Do Jews Run Hollywood?
You bet they do--and what of it?
by Ben Stein
E-ONLINE of 19 January 2005
BEN STEIN QUOTES BRANDO:
"Hollywood is run by Jews; it is owned by Jews--and they should have a greater sensitivity about the issue of people who are suffering. Because...we have seen...the greaseball, we've seen the Chink, we've seen the slit-eyed dangerous Jap, we have seen the wily Filipino, we've seen everything but we never saw the kike. Because they knew perfectly well, that that is where you draw the [line]."
--Brando on Larry King Live
Yes, this is the famous truth Marlon Brando had the "gall" to speak for which he was blacklisted by Hollywood until he came crawling back on his hands and knees.
>A few days after Marlon Brando scandalized the airwaves by referring to the Jews who worked in Hollywood as "kikes,"
Brando isn't "referring to the Jews who worked in Hollywood as "kikes" -- he's simply trying to make the point that Hollywood feels free to demonize all others BUT Jews. Perhaps he made a bad choice of words, but his use of the word "kike" is in the same context as the other derogatories mentioned, i.e., greaseball, Chink, Jap and wily Filipino. Thus, right off the bat, Stein is misrepresenting the tenor of Brando's comment and trying to make it into a victim thing, a misrepresentation which typifies his entire commentary on Jewish domination of Hollywood.
>I got a call from an editor at 60 Minutes. The woman wanted to know how I felt about Brando's use of words and his allegation that Hollywood is "run by Jews." She suggested the desired answer by noting that her researchers had conclusively proven that Jews do not run Hollywood.
Jews do not run Hollywood, Hollywood is run by Jews.
>Crafty 60 Minutes had studied the top slots in town. Their research showed that "only" about 60 percent of the most important positions in Hollywood were run by Jews. What did I think?
The actual truth is closer to 70% or 80% of the top positions in the MPAA studio/distributors are dominated by Jews. See http://www.homevideo.net/FIRM/control.htm
>I managed to disqualify myself by saying that while Hollywood was not really "run" by anyone (it's far too chaotic for that),
"Run" and "control" are red herrings. The technical term is DOMINATED.
>if Jews were about 2.5 percent of the population and were about 60 percent of Hollywood, they might well be said to be extremely predominant in that sector.
Note the use of the word PREdominant. This is a mini-whitewash here because the term, again, is DOMINATED.
>That was far too logical and un-PC an answer, and I never heard from her again.
She was probably Jewish.
>But Jews are a big part of my thoughts (as they are of every Jew's thoughts).
I have posted often that Jews network better than everyone else. Thus they are always thinking of each other.
>Plus, I live and struggle in Hollywood, so the combination intrigues me. What exactly is the role of the Jew in Hollywood? More to the point, what does it signify, if anything, if Jews have a big role? And, most interesting of all, why do we care?
I can't tell you how many times I have heard this one: Why do we care? Here is the reason we care: Read THE GREAT AMERICAN MOVIE DEBATE by John Cones at http://www.homevideo.net/FIRM/amdebate.htm.
>First, it is extremely clear to anyone in Hollywood that Jews are, so to speak, "in charge" in Hollywood in a way that is not duplicated in any other large business, except maybe garments or scrap metal or folding boxes.
See, even Jews admit this . . . finally, in public. Neal Gabler admitted this many years ago in a book, AN EMPIRE OF THEIR OWN, but I guess the masses are simply unaware and thus still scared to mention this fact for fear of being branded anti-Semitic.
>At mighty Paramount, the controlling stockholder is Sumner Redstone. Head of the studio is Jon Dolgen. Head of production is Sherry Lansing--all members of the tribe.
All members of the tribe. Read a book that will NEVER get published (because Jews dominate the publishing industry as well) called WHEN VICTIMS RULE found on-line at http://www.jewishtribalreview.org Then you will get a picture of the "members of the tribe" -- largely from Jewish scholars too.
>At titanic Disney, the CEO is Michael Eisner, the world's most assimilated Jew, who might as well be a Presbyterian. Deputy head is Michael Ovitz, karate champ but also a Jew. Head of the studio is Joe Roth.
Ovitz is long gone to my knowledge.
>At newly energized ICM, the top dogs are Jeff Berg and Jim Wiatt. At still overwhelming CAA, Jack Rapke and other members of my faith predominate. At William Morris, Jon Burnham and other Jews are, by and large, in the power positions.
But he forgot to mention the Jewish domination and control of the top positions of the MPAA studio/distributors over the past 90-some years. Here they all are again, by name, at http://www.homevideo.net/FIRM/control.htm#execlist
>This has always been true in Hollywood. The ex-furriers who created Hollywood were Eastern European Jewish immigrants, and all of the great edifice of fantasy-making in Hollywood is their handiwork. Names like Zukor and Lasky and Goldwyn and Cohn are the foundation of mass culture in America and the world.
There is a much quoted note that it took all these Eastern European Yiddish-speaking Jews to create the lasting, worldwide image of America and what America is--the mass culture mirror that America likes to hold up to its face.
Blah, blah, blah. Gabler covers all this in his book.
>This thought is made concrete by the simple line at the beginning of Gone with the Wind that it is "A David O. Selznick Production." It took a Selznick, married to the daughter of a Louis B. Mayer, working with a Thalberg, to create the ultimate vision of romantic America--the antebellum South.
This is a bigoted statement when you consider it because it implies that a non-Jew couldn't come up with a GONE WITH THE WIND.
>It took a Jew--Leslie Howard--to play Ashley Wilkes, the bedrock image of what a perfect American gentleman is supposed to be.
Another bigoted statement. Why does it take a Jew? Are Gentiles inferior to Jews? Elitist, at the very least!
>Thus, the fact of Hollywood's being very largely Jewish is not exactly news. The news is that Hollywood is rapidly becoming ethnically far more diverse than it was only a couple of decades ago, when I first arrived here.
Not true. All this diversity is window dressing. The executives that manage the MPAA studio/distributors are still dominated by liberal, secular, Jewish makes of European heritage, as I, and John Cones, have been saying for years. Hollywood apologists like Stein like to point to all the actors and technical people that are paraded in the Oscar ceremonies to "substantiate" their claim that Hollywood is really a very diverse place. But the truth is, the ones that cut the pay checks and allocate the production budgets to the producers are still predominantly Jewish executives.
>You can take it from the studio level, where probably the most powerful man in town is of the Australian faith--one Rupert Murdoch by name. Murdoch, no one's idea of a Jew, controls a major studio, a major broadcast network and the largest aggregation of TV stations in America.
Note how delicately Stein puts this. He said "one Rupert Murdoch by name. Murdoch, no one's idea of a Jew, controls a major studio" Fact is Murdoch IS Jewish, because his mother is Jewish. Murdoch's "no one's idea of a Jew" because Stein obfuscates the fact that he's Jewish by saying that he's of "Australian faith." Another ridiculous spin on the truth because there is no such thing as "Australian faith." But by using the word "faith" in juxtaposition with the word "Australian," Stein has drawn your attention away from the idea that Murdoch could be of Jewish faith. Thus, if he's of "Australian faith," he's certainly NOT of Jewish faith. This twist further substantiates the idea that he's "no ones IDEA of a Jew, when again, the fact is: MURDOCH IS A JEW.
If you follow me here, you can see how the Hollywood machinery manipulates the data. Are we surprised that E-ONLINE is part of the Hollywood-MPAA propaganda machine that dominates the media and the movie industry, hence American culture for the benefit of the Jewish lobby?
>The head of programming at ABC is a full-on gentile, Ted Harbert. The owner and head of production of what has become the Tiffany studio, MGM, are Kirk Kerkorian and Frank Mancuso, also not members of Temple Israel. And on and on.
Whoopee. A few exceptions to the general rule don't change the general rule: Hollywood is and continues to be dominated by liberal, secular Jewish males of European heritage, as we have been saying at FIRM since 1998. See http://www.homevideo.net/FIRM/bginfo.htm
>It is certainly true that there have always been goyim in Hollywood.
Since this term "goyim" means "cattle," yet it's used to refer to all Gentiles, or non-Jews, isn't Stein being as disrespectful to non-Jews as he imagined Brando was being disrespectful to Jews when Stein made the straw calm that Brando was calling them kikes? Talk about a double standard here. But typical for Hollywood apologists. It's okay for Jews to be bigots, but it's not okay when anyone else is a bigot.
>But there are more gentiles in the Industry now, and there has formed a whole new route to Hollywood.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. What a crock! Show me what new appointments there have been in the 3 top positions of the 7 MPAA studio/distributors, Stein, and how the ratio of Jewish executives to Non-Jewish executives has changed. If you could, you would have.
>No longer do young men and women work their way up solely by being mailroom clerks or nephews of producers or offspring of men in the linen-supply business.
What does this have to do with the issue at hand? Is this statement supposed to make us think Hollywood has changed? Pah-leeze!
>The standard route to Hollywood now is through Harvard and Yale.
Oh come on, what an obfuscation.
>Sitcom writers and producers, movie scriptwriters and producers now come from the Ivy League far more than from the streets of Brooklyn. Most of the writing staff of the powerhouse Seinfeld is from the Harvard Lampoon.
Yeah, you mentioned writers twice and producers twice, but mentioned STUDIO EXECUTIVES zero times. The writers and the producers get HIRED and PAID by the studio executives and the studio executives continue to be predominantly JEWISH. So Stein, you're just obfuscating the facts and lying some more.
>So are many of the writers on Married...with Children, Friends and other stalwarts of the box. The route from Harvard Square to Hollywood is now hallowed by success and money. In fact, the agencies now beg and plead for Harvard Lampoon grads the way they once cried for the writers of The Jack Benny Radio Program.
All this rhetoric is about WRITERS. Writers have no power in Hollywood. Writers don't make the decisions which $150 million pictures will be developed and greenlit for millions to see all over the world. More obfuscation on part of Stein.
>This change from borscht-belt origins to the halls of Harvard as a prime source of writing talent in Hollywood is a quantum shift. Many of the Harvard and Yale alums are, to be sure, Jews, but many are not.
>Now, this is interesting to those of us who work here. But it is of no significance at all to the 99.9 percent of Americans who do not.
No, this is of great significance to the 99.9 percent who do NOT work in Hollywood because movies tend to influence cultural values and right now we have a nation with values in the toilet. See GREAT AMERICAN MOVIE DEBATE above cited.
>The only possible significance of whether Hollywood is run by Jews or not must have to do with whether or not the product comes out "Jewish," or in some way different from the way it would if it were made solely by gentiles.
And yes, it does. Who do you think is spearheading the assault on Christian values right now? It's secular Jews that dominate Hollywood and the media hiding behind Judaism. Duh. Who do you is behind the ACLU? Duh. Nativity scenes out of the public square. Duh! The culture war against Mel Gibson. Duh!!! Endless billions for Israel? Duh. The war in Iraq? The neo-cons, predominantly Jewish. Duh! The Jews that dominate Hollywood are definitely pushing an agenda that favors and supports the Jewish lobby's agenda and the agenda of the AIPAC and the agenda of the Neo-Cons. Duh!! And much of this is all about uncritical support of Israel. Any surprise Murdoch is one of the biggest Zionists around. It doesn't matter if Murdoch doesn't SEEM like a Jew so long as he supports Israel and the hundreds of billions American citizens have pissed over there. You will NEVER see O'Reilly, who is a Murdoch mouth-piece into the Gentile Establishment, bad mouth Israel. Murdoch would fire him instantly. Thus this is evidence that Murdoch is not only Jewish, but pushes the Jewish agenda.
>Really, the point is even a little uglier than that. The only real reason why the question of whether Jews "run" Hollywood is at all interesting is because there is some residual thought--apparently as was in the mind of Marlon Brando--that Jews are sinister and alien.
This straw argument is ALWAYS used by apologists. It's a variation of the VICTIM ploy used so much by Jews. It goes like this: Critics of Hollywood don't like Jews running the place because Jews are evil and thus they are unfit to run Hollywood. This argument is totally off point. For the 100th time, people such as myself, are calling for more diversity in Hollywood's control group because we feel that NO NARROWLY DEFINED GROUP should dominate one of the most powerful communication channels ever devised. This has NOTHING to do with Jews. And it certainly has NOTHING to do with anyone being evil. Jews are no better or worse than anyone else. They are just people. But to have them dominating Hollywood is as bad as it would be if Christians dominated Hollywood. The idea is NO ONE should dominate Hollywood. But Jews, such as Stein, bring this straw argument up to try to make you think that people like myself have something against Jews. We don't. We just want diversity. It has nothing to do with Jews or whoever would be running Hollywood. So again, this argument is ALWAYS brought up to obfuscate the real issues. It's almost as if all the Hollywood apologists are plugged into the same Borg cube.
>Kike is a low Polish word meaning the nastiest, most alien connotation of Jew. That would mean that the Jewish product of Jewish Hollywood would be somehow subversive in some way. This would be akin to Wagner's notion that Jews had polluted and ruined German music with their innately subversive sensibility.
Again, all this is obfuscation and a misrepresentation of what Brando said.
>This is a thought so bizarre and even comical to anyone familiar with Hollywood that it merits laughter more than fear. Yes, of course, the Hollywood product is made mostly by Jews. But these Jews are in love with America.
Yack, yack, yack. More of the same obfuscation and straw argument. See what I said above.
>These are Jews who want to play polo, not davvinn in shul. These are Jews whose children play soccer and learn horseback riding in Malibu.
Give me a break Stein, Gabler already said all this a hundred times. Did you just get finished reading his book or something?!
>These Jews, as soon as they have two million to rub together, buy farms in South Carolina (Joel Silver) or vast spreads in Colorado (Peter Guber).
Wow, they must NOT be very Jewish if they buy farms!
>It was the Jews of the '30s and '40s who gave us the vision of America the Good, where money did not count--only goodness. Think of the works of William Wyler (maker of the ultimate pro-American heartstrings movie, The Best Years of Our Lives), or of MGM and its celebration of the swinging good life of Ginger and Fred.
Ah, I think there were FAR fewer Jews in Hollywood around the 1930's and 1940's. Remember Walt Disney? How come you didn't mention that when Eisner took over Disney, he brought hundreds of Jewish executives and staff members in to the organization?
>Where does the idea come from of the perfect American family, occasionally quarreling mildly but ultimately working it all out in love and affection? From Ozzie and Harriet and Leave It to Beaver and I Love Lucy, with their largely Jewish writers and producers.
Again he mentions only writers and producers. Standard ploy: ignore the Jewish studio executives that really call the shots. And don't bother to mention that Lucille Ball was NOT Jewish and she, through DESILU, was one of the most powerful production companies in the business. More obfuscation on behalf of Stein.
>Where does the idea come from that parents and children, as polarized as they might be, will ultimately love each other? From Norman Lear and his factory for grinding out funny and touching affirmations of domestic life in America.
Norman Lear, producer of Archie Bunker, made endless fun of bigots in no small part to benefit the Jewish agenda of crushing bigotry in a post-Holocaust world.
>Where does the idea that blacks can be funny and endearing as millionaires and not just as servants and wide-eyed fools fleeing ghosts? Again, from Norman Lear and The Jeffersons.
No one is saying that Jews don't come up with some heartwarming and valid programming. But let's give others the same chance.
>Hollywood's current product occasionally repels and even sickens me. I am truly disgusted with its language, its violence, its endless attacks on businessmen and military officers. (On the other hand, it never can attack the CIA enough for me.) But these are eddies and ripples in the vast tide of Hollywood messages that encourage and hearten us in our daily struggle.
Oh brother. What a crock! I suppose Stein also feels there is no global warming.
>Many Americans get this message far more from Hollywood than from worship, and these are by no means subversive messages.
No not at all, just another assault on people of faith -- Hollywood's stock n' trade, and apparently yours as well, Stein.
>So now, as the shrinks say, we may perhaps to begin.
My father is a shrink and I never heard him, or any of the hundreds of his colleagues over the last 30 years, say THAT.
>If any overall view of the Hollywood product shows it has been a wholesome influence on American life, why is Hollywood itself still so not trusted?
Hollywood was a wholesome influence on American life because it was more influenced by Christian values. Over the past 2 or 3 decades, Hollywood's secular values have managed to erode Christian values and thus we have the endless carnage and mindless vanilla product all over, product that seeks only to sell other products in an orgy of commercialism that is now destroying America and its money supply.
>Why can a Marlon Brando attack it so explicitly for its Jewishness and a Dan Quayle and even a Bob Dole and even a Bill Clinton attack it on an ongoing basis for its alleged sinister quality?
If only 2.5% of the executives in Hollywood studios were Jews, the movie industry would probably be very similar to the way it is today. There would be fewer Holocaust films and you would hear the word kike about as much as you hear the word greaseball, chink, jap and nigger. This is not nice language, but it's less nice to see any particular group or groups getting endlessly singled out as the bad guys when one group gets to remain forever off bounds. The point is: everyone deserves to tell their unique stories and that can't happen when ANY one group dominates the financial strings at the top of the studios.
>I marvel that when people criticize the auto industry for making trucks that catch fire when they are struck and cars that turn over on a turn, no one ever says "the gentile auto industry."
That's because the very word "gentile" is a bigoted word made up by Jews. ANYONE that is NOT a Jew is a gentile. It's an us-and-them thing. A manifestation of mass paranoia. What word do Christians have for all other people other then themselves. And don't tell me "Non-Christians" because that's a cop out.
>No one calls the pharmaceutical industry sinister or attacks it as alien even though it turns out a lot of pills that addict people.
The Scientologists call the pharmaceutical industry sinister all the time. So do I. And now people are getting a good look at the sinister effects this industry has in its part in corrupting the FDA. For an early window into this situation, read a book called WORLD WITHOUT CANCER by G. Edward Griffin. Griffin has extensively written about the sinister pharmaceutical industry early on and named the devil himself: John D. Rockefeller, Gentile. The book is available at Amazon or http://www.realityzone.com
>As far as I can recall, Hollywood, and only Hollywood, gets the treatment as being somehow sinister and alien.
Not true at all. But the fact IS Hollywood DOES have an agenda. See my article, HOLLYWOOD'S TRUE AGENDA at http://www.mecfilms.com/universe/articles/agenda.htm
>Other industries are bad--like big tobacco--but only Hollywood is un-American, even though its product kills a lot fewer Americans.
Not true, Hollywood's product is killing American culture and thus slowly killing hundreds of millions of Americans because, as the most powerful communications channel yet devised by Mankind, it is truncating the vital dialog that a democratic society needs in order to survive. See what Ted Turner has to say about this in his article, MY BEEF WITH BIG MEDIA at http://www.mecfilms.com/universe/articles/beef.htm Also see the various articles at http://www.homevideo.net/FIRM/bginfo.htm
>It's hard to resist the thought that there are only two explanations for this:
>--Envy. Life in Hollywood is thought to be fun, well-paid, glamorous and sexy. Naturally, many people sitting in cheerless offices in D.C. or elsewhere want to be in the seat where the mighty of Hollywood sit. Because they have no idea of how to get there, they express envy and criticism of the people who are there.
This is another standard Hollywood apologist argument. That we're all jealous of the people in Hollywood. I hear this all the time. People that know nothing about me or my career, claim that I am a jealous and this is what motivates me to be critical of Hollywood. I worked in Hollywood for 11 years and believe me it's not glamorous there at all. The offices and the studios are dingy (except the very top executives offices in the studios); everyone is paranoid and money-grubbing; only 1% are over-paid (for strategic reasons. See http://www.homevideo.net/FIRM/task.htm) and the rest are starving; the real estate is priced about 250% above fair market value; there are sexual diseases all over; it's no place to raise children because there is porn manufactured on every corner in the Valley; the government is bankrupt; the police are brutal; helicopters fly over your house at night shining spot lights all over the neighborhood; artists and talented people are constantly invalidated and rejected; discrimination, nepotism and cronyism run rampant; actors that have given splendid performances all their life are suddenly thrown in the trash can as soon as they turn 40; 80% of the women don't have orgasms because they get no love, just lust; drugs and drug addition is all over the place. And this is the 99%. Of the 1% that have "made it," you can take the above and multiply it by several factors. The huge salaries that stars get paid go mostly to their agents, lawyers, publicists and the endless staffs and machinery they must maintain to keep up the impression in the public eye; these people have little time for their children, brothers, sisters, mothers and fathers as they are always rushing here and there and when they do get to see one of their family members they are so beat and exhausted (as they have to get up so early for call) they have little or no "quality" time, even though that actual term is laughingly used. So, only an idiot would be jealous or envious of the Hollywood lifestyle. As for me, that is certainly not what motivates me to be critical. I am critical because I am in the right, its the right thing to be and 80% of America agrees with me (as you will increasingly see in the next 5 years).
>--Plain old primitive anti-Semitism. About two years ago, as I was having lunch at the Spokane airport, an obviously somewhat off waitress recognized me from my modest acting work and said she had once seen "that Jewish woman with the big nose and the great voice" and did I know her?
Oh, here we go, the FALSE ACCUSATION OF ANTI-SEMITISM again. Jews use the accusation of anti-Semitism like a soldier uses a machine gun. Blow away any imagined adversary of Jewish hegemony before they even get a word out. See the "Anti-Semitic Sword" at http://www.homevideo.net/FIRM/shields.htm
>"Do you mean Barbra Streisand?" I asked.
>Without missing a beat, she asked, "Say, do the Japanese control Hollywood, or do you people still run it?"
>It's fear and racism at that level that motivates the issue of Hollywood as sinister and alien.
This is such a twisted argument I can't believe I'm hearing it again. Let me go through what Stein is doing. Stein is setting up a straw argument. He has tried to establish that some think Hollywood is alien and sinister BECAUSE it's dominated by Jews. Any reasonable person would thus rightfully reject this argument because there is NO cause and effect between Hollywood being sinister and it being dominated by Jews. It's not Jews that are sinister thus making Hollywood sinister. This would lead a person to end any further attention on criticism focused on Hollywood -- just as Stein is attempting to do. On the other hand, the German film industry was dominated by Germans and IT was sinister, thus it IS possible that a film industry dominated by a narrow group CAN BE sinister, especially if one considers the fact that Jews, having been so victimized in the past by Germans, HAVE the motivation AND the opportunity AND the means to now victimize, not only Germans, but all others through their power in Hollywood. Hitler did it to the Jews in WWII, so there is no reason to ASSUME Jews won't consciously OR sub-consciously attempt to exact some sort of revenge on others for what they have suffered, real or imagined. At the very least, because the have suffered so much, an argument CAN be made that they are thus insensitive to the suffering their excessive violence-oriented programming is causing. Children today are exposed to WAY too much violence and it pervades the entire media, which includes the film and game business. Hollywood is thