No Jewish historical inferiority complex
Some consider that the strong need of Jewish people to consolidate stems entirely from historic events such as slavery or subordination. The concept of the historical inferiority of Jews, however, is ill-founded as it does not explain the stability of Jewish stereotypes that appear to be almost independent from the historical context. The Jewish specificity has persisted throughout ages irrespective of the wellbeing of the group. This suggests that Jewishness is a personal characteristic rather than a product of socio-historical conditions.
The Jewish and Islamic stereotypic traits are introversive and more or less gravitate toward emotional insecurity and sexual frustration. They appear to stem from a psychological complex. The autonomy and the type of Jewish stereotypic traits means they are rooted in the subconsciousness and are long-standing. They seem to be as old as the Jewish ethnos and hence as Judaism and mass neonatal circumcision are.
The subconscious character of Jewishness means that Jews cannot be blamed for it, at least according to modern standards. However, this must not entail that a practice that induces psychological complexes and introduces group irresponsibility must be tolerated. This is so because like the psychological syndromes the historical inferiority complex is compensated by ethnic superiority.
The deep effects of pedocircumcision have continually created emotional sub-races and have segregated circumcising from natural ethnoses throughout the ages. This along with ignorance of its cause has stirred up interethnic hatred from millennia. Undoubtedly, abolishment of pedocircumcision must mitigate them in a few generations only.
Involuntary Jewish contribution to the Holocaust
By choosing the Jewish people the Old Testament God wisely instigated anti-Semitism and anti-Islam. Monotheism inescapably instigates strong religious ethnocentrism. It is typical of organized religions to segregate ethnic groups and to rouse ethnoreligious hatred. Segregation of ethnic groups and rousing ethnoreligious hatred is typical of organized religions. But when devoutness is achieved by physical intervention and the results are obsessive, life-long and grave.
Nazis believed they were purifying human race by physically removing impure ethnoses. Jews believe they purify human nature by physically removing the impure foreskin. Both groups are preoccupied with physically upgrading human race in keeping with their ideals. Modern democracies, however, consider physical interference in humans unhuman. Physical modification is violence in itself and is immoral to any human being at any time. Not to speak of modifications that decrease vital sensitivity and alter emotionality and reasoning.
To the extent that have Jews self-inflicted a neuropsychological difference by erogenous desensitization, they have actively contributed to anti-Semitism. The circumcising Jews are involuntary co-authors of the Holocaust.
Jews escape moral blame for their part in conditioning anti-Semitism by three mutually exclusive ways. On the one hand they insist that neonatal circumcision is a physically harmless, purely spiritual practice. This leaves gentiles with the impression that circumcision is an entirely symbolic and hence meaningless ritual and makes them wonder why it must be performed at all. On the other hand Irrespective of the lack of universally acknowledged medical evidence modern circumcisers assert that circumcision is beneficial to health. This pragmatic allegation, however, conflicts with the idealistic symbolic goal. Presenting the same procedure as simultaneously ideal and material is hypocritical. The contradicting justifications of circumcision insult the common sense and naturally cast suspicion on Jewish good faith.
On the third hand Jews dogmatically insinuate that neonatal circumcision is superhuman, a requirement of their God. This irrational and ethnocentric statement appears haughty and arrogant to gentiles. Yet, the supernatural origin of the religious view makes it undiscussible. The covenant is a manifestation of Jewish uncooperativeness. It provokes gentiles’ hostility and anti-Semitism which Freud attributed to their fear of circumcision due to the castration complex they harbour.
Dogmatism, mutual inconsistency and irrationality of the Jewish arguments for pedocircumcision act as a total refusal on the part of Jews to discuss the issue. They are interpreted as ethnic hostility and genetic divergence of the Jewish race. They create an aura of ill-intentioned contrariness of Jews and fuelled anti-Semitism. Unprejudicedly, however, the inconsistency of arguments reveals some kind of psychological problem, such as insecurity, compulsive thoughts or split personality. As the reader knows we refer to this problem as to the Circumcision complex. As long as the true deeper effects of pedocircumcision are unknown they are to generate ethnoreligious conflicts.
Germans were the physical assassins of the different in the Holocaust. Jews, however, are the physical inflictors of the difference. Both sides are responsible in their own way for the genocide. Of course murder is the severest crime possible. But persistent millennia-long liquidation of rest-providing sensitivity and silent provocation are also wrongdoings.
Although this is still unrecognized by historians and legislators the mental effects of circumcision are central to anti-Semitism. The concept of the Circumcision complex reveals that Jews and gentiles are co-authors of the anti-Semitic craze. Surely the reader prefers to keep his distance from anti-Semitism. But ignoring a fire actually kindles it. Watchers of a conflagration are no different than those who started it. Original Sin is Ignorance.
Jews violate the integrity of their own body for the sake of their beliefs and wait for the spiritual effect of this to unfold. Gentiles dislike the resultant difference of the clandestine practice. Being oblivious of the cause for the Jewish specificity they assail Jews in general.
It is neither the mark of bodily nor of ethnic or religious identity that has nourished anti-Semitism for so long but the mental consequences accompanying the marking practice. It is not the disgust of naturals at the bareheaded penis that have roused their hostility but the mental dispositions and clannishness of Jews. At the core of anti-Semitism lies not the bodily but the psychological difference that circumcision causes.