Carl Jung, Schlomo Freud and the Rejection of Semitism

Diversity Macht Frei
January 3, 2019

Schlomo Freud (left) and Carl Jung (right)

Alongside Communism, Freudian psychology was the other great Jewish ideational assault on our civilisation during the last century, one that continues to have ripple effects even today, despite being largely discredited as serious science.

(Jews are always keen on appropriating the cachet of science for their cult movements. It’s often forgotten that Marxism was also presented under the guise of “science”; Marx referred to his ideas as “Scientific Socialism”.)

The credibility of (Schlomo Sigismund [his real name, not Sigmund]) Freud’s cult began to be eroded when it was shown that the clear-up rate of patients undergoing Freudian psychotherapy was no better (and, in some cases, worse!) than a control group of patients undergoing no therapy at all, due to “spontaneous remission” (meaning the problems going away by themselves).

Freud had actually privately admitted the ineffectiveness of his therapy decades before to one of his disciples, (((Sandor Ferenczi))), who also became a “distinguished” psycho-therapist. Ferenczi wrote in his diary:

As proof and justification of this suspicion, I remember certain statements Freud made to me. Obviously he was relying on my discretion. He said that patients are only riffraff. The only thing patients were good for is to help the analyst make a living and to provide material for theory. It is clear we cannot help them.

Despite the failure of his therapeutic techniques to actually cure anyone, leftists wishing to undermine our civilisation still invoke Freud as an authority. See here for a recent example in the Guardian.

There was a strong Semitic element to Freud’s ideas in their obsession with scatology and sexuality, including the perverse ideas of parent-child sex which formed the cornerstone of his theories. Freudian psychology mainstreamed this kind of obscenity in our culture. The pathologisation of normality was another of the sinister effects of the Freudian movement. Normal, functional families were portrayed as afflicted by secret perversions. Those who favoured the maintenance of order and authority over the chaotic social experiments of the Left were seen as somehow “repressed” and dysfunctional. Freudian discourse can be seen as part of a long Jewish tradition, dating at least since the Talmud, which has framed the Goyim as impure, unclean and disease-ridden.

Many of Freud’s disciples were Jews themselves. One who wasn’t was Carl Jung, who broke away from the cult and founded his own branch of psycho-therapy.

Semite vs. Aryan tensions are apparent in some of the statements Freud and Jung made about one another and their respective sets of ideas over the years.

Jung wrote in one of his letters:

“As you know, Freud previously accused me of anti- Semitism because I could not abide his soulless materialism. The Jew directly solicits anti-Semitism with his readiness to scent out anti-Semitism everywhere.”

Jung once had a Jewish patient called Sabina Spielrein who later became a psychotherapist herself. Some kind of amorous feelings may have developed between them during the therapeutic relationship. She apparently wanted Jung to leave his wife for her then tried to blacken his name when he refused.

As part of this campaign, she corresponded with Freud, who wrote the following to her later when she was pregnant with the child of a Jewish father:

I can hardly bear to listen when you continue to enthuse about your old love and past dreams, and count on an ally in the marvelous little stranger. I am, as you know, cured of the last shred of my predilection for the Aryan cause, and would like to take it that if the child turns out to be a boy he will develop into a stalwart Zionist.

Jung clearly sensed the strong Semitic element in Freudian psychology and reacted strongly against it.

When the National Socialist movement emerged in Germany, Jung seemed very much at ease with it.

Jung became editor of the Zentralblattfur Psychotherapie und ihre Grenzgebiete (Journal for Psychotherapy and Related Disciplines) in December 1933, when it published the following statement (not written by Jung).

It is expected of all members of the Society who write articles that they will have read through with great scientific care the path-breaking book by Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, and will recognize it as essential [to their work].

In the same issue of the magazine, Jung did say this:

The differences which actually do exist between Germanic and Jewish psychology and which have long been known to every intelligent person are no longer to be glossed over, and this can only be beneficial to science.

Jung later said of this statement:

Admittedly I was incautious, so incautious as to do the very thing most open to misunderstanding at the present moment: I have tabled the Jewish question. This I did deliberately…. The Jewish problem is a regular complex, a festering wound, and no responsible doctor could bring himself to apply methods of medical hush-hush in this matter.

Jung later made many interesting remarks about Freud, his psychological system, Jews and the Counter-Semitic reactions they provoked, as well as politics more generally.

“The Jews have this peculiarity in common with women; being physically weaker, they have to aim at the chinks in the armor of their adversary.” 

The Jewish race as a whole— at least this is my experience— possesses an unconscious which can be compared with the “Aryan” only with reserve. Creative individuals apart, the average Jew is far too conscious and differentiated to go about pregnant with the tensions of unborn futures. The “Aryan” unconscious has a higher potential than the Jewish; that is both the advantage and the disadvantage of a youthfulness not yet fully weaned from barbarism. In my opinion it has been a grave error in medical psychology up till now to apply Jewish categories— which are not even binding on all Jews— indiscriminately to Germanic and Slavic Christendom. Because of this the most precious secret of the Germanic peoples— their creative and intuitive depth of soul— has been explained as a morass of banal infantilism, while my own warning voice has for decades been suspected of anti-Semitism. This suspicion emanated from Freud. He did not understand the Germanic psyche any more than did his Germanic followers. Has the formidable phenomenon of National Socialism, on which the whole world gazes with astonished eyes, taught them better?Where was that unparalleled tension and energy while as yet no National Socialism existed? Deep in the Germanic psyche, in a pit that is anything but a garbage-bin of unrealizable infantile wishes and unresolved family resentments. A movement that grips a whole nation must have matured in every individual as well. That is why I say that the Germanic unconscious contains tensions and potentialities which medical psychology must consider in its evaluation of the unconscious. Its business is not with neuroses but with human beings— that, in fact, is the grand privilege of medical psychology: to treat the whole man and not an artificially segregated function. And that is why its scope must be widened to reveal to the physician’s gaze not just the pathological aberrations of a disturbed psychic development, but the creative powers of the psyche laboring at the future; not just a dreary fragment but the meaningful whole.

The poison of the “low-down” interpretation has bitten so deeply into the marrow of these people’s bones that they can no longer think at all except in the infantile-perverse jargon of certain neurotics who display all the peculiarities of a Freudian psychology.

And if he [the Freudian] degrades everything to the level of a “dirty joke” psychology, then we must not be surprised if the patient become spiritually blighted and compensates for this blight by incurable intellectualism…. To treat such people reductively, to impute ulterior motives to them, and to suspect their natural wholesomeness of unnatural obscenities is not only sinfully stupid but positively criminal.

Jung described Mussolini as “warm” and “human”; “I couldn’t help liking Mussolini,” he said.

About Hitler, he said the following:

There is no question but that Hitler belongs in the category of the truly mystic medicine man. As somebody commented about him at the last Nürnberg party congress, since the time of Mohammed nothing like it has been seen in this world. This markedly mystic characteristic of Hitler’s is what makes him do things which seem to us illogical, inexplicable, curious and unreasonable…. So you see. Hitler is a medicine man, a form of a spiritual vessel, a demi-deity or, even better, a myth….

Again, you take the widespread revival in the Third Reich of the cult of Wotan. Who was Wotan? God of wind. Take the name “ Sturmabteilung”— Storm Troops. Storm, you see— the wind… And all these symbols together of a Third Reich led by its prophet under the banners of wind and storm and whirling vortices point to a mass movement which is to sweep the German people in a hurricane of unreasoning emotion on and on to a destiny which perhaps none but the seer, the prophet, the Führer himself can foretell— and, perhaps, not even he.

Jung said the following about feminism.

A man’s foremost interest should be his work. But a woman is her work and her business. Yes, I know it sounds like a convenient philosophy of the selfish male when I say that. But marriage means a home. And home is like a nest— not enough room for both birds at once. One sits inside, the other perches on the edge and looks about and attends to all outside business.

I asked myself whether the growing masculinization of the white woman is not connected with the loss of her naturalness… whether it is not a compensation for her impoverishment; and whether the feminizing of the white man is not a further consequence.

Jung made the following remarks about racially diverse people coming into close contact with one another.

In South Africa the Dutch, who were at the time of their colonizing a developed and civilized people, dropped to a much lower level because of their contact with the savage races. The savage inhabitants of a country have to be mastered. In the attempt to master, brutality rises in the master. He must be ruthless. He must sacrifice everything soft and fine for the sake of mastering savages. Their influence is very great; the more surely they are dominated, the more savage the master must become. The slave has the greatest influence of all, because he is kept close to the one who rules him.

The causes for the [sexual] repression can be found in the specific American Complex, namely in the living together with lower races, especially with Negroes. Living together with barbaric races exerts a suggestive effect on the laboriously tamed instinct of the white race and tends to pull it down.

As we survey the wreckage of our civilisation, those who saw the danger coming deserve to be remembered with respect, among them Carl Jung.