilhelm] Stekel’s Sexual Aberrations (Vienna, 1922) were printed by scientific publishing houses and produced principally for therapists and legal scholars in Central Europe.”[49]
Wilhelm Stekel was an important figure in this movement because he not only advanced sexual fetishism, but also collaborated with Sigmund Freud. Ernest Jones, a gentile disciple of Freud during Freud’s early years, noted that both Freud and Stekel were the original founders of the first psychoanalytic society.[50] Though the two men separated later, they were working toward a common goal: sexual revolution. Stekel ended up playing semantics in order to deconstruct what Western civilization considered perversion—he replaced the word “perversion” with his own term “paraphilia” in his book Sexual Aberrations. Peter Gay notes that Freud’s Interpretation of Dreams makes references to Stekel’s use of symbols in dreams.[51] Stekel later wrote in his autobiography that Freud was not only his “apostle” but also “my Christ!”[52]
Psychoanalysis, from its inception, was a largely Jewish movement and was later called “Jewish science.” What Gay refers to as the “nucleus” of the Psychoanalytic Society in Vienna in 1908 included people like Max Kahane, Stekel, Rudolf Reitler, Alfred Adler, and of course Sigmund Freud.[53] Yet Freud, for fear that this would provoke anti-Jewish backlash, distanced himself from psychoanalysis as a Jewish science[54] and even admitted that what Stekel was promoting was sexual perversion.[55] Yet Freud knew that he too was promoting the destruction of sexual taboos, most particularly in his Three Essays on Sexuality, implying things such as perversion is just a different form of sexuality and that all mankind at some point desire some form of sexual perversion.[56] With this sexual revolution taking place, the Weimar Republic was basically establishing reasons for Nazi Germany:
The numerous copies in multiple editions of [Psychopathia Sexualis and Sexual Aberrations] revealed an unintended secondary readership: other perverts. The salacious case histories of sadists, fetishists, Algolagnists, flagellants, and the like, formed a novel province in Weimar pornography. Under the guise of psychological research, graphic photographs and illustrations were added to still other strange biographical confessions and fantasies. Berliners seeking stronger erotic sensations and instruction for weird sex scenarios merely had to peruse Galante journals for the current ‘scientific’ offerings. Virtually every deviant practice had a layman’s society and private publishing arm.
One ‘physician,’ Ernst Schertel, headed a hypnotic ‘Dream theater’ and several book clubs devoted to whipping and buttock fetishism. Schertel’s serialized periodicals explored the dark fantasy games and dramatics of animal lovers, worshippers of obese Dominas, sadistic teachers, bare-hand flagellants, incestuous necklas fetishists, urine drinkers, bondage freaks, high-heel stompers…German authorities attempted to shut down his Parthenon-Verlag in 1931 and Wilhelm Reich publicly opposed the perverse Dream Theater. But Schertel, working under foreign pseudonyms like Dr. F. Grandpierre, outwitted them all.[57]
Of course, Mel Gordon plays down the participation of Jews in the business, saying that while the Jews “dominated certain cultural fields in pre-Nazi Berlin, especially publishing, law, medicine, theatre, graphic art, cinema, music, architecture, and popular entertainment, relatively few Jews were still involved in common prostitution with the exception of two picturesque types: Kupplerinnen (procuresses) and Chontes—zaftig whores from southern Poland.”[58]
It is understandable that Gordon is trying to dismiss a body of scholarship, since that would eventually lead to a reevaluation of at least one reason why Nazi Germany was completely against Jewish revolutionary activity. Gordon tells us that Wilhelm Reich, another Jewish sexual revolutionary, believed that Hirschfeld’s work would advance the cause of fascism.[59] Gordon also tells us that as soon as Hitler came to power in 1933, “the Institute of Sexology was one of his first targets.”[60] Nazi Germany quickly placed the graphic paintings of George Grosz, Jankel Adler, Rudolf Bauer, Cesar Klein, Max Pechstein, Ludwig Meidner, Otto Dix, Rudolf Schlichter, among dozens of others, under the heading of “degenerate art” because of their pornographic imageries. Throughout his own work, Gordon tells us how the Weimar Republic sought to refashion Germany through sexual revolution.
Prostitution lost its exact meaning when tens of thousands were involved in complex sex attachments, all of a commercial nature. The vaguely Wilhelmian underpinning of middle-class Berlin slowly cracked and, over time, collapsed. Venereal disease, not flesh-peddling, threatened the immediate well-being of the capital. Syphilis and gonorrhea spread at an alarming rate. The city fathers, once proud watchdogs of the moral code, turned to Berlin’s public officials and social workers for help…Public and habitual masturbation, manifestations of shell-shock, grew to epic proportions, shaking morals as well as becoming an embarrassing disciplinary problem. In the countryside, the brutal corralling and rape of foreign women, usually peasant girls, by German recruits was reported with some frequency in the early dispatches…
Roman-style orgies became synonymous with Etappe life…Sex, the historical lubricant for rallying a nation to armed conflict, was destroying the Kaiser’s war. A dizzying panic overtook Berlin in October 1919. Not since Paris in the 1860s had a European city experienced the Edenic flush of total erotic freedom. With prostitution and all-night dancing already accepted features of contemporary Berlin life, what else could be added. Drugs and over-the-counter pornography appeared first…The most sought-after pornographic postcards and films had been imported from Paris and Budapest before the war. Now Berlin was patriotically producing its own brands in oversized graphic portfolios, ‘bachelor’ Galante magazines, photo-sheets, and smokers…The sweet qualities of Gallic porno were supplanted in Berlin studios by the psychopathic scenarios from Krafft-Ebing. Forced, intergenerational, scatological, and obsessive fetish sex prevailed…
The distinct erotica of Berlin was sold in specialized bookstores and here and there on the street… Wild sex and all-night antics could be made anywhere. In private flats, hotel rooms, and rented halls, drug parties and nude ‘Beauty Evenings’ were constantly announced and held. A gala atmosphere enveloped 1919 and 1920…In postwar Paris, a traveler could engage the services of a streetwalker for five or six dollars; but during the inflation in Berlin, five dollars could buy a month’s worth of carnal delights…Sex was everywhere and obtainable on the cheap…Child prostitution was a searing social issue long before and after the inflation era. It involved both female and male children, sex-workers’ progeny, runaways, and troublesome adolescents. There seemed to be almost no bottom age for those seeking physical companionship with children. And virtually no end to willing girls and boys.[61]
As Jewish historian Edward J. Bristow shows, Jews were considered a small number of the population in Germany in the early part of the twentieth century, yet they were the largest ethnic group to promote and profit from white slavery and prostitution. It is important to make this distinction: Jews were the largest group owning whorehouses, but as far as pimps or whores in those houses, there were other groups as well. When things began to get rough, many Jews changed their names in order make things complicated for the police.[62]
What was even more troublesome during that era was that sex magic was used as a form of revival; it was viewed as a form of religion and prayer.[63] Gordon states that sex magic was used as a “bodily manifestation of lost esoteric wisdom, techniques of Gnostic faith, flipped transmogrifications of flesh, even divine rungs for ultimate human salvation…Sexuality was the fuse and hidden spring of Weimar Germany’s newest dogmas.”[64]
Yet by 1932, the power of sexual eroticism began to decline during the rise of Nazi Germany—most pornographic publications were banned and nudist clinics such as Koch’s were shut down.[65] By 1933, Hirschfeld’s Institute of Sexology was ransacked and vandalized by SA-men and students. Archival files were destroyed, and thousands of books and manuscripts were burned.[66] Gordon admits that “Berlin’s sex industry contracted and nearly disappeared throughout the summer months of 1933.”[67]
Hitler moved from deep-seated wrath to actions taken against what he called “intentional acts.” “I had now no more hesitation about bringing the Jewish problem to light in all its details. No. Henceforth I was determined to do so.”[68] By the summer of 1933, “Berlin’s sex industry” almost disappeared, and by the spring of 1934, approximately 20 brothels were left in Berlin. Many popular historians, even though they discuss the Weimar Republic, seem to stay away from addressing these historical issues.[69]
The Sexual Subversion in America
The Jewish proliferation of corruption and the culture of explicit content has thrived over the past sixty years in both Europe and America. For example, Jewish scholar Nathan Abrams declares in his book The New Jew in Film that “older generation of Jewish filmmakers and actors, here [Woody] Allen, [Stanley] Kubrick and [Ron] Jeremy, arguably not only increased the Jewishness of their work, but updated it to match the new post-1990 sensibility by defining it in increasingly sexualized (and pornographic) terms.”[70] Within the book, Abrams dedicates numerous pages to an extensive examination of both major and minor pornographic or sexually explicit films, contending that there exists a Jewish element or ideological underpinning behind the majority of them.
Abrams continues to surprise readers by maintaining two contradictory statements: he subtly suggests that “anti-Semitism” is generally unrelated to Jewish behavior, while concurrently asserting throughout the book that Jewish actors, actresses, and filmmakers contribute to the debasement of culture by producing pornographic and subversive films. For example, he writes that
the character of Victor Ziegler in Jewish director Stanley Kubrick’s final film Eyes Wide Shut (1999) is the embodiment of a ‘menacing hypersexuality.’ [Scholars] Gene D. Phillips and Rodney Hell describe Ziegler as ‘sinister,’ while James Naremore refers to him as ‘the most morally corrupt character.’
How is it possible for Abrams to simultaneously maintain these two positions? How can he assert that anti-Jewish reactions have very little or nothing to do with Jewish behavior while, at the same time, argue that Jewish contributions to certain films are subversive? This appears to be a challenging intellectual puzzle, but it doesn’t require a scholar or intellectual to notice that Abrams is engaging in intellectual inconsistency. We do know why.
In an essay included in his 2008 book Jews and Sex, Abrams reasoned that “many anti-Semites are eager” to display the negative side of Jewish pornography. He cited people like David Irving and David Duke who used his essays to promote what he called anti-Semitism.
All of these websites are anti-Semitic in intent. Where Duke is a neo-Nazi, Irving is a convicted Holocaust denier. Their websites are a montage of extracts culled primarily from the print media to prove that Jews are corrupting pure, white Christian society…they unfortunately used my original article to this end, particularly in light of the fact that since it was written by a Jew it provides some sort of legitimacy to their claims.[71]
At the same time, Abrams admits that Jews play an enormously powerful influence in the pornographic and erotic world which Hollywood disseminates through films. Abrams cannot make up his mind because he is living in a contradictory world, one which keeps him in intellectual bondage. He writes,
Sex is even more radically foregrounded in Superbad, which follows a similar trajectory to American Pie in its shadowing of three Jewish teenagers’ attempts to lose their virginity, but whose language is much more obscene. The film opens with a long, serious, detailed and matter-of-fact dialogue about hardcore pornography between the two Jewish protagonists. This explicit and sex-fixated language continues in a similar vein throughout the film. Likewise, Funny People, which depicts the sex lives of a group of Jewish stand-up comics, is literally peppered with sex, penis and testicle jokes. Another sign of increased confidence of the younger generation of Jewish directors, screenwriters and actors is not only their increased openness about the consumption of hardcore pornography but also their drawing attention to it in their films. Jim in American Pie and American Pie 2 is seen consuming adult material, as is Darren in Saving Silverman. Archie Moses in Bulletproof is a self-proclaimed adult-film aficionado. The Wiseman brothers in A Mighty Wind open a sex emporium…..
[…] This is just an excerpt from the Feb 2024 Issue of Culture Wars magazine. To read the full article, please purchase a digital download of the magazine, or become a subscriber!
Articles:
Culture of Death Watch
Fiducia Supplicans and Hobson’s Choice by E. Michael Jones
Features
Confessions of an Ivy League Shiksa by Delphine Lavoie
Reviews
The Jewish Moral Corruption of Germany and America by Jonas Alexis
(Endnotes)
[1] Quoted in Jill Suzanne Smith, Berlin Coquette: Prostitution and the New German Woman, 1890–1933 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013), 108. [2] Annette Timm, The Politics of Fertility in Twentieth-Century Berlin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 88; Cornelie Usborne, The Politics of the Body in Weimar Germany: Women’s Reproductive Rights and Duties (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1992), 119. [3] Laurie Marhoefer, Sex and the Weimar Republic: German Homosexual Emancipation and the Rise of the Nazis (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015), 9. [4] Ibid., 8. [5] For studies on these issues, see Laurie Marhoefer, Racism and the Making of Gay Rights: A Sexologist, His Student, and the Empire of Queer Love (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2022); Sex and the Weimar Republic: German Homosexual Emancipation and the Rise of the Nazis (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015). [6] Mel Gordon, Voluptuous Panic: The Erotic World of Weimar Berlin (San Francisco: Feral House, 2006), 153. [7] Robert Heynen, Degeneration and Revolution: Radical Cultural Politics and the Body in Weimer Republic (Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015), 287. [8] Quoted in Elena Mancini, Magnus Hirschfeld and the Quest for Sexual Freedom: A History of the First International Sexual Freedom Movement (New York: Palgrave, 2010), 13. [9] Usborne, The Politics of the Body in Weimar Germany, 119. [10] Smith, Berlin Coquette, 215. [11] Ibid., 120-121. [12] Laurie Marhoefer, Sex and the Weimar Republic: German Homosexual Emancipation and the Rise of the Nazis (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015), 4. [13] Ibid., 3. [14] Ibid., 4. [15] Ibid. [16] Martin Bernal, Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, vol. I (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987), 313. [17] Sarah Ann Gordon, Hitler, Germans, and the Jewish Question (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), 96-97. [18] Lucy S. Dawidowicz, The War Against the Jews (New York: Bantam, 1986), 7. [19] Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (New York: Hurst & Blackett, 1942), 42. [20] Ibid., 42-43 [21] For a study of these films, see Noah Isenberg, ed., Weimar Cinema: An Essential Guide to Classic Films of the Era (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009). [22] . Richard M. McCormick, “Coming Out of the Uniform: Political and Sexual Emancipation in Leontine Sagan’s Madchen in Uniform (1931),” Isenberg, Weimar Cinema, 271. [23] Ibid., 272. [24] Paul Johnson, Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Nineties (New York: HarperCollins, 1983), 114. [25] McCormick, “Coming Out of the Uniform,” Weimar Cinema, 273. [26] Lotte H. Eisner, The Haunted Screen: Expressionism in the German Cinema and the Influence of Max Reinhardt (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008), 40. [27] Eric D. Weitz, Weimar Germany: Promise and Tragedy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009), 250. [28] Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (New York: Harper Perennial, 1988), 479. [29] Janet Ward, Weimar Surfaces: Urban Visual Culture in 1920s Germany (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001), 14. [30] Dagmar Herzog, Sex After Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2005), 20. [31] Ibid., 22. [32] Hitler, Mein Kampf, 43. [33] Ibid., 42-43. [34] Ibid., 43. [35] Mel Gordon, Voluptuous Panic: The Erotic World of Weimar Berlin (San Francisco: Feral House, 2006), 153. [36] Ibid., 