Elior has a review of that Polish novel on Frankism that won the Nobel Prize in 2018, and I find it pretty revealing

In this light, the shabbos goys are quite happy to call themselves Frankists.

That’s cool, I’m not trying to change you (like that’s possible anyway), I’m only trying to show you it can be traced back to somewhere you wouldn’t have expected.

The way she says “pass on secret Saturnian teachings” seems like a mask slip. I.e. she seems to be implying she does that herself.

Ugh, I wish Liebes’ articles were in insta-translatable format like Elior’s. Another rare essay of his in English can be found here. I’m still fixated on seeing Nathanism teased out somewhere, and the resources are so scarce I’m just continuing to compile the titles of Sabbatean texts that I find, hoping that one happens to be in English somewhere- for instance

R. Nehemia Hayon’s book on Sabbatean Kabbala, Oz Le-Elohim

I starve for Realpolitik, and Nathanism offers that.

Some might want to pipe up and say modernity and atheism can be traced most convincingly to people like Machiavelli and Darwin, and I don’t think it’s that simple. They had a substantial part in it no doubt, it just seems more precise to say that people of today are more reminiscent of Sabbatean-Frankists.

Another way to look at it is- if you agree with the premise of “ZOG” which Jews are you going to point to that are “universalized figures”? It ain’t Kafka or Maimonides. Saying that Marx is “everyperson” gets closer to the truth, and saying Frank is everyperson seems to get even closer.

I’m just trying to show people who they really are, I don’t think that’s a crime.

If they cared about proles maybe I would call them Marxists, and they don’t. They care about destroying religion and government–authority in general–and undermining all law and morality. And that is Frankism. Show me where Marx talks about eliminating all guilt and judgment. Frank does that directly, and that’s what you see all around you.

I just simply can’t expect honesty from many people about this. Most people with the brainpower and attention-span to give a competent response are shills who would probably say that everyone today is a Rousseauian, as long as it’s a goy who gets the blame. I’m not saying that Rousseau and the others I’ve named did not have a hand in it, only that there is something conspicuous in the case of Frank. “Who? Who’s that?” Yeah that makes it even more conspicuous. Anne Frank psyops you into a stupor about Jacob Frank, let’s put it that way.

Let’s trace it back one more step for now though- these are some other Sabbatean texts that Liebes mentions

Or Yisrael by R. Israel Jaffe from Shklov, Hemdat Zevi by Zevi Chotsh, Avaq Soferim by R. Abraham Cuenque

In other words, there are reasons why Frank was the way he was- he and Zevi were pretty similar people.

It’s not even that bold of a thesis given that Scholem’s magnum opus is on Zevi! I’m only suggesting that we gather together as much of the Sabbatean corpus that we can in order to better understand the modern world through better understanding this buried chapter in Jewish history.

After studying this for a month or so now I am beginning to doubt whether Scholem really meant it when he called Frank a frightening nihilist. It’s typical of Sabbatean-Frankists throughout history to denounce their movement in harsh terms like that. And the implications of this for Straussianism is a new frontier in itself.

“Grrr I thought goyim were supposed to be Thoughtless Light!!” That’s only what you want, you want to make your expectation a reality. And you make it a reality through disappearings and gulags.

Just giving you stuff to google around about if you’re interesting in this, I’ll get back to them when I have more time

the noted Sabbatean book Wa-Avo Ha-Yom el Ha-Ayin

Liebes has so many studies on this stuff but it’s only in Hebrew.

The questions I’m really asking here aren’t frivolous ones- Why are people today the way they are? Why are the screens that they stare at the way that they are? Why are their professors the way that they are? Why are the most powerful plutocrats the way they are?

The way Elior speaks of things so frankly she might as well be the Queen. Her subjects are unaware of what she says because she speaks a secret language that those plebs are beneath. She describes what is going on across the ocean in America without saying it directly that’s what she’s doing.

The Age of Grace, of equality, so the tyranny of the vulgar? She doesn’t mention that part. Shekina, you’re still so cloaked in those demonic garments! Or have you just turned into a demon yourself after all those centuries of exile? I think I know the truth of that. After so long of waiting for the moshiach you were willing to settle for anyone who showed up, and when nihilists declared themselves that you went right along with it. Sabbatean-Frankism is a movement of swine in desperation. And the cladistic postmodern manifestations of it are even more disgusting to behold.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: