Once Aryan Skynet Goes Live It Doesn't Matter Who Pulled The Switch
If teachers still bother to impart to students any information about Tammany Hall, the most infamous political machine in American history and a power in New York politics for well over a century, it is that its legacy was one of unabashed corruption, its name forever emblematic of the worst excesses of graft and oppression; and it is not the intention of this post to suggest that Tammany Hall was not corrupt and criminal in its character. However, is this all there is to say?
Opponents of Tammany Hall are remembered as honorable reformers – but was there no other motivation behind their machinations? Was there something other than the zeal for honest government that united these “reformers”? The World’s Work ran a surprisingly frank item titled “Jewish Power in New York’s Politics” in a 1913 number:
The most fundamental fact in the defeat of Tammany Hall in New York City is a complete change in the character of its population. In the last 15 years one of the greatest immigrations in human history has been taking place: that is, the movement of Eastern European Jews to the United States. The expulsion of the Jews from Spain by Ferdinand and Isabella figures large in history; but this involved only 100,000 people – which is about the number of Jews who arrive at Ellis Island in every two years. And the great majority of these immigrants settle in New York. There are almost 2,000,000 Jews in the United States today; of these, 1,000,000 are found in New York City. No city in the world, not even in Russia, contains half so many Jews. On Manhattan Island, they are one fourth of the population.
Richard Croker, a former Tammany boss, confided when interviewed in 1916 that the shifting demographics demanded a change in the quality and the sensibility of political candidates toward more of a “social justice” orientation:
“When I was leader of Tammany hall it was the endeavor of the organization to nominate men entirely superior to those the Republicans and reform organizations could place upon their tickets.”
“But conditions have changed since you headed the Tammany hall organization.”
“That is emphatically true,” answered Mr. Croker. “It is imperative that Tammany Hall recruit to its ranks new blood – men of the younger generation who have interested themselves in politics.”
“Who are they?” was asked.
Mr. Croker pulled at his cropped mustache reflectively, and after a moment’s hesitation, answered:
“Well, when I was the head of New York’s Democratic organization the Irish-American element was the dominant factor. Today, I am told, the Irish have moved uptown. In their places have come the Jew and the Italian.
“Jews and the Italians are good citizens. [. . .] But neither, speaking politically, are devoted to the interests of one or the other party. They are interested in social justice and social welfare more than they are in political meetings. As a consequence, they don’t vote blindly. All of which means, to my mind, that it’s harder to be a boss of Tammany Hall today than it was when I, as the newspapers said, dominated affairs at Fourteenth St. Tammany will have to fight hard to get back into power.”
Judge William Travers Jerome, an anti-Tammany candidate for District Attorney in 1901, capitalized on the feeling among the Jewish and immigrant populations that they were being held back and exploited by the reigning Democratic political machine. A description of the crowds that came to hear Jerome speak and the virulence of their ethnic grievances is illustrative of the city’s changing electoral dynamics:
Before an audience composed of Hebrew voters he uses the most direct language. [. . .] He uses the names of men in affiliation with Tammany who have made safety for young girls almost impossible on the East Side; he sets forth the awful evils with which the people he addresses are too familiar. He has studied the Tammany system of extortion until he can in the language of the people recapitulate the history of the years of oppression. [. . .]
The audiences give expression to rage that needs but the merest incentive to become violence. [. . .]
Not the least interesting feature of these audiences is the number present who do not understand English. They sit and stand with puzzled faces, gazing intently at the speaker. Beside them an English-speaking friend interprets, while rage, hope, determination, anger, sympathy is expressed in their faces. They applaud when their friends applaud, and find out afterward why.
After women received the vote, they too were drafted into the ragtag coalition of anti-Tammany elements that facilitated the rise of Jewish political power in New York. Doing her part to marshal and mold these forces was a representative figure of the time, Belle Moskowitz, who lurked as an ethnic eminence grise and worked as a capable rabble rouser for gubernatorial candidate and former Tammany Hall operative Alfred E. Smith.
It was during this period, while working to improve conditions in New York’s garment district, that she crossed paths with Alfred E. Smith, who had labored alongside Robert Wagner to secure establishment of the New York State Factory Investigating Commission [after the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire]. From this point, Smith’s political fortunes began to rise, thanks in large measure to the promotion and advice of Belle Moskowitz.
Moskowitz, described as “the power behind Al Smith’s throne”, continued to back Smith until he turned against fellow anti-Tammanyites the Roosevelt family, who, history would show, were a much, much more profitable connection for the Jews. Eulogizing Franklin Roosevelt for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, David Schwartz even compared the president to Moses in his impactfulness on Jewish history.
Franklin D. Roosevelt came to the presidency through the springboard of the governorship of New York, the state with the largest Jewish population. From the very beginning, Jews took to him – though in those beginning days, there was no thought that he would someday prove the great antidote to Hitlerism. [. . .]
Roosevelt had first been associated with the candidacy of Al Smith. All over America, when Al ran for the presidency, one heard as the theme song of the campaign, that tune:
“East side, west side, all around the town”
It was something new in American history. The east side was where the Russian Jews and the Irish, where the immigrants and the poor people, lived. [. . .]