153-154. [37] Ibid., 153-163. [38] Ibid., 164. [39] Johnson, Modern Times, 115. [40] Gordon, Voluptuous Panic, 164. [41] Ibid., 165-166. [42] Ibid., 164. [43] Ibid., 165. [44] Ibid., 171-183. [45] E. Michael Jones, Monsters from the ID: The Rise of Horror in Fiction and Film (Dallas: Spence Publishing Co., 2000), 134; also Paul Johnson, Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Eighties (New York: Harper & Row, 1983), 136-137. [46] Ibid., 134. [47] Gordon, Voluptuous Panic, 1, 2. [48] Ibid., 8 [49] Ibid., 186. [50] Ernest Jones, The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud (New York: Basic Books, 1953), 312, 420. [51] Peter Gay, Freud: A Life for our Time (New York: W. W. Norton, 1998), 114, 173. [52] Ibid., 173. [53] Ibid., 174. [54] See Jay Geller, “Freud, Bluher, and the Secessio Inversa,” Daniel Boyarin, Daniel Itzkovitz, and Ann Pellegrini, ed., Queer Theory and the Jewish Question (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 93. [55] Gay, Freud, 187. [56] Geller, “Freud, Bluher, and the Secessio Inversa,” Queer Theory, 95. [57] Gordon, Voluptuous Panic, 186, 188. [58] Ibid., 41. [59] Ibid., 168 [60] Ibid., 169. [61] Ibid., 15-16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 44. [62] Edward J. Bristow, Prostitution and Prejudice: The Jewish Fight Against White Slavery 1870-1939 (New York: Schocken, 1983), 52-53 [63] Gordon, Voluptuous Panic, 193-194, 195-213. [64] Ibid., 194. [65] Ibid., 249. [66] Ibid., 250. [67] Ibid., 252. [68] Hitler, Mein Kampf, 43 [69] See Mary Fulbrook, A History of Germany, 1918-2008: The Divided Nation (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2009); Detlev J. K. Peukert, The Weimar Republic (New York: Hill & Wang, 1989); Peter Gay, The Weimar Republic: The Outsider as Insider (New York: W. W. Norton, 2001). [70] Nathan Abrams, The New Jew in Film: Exploring Jewishness and Judaism in Contemporary Cinema (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2012), 72. [71] Nathan Abrams, “Kosher Beefcakes and Kosher Cheesecakes: Jews in Porn,” Nathan Abrams, ed. Jews and Sex (Nottingham: Five Leaves Publications, 2008), 184. [72] Abrams, The New Jew in Film, 73-74. [73] Ibid., 40-41. [74] Ibid., 40. [75] Adrea Friedman, Prurient Interests: Gender, Democracy, and Obscenity in New York City, 1909-1945 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 140-141. [76] Ibid., 143. [77] Ibid. [78] Ibid., 141. [79] Ibid., 145. [80] Ibid. [81] Josh Lambert, “‘Dirty Jews’ and the Christian Right,” Haaretz, March 2, 2014. [82] Ibid. [83] Nathan Abrams, “Triple-exthnics,” Jewish Quarterly, Winter 2004; Abram’s work has been published by academic centers like Rutgers University Press, and no one has ever accused him of being an anti-Semite. In fact, he has gotten great accolades for writing provocative works. [84] Michael Wex, Born to Kvetch: Yiddish Language and Culture in All Its Moods (New York: Harper Perennial, 2006), 24; emphasis in original. [85] Maria Tatar, Lustmord: Sexual Murder in Weimar Germany (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995), 4. [86] Ibid, 6; emphasis in original. [87] Ibid., 100-101. [88] Ibid., 101; emphasis in original. [89] Tatar, Lustmord, 102. [90] Ibid., 103. [91] Ibid., 104. [92] Ibid., 106-108. [93] Ibid., 113. [94] Ibid. [95] Ibid., 68. [96] Ibid., 69. [97] Ibid. [98] Ibid., 74. [99] Ibid., 85. [100] See for example Barbara Ulrich, The Hot Girls of Weimar Berlin (Los Angeles: Feral House, 2002). [101] See for example Ruth Langer, Cursing the Christians?: A History of the Birkat HaMinim (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012); Jacob Yuval, Two Nations in Your Womb: Perceptions of Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006); for similar studies, see Elliott Horowitz, Reckless Rites: Purim and the Legacy of Jewish Violence (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006); Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996). [102] Julia Roos specifically excluded discussing the disproportionate number of Jews in the sex industry during the Weimar Republic. She writes, “The Nazi press was filled with propaganda about the alleged Jewish-controlled white slave trade in Christian women. Such articles frequently blamed Weimar democracy and its supporters for complicity in Jewish sex crimes.” Julia Roos, Weimar through the Lens of Gender: Prostitution Reform, Woman’s Emancipation, and German Democracy, 1919-33 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2010), 210. [103] Josh Lambert, Unclean Lips: Obscenity, Jews, and American Culture (New York: New York University Press, 2013), 10. [104] Ibid., 6-7, 8. [105] E. Michael Jones, “Rabbi Dresner’s Dilemma: Torah v. Ethnos,” Culture Wars, May 2003. [106] Cheyenne Roundtree, “‘The Idol’: How HBO’s Next ‘Euphoria’ Became Twisted ‘Torture Porn,’” Rolling Stone, March 1, 2023. [107] Kelly Lawler, “Review: HBO’s ‘The Idol’ is sexist, gratuitous, exploitative … and achingly boring,” USA Today, June 9, 2023. [108] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gen_V. [109] Quoted in Stuart Dredge, “Netflix series Hemlock Grove: ‘People want their horror horrific,’ says Eli Roth,” Guardian, April 10, 2013. [110] David Breskin, “David Cronenberg: The Rolling Stone Interview,” Rolling Stone, February 6, 1992: 66-70. [111] Michael Ruse, “God is dead. Long live morality,” Guardian, March 15, 2010. [112] E. Michael Jones, Degenerate Moderns: Modernity as Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2012), 15. [113] Plato, The Republic (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 116. [114] See for example William Beard, The Artist as Monster: The Cinema of David Cronenberg (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006). [115] Breskin, “David Cronenberg: The Rolling Stone Interview,” Rolling Stone, February 6, 1992: 66-70. [116] William Beard, The Artist as Monster: The Cinema of David Cronenberg (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006), 434. [117] Ibid., 443. [118] Ibid., 434. [119] Ibid., 431. [120] Ibid. [121] Ibid., 433. [122] Ibid., 430. [123] Ibid., 446. [124] Breskin, “David Cronenberg: The Rolling Stone Interview,” Rolling Stone, February 6, 1992: 66-70. [125] Beard, Artist as Monster, 452. [126] Beard goes into great detail of this. See pages 452-453, 455-456. [127] Beard, Artist as Monster, 433. [128] revokcom, “DAVID CRONENBERG,” YouTube, Sept. 10, 2010, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL1MOf1gTTo&ab_channel=revokcom. [129] Thomas Szasz, The Myth of Psychotherapy: Mental Healing as Religion, Rhetoric, and Repression (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1988), 139, 146; also Moshe Gresser, Dual Allegiance: Freud as a Modern Jew (New York: State University of New York, 1994), 10-11. [130] Rothman and Lichter, Roots of Radicalism: Jews, Christians, and the Left (Edison, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1996), 125. [131] Kevin MacDonald, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements (Bloomington: 1st Books Library, 2002), 112. [132] David Bakan, Freud and Mystical Tradition (New York: Dover Publications, 2004), 25. [133] Caim Bermant, The Jews (New York: Times Books, 1977), 121. [134] Michael Eigen, Kabbalah and Psychoanalysis (London: Karnac Books, 2012). [135] Bakan, Freud and Mystical Tradition, xviii. [136] Ibid., 29. [137] See Jonas E. Alexis, Kevin MacDonald’s Metaphysical Failure: A Philosophical, Historical, and Moral Critique of Evolutionary Psychology, Sociobiology, and Identity Politics (Bloomington: AuthorHouse, 2022). [138] Jonathan Tilove, “White Nationalist Conference Ponders Whether Jews and Nazis Can Get Along,” Forward, March 3, 2006.
