Jews have good senses of humor. Particularly Jews from New York. That’s a famous stereotype about Jews. So far, the New York Jew Nathan Cofnas has shown little sign of living up to it. But he has indirectly provided me with one of the funniest moments of 2024. After seeing my article “The Power of Punim,” he tweeted that “The Occidental Observer (edited by Kevin MacDonald) published an entire article about my face.” The tweet itself is dishonest rather than funny, as is proved by the fact that Cofnas didn’t include a link to the article, only a censored screenshot.
No, what was funny – very funny – was one of the responses to the tweet. A giant of genetic science felt Nathan’s pain and responded with virtuous solemnity: “This is grim antisemitism. Racism is awful in all its forms.” And who was that giant of genetics? None other than Dr Adam Rutherford. Yes, I was very amused to see the anti-woke Nathan Cofnas receive the support of the highly woke half-Indian Adam Rutherford (born 1975). And I was being sarcastic when I called Rutherford a giant of genetics. He isn’t, of course (see Steve Sailer’s “Occam’s Butterknife”). He’s a pygmy who thinks that “race as a scientific concept holds no water.” He fully supported the anti-scientific witch-hunt that drove a genuine giant of genetics, James Watson (born 1928), out of science and into poverty for stating the truth about low Black intelligence in 2007. According to Rutherford, Watson is “racist,” guilty of “hideous errors,” and “deserves to be shunned.” Pygmy Rutherford has also assailed another scientific giant, the Victorian polymath Francis Galton (1822-1911), for “racism.”
Cofnas’ conk at Cambridge
Like me, Galton was interested in the power of punim (punim is Yiddish for “face”). He once tried to create a “beauty map” of Britain by rating the looks of local women as he travelled around the country. He was insatiably curious and endlessly active in many fields, from mathematics to biology to meteorology to psychology. Unlike me, he had the brains to match his curiosity. I’m not a scientific giant like Galton or Watson. I’m not even a scientific pygmy like Rutherford. But it’s still very amusing to have Rutherford dismiss my article as “grim antisemitism” and “racism.” Not that Rutherford will have read “The Power of Punim” and seen the full context. Cofnas didn’t supply a link, after all. And he censored his screenshot of the article. I originally wrote this: “Is Cofnas’ selfie intended to proclaim ‘A Kike at Cambridge’? (Please note that I’m using the term ‘kike’ as an ironic Jew like Cofnas might use it, not to insult Cofnas.)” In the screenshot, my explanation in parenthesis is deleted after “the.” There seems little point in asking Nathan if he thinks this deletion was honest and fair. I asked him lots of questions in “The Power of Punim” and he hasn’t replied to any of them.
I also attempted to psychoanalyse Nathan in the article, suggesting that he is “one of the many Jews who feel resentment about White gentile beauty and concomitant distress at any discussion of Jewish ugliness.” His tweet seems to contain further evidence for this hypothesis. After misrepresenting the substance of my article, he went on to say: “Indeed, I wave my superior nose like a flag pole and proclaim, ‘A —- at Cambridge.’” Philosophers are trained in the careful use of language, but Cofnas was not using language carefully there. “Flag-pole” is not the right word. In that context, one’s nose is waved like a flag, not like a flag-pole. The flag is the highly visible part, not the pole. Was emotion interfering with Cofnas’ training in careful language? Perhaps. If it was, I hope I’m not going to trigger more emotion by discussing punims again. In “The Cult of Ugly,” I suggested that ugliness was characteristic of both leftists and Jews, and that this ugliness was related in some way to the harmful ideologies and ideas of leftists and Jews.
It’s interesting that nobody at the Occidental Observer or the Unz Review objected to my claim as it applied to leftists. For example, nobody produced any examples of good-looking leftists in attempted refutation. But there are good-looking leftists, of course, just as there are good-looking Jews. A good-looking leftist called Rosie Duffield (born 1971) has recently hit the headlines in Britain. She’s resigned from the Labour party, criticizing the prime minister Keir Starmer and other senior ministers for accepting lavish gifts from a publicity-shy Labour peer called Waheed Alli. She accurately said Starmer’s government is about “greed and power,” not about helping ordinary people. After her resignation, this good-looking leftist was interviewed on the BBC by the ugly leftist Laura Kuenssberg, who is Jewish (the double-s in “Kuenssberg” is correct). Here are Duffield’s and Kuenssberg’s punims side-by-side for comparison:
Kuenssberg is characteristically ugly as both a Jew and a leftist; Duffield is uncharacteristically good-looking as a leftist. However, it’s interesting that, unlike ugly Kuenssberg, she isn’t a typical leftist. She was on the right of the Labour party and this isn’t the first time she’s been at odds with the Labour elite. Duffield is “gender critical” and doesn’t accept the lunacies of transgenderism. The Labour elite did not support her adequately as she received the usual threats of murder, mutilation and rape from the narcissistic and perverted men who have a sexual fetish about pretending to be women. And after she said that “only women have a cervix,” Keir Starmer was asked whether he agreed with this clear statement of biological reality. He didn’t. He said it was “something that shouldn’t be said” and was “not right.”
Another good-looking leftist in Labour has been at odds with the Labour elite too. Sarah Champion (born 1969), MP for Rotherham, broke the tradition established by her predecessor, the philosemitic Denis MacShane, and stood up for the White working-class. Rather than schmoozing Jews and ignoring non-White pathologies like MacShane, she accurately said that there is a serious problem of Pakistani Muslim men preying on White girls in Britain. The unattractive Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn promptly drove her out of the Shadow Cabinet. Both Duffield and Champion are good-looking. Both departed from mainstream leftism in some way. Is this a coincidence? I don’t think so.
And I don’t think it’s a coincidence that two more prominent figures in the British media share three significant traits with Laura Kuenssberg at the BBC. Emily Maitlis and Jon Sopel used to work for the BBC too. Then they departed to run an independent podcast called The Newsagents. The podcast is strongly in favor of non-White immigration and deeply hostile to the anti-immigration politician Nigel Farage. Like Kuenssberg, Maitlis and Sopel are three things: leftist, Jewish, and ugly. I think these three things go together. Indeed, I think they have similar genetic roots. Dr Adam Rutherford would call that “grim antisemitism.” I’d call Rutherford a PC pygmy. That’s why his support for anti-woke Nathan Cofnas is so amusing. After all, Rutherford also supported the anti-scientific witch-hunt against James Watson. And for exactly the same reason: “Racism is awful in all its forms.” I hope Nathan Cofnas appreciates the irony of that. I certainly do.