Many Jews were active in the Smith campaign and when Smith receded from the picture, New York Jews gave strong support to Franklin Delano Roosevelt who had stepped into the position formerly occupied by Smith. It was a noteworthy fact that in Roosevelt’s several races for the Presidency, north of the Bronx, his opponent would show the lead – but when he hit the Bronx and the other boroughs of New York City, the heavy vote for Greater New York with its large Jewish percentage would always bring Roosevelt into the lead.
Jews as a whole were strongly attracted to Roosevelt and I see no reason to hide the fact. [. . .]
Roosevelt was distinctive from other American presidents in the remarkable knowledge he had of Jewish affairs. Jewish leaders who saw him spoke with amazement of his intimate knowledge of Jewish affairs. He knew even the details of the inner politics and rivalries of the several Jewish factions.
Following the Yalta conferences, he tried to persuade the Arab leaders of the benefit Zionism would bring to them. [. . .]
Like Moses, in this case, too, Roosevelt did not attain the Promised Land for the Jews – but he pointed the way – and when the way is pointed, a great step has been taken. Yes, Jewish history will have to deal much with Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Roosevelt continued to work to weaken Tammany Hall power from the presidency, and Jewish favorite and District Attorney Thomas E. Dewey also devoted himself to its destruction. The latter struck a major coup with his high-profile prosecution of Tammany boss James J. Hines for connivance in the rackets of gangster Arthur Simon Flegenheimer (alias Dutch Schultz). Significantly, Newspaper Enterprise Association correspondent Paul Ross referred to boss Hines as a “fallen Goliath” at the time. Anti-Tammany coalitions marked further milestones of Jewish ascendancy with the 1932 election of Jewish Democrat and Lehman Brothers partner Herbert H. Lehman as Governor of New York and the 1933 election of Yiddish-speaking mischling Republican Fiorello LaGuardia as Mayor of New York City.
Tammany Hall persisted, limping along as an also-ran in New York politics for a few decades, but its symbolic death knell was rung in 1943 when, as Newspaper Enterprise Association writer Marguerite Young summarized in an article titled “New York’s Notorious Tammany Approaches Its Political Doom”, even the organization’s eponymous headquarters slipped from its grasp:
Tammany Hall, since Revolutionary times the nation’s No. 1 symbol of boss rule, is no more. The $950,000 building has been sold for $250,000 because some Tammany politicians no longer can and others no longer will, pay the rent and carry the mortgage. [. . .]
The society owned the building and ruled the roost, frequently ousting politically hostile factions.
But now the society is financially busted and the political outfit is moving to modest rented rooms. [. . .]
They lived by and for graft and patronage, throwing their weight around in national politics, and showing at home the most picturesque and flagrant character ever displayed by political freebooters – up into the roaring twenties.
Then they were exposed again, for graft in keeping with the colossal spirit of the Teapot Dome Decade. Yet they bucked Franklin D. Roosevelt for the presidency and rejected a reform candidate for mayor of New York.
This got them the bounce two ways. Roosevelt put the squeeze on the federal patronage; and New York City voters in 1933 elected an independent mayor on a Republican-Fusion ticket, thus shutting off Manhattan patronage to Tammany.
Then an independent political organization, the [heavily Jewish] American Labor Party, rose. It supported Roosevelt in 1936 but fought any Tammany Democratic candidate it considered anti-labor, and soon held a balance of power position between the Democratic and Republican parties. It backed Mayor F.H. LaGuardia again in 1937, and in he went; it supported Democratic candidate Herbert H. Lehman for governor of New York State in 1938 and he won. It swung New York State to Roosevelt in 1940; and when the Democrats put up a non-Roosevelt candidate for governor in 1942, the ALP ran its own man and thus handed the state to Republican Thomas E. Dewey. This established ALP strength [i.e., Jewish power] unquestionably – and turned off the last big spigot of Tammany patronage, the New York State jobs. [. . .]
Now a [Jewish] union of garment workers who were among the chief founders of the labor party is moving into Tammany Hall, the building.
Harry Greenberg, secretary-manager [. . .] is taking over the sumptuous second-floor office that was Democratic leader Kennedy’s. [. . .] Now the penthouse will be a union staff lounge and the janitor’s headquarters.
Controlling for apolitical advancements in sanitation and technology, has the quality of life enjoyed by the average New Yorker – the social justice Jew’s ballyhooed “common man” – really improved in succeeding decades of unbroken Jewish dominion? “During the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s, New York City could best be characterized as a dirty, dangerous, sleazy, crime-infested rotting apple,” recounts Victor Thorn in American Free Press. “Pornography stores littered Times Square. Trash remained uncollected on street corners. Thousands of homicides made this metropolis the undeniable murder capital of America.”1 All of this in addition to the widespread police corruption that led to the Knapp and Mollen Commissions. But surely none of this was remotely as bad as the grueling groan of life in the bad old days of white supremacy under Tammany Hall’s grim imperium.
What of the men who administer New York today? Are these the worthy inheritors of the Hebraic mission of perpetual “reform” of New York politics?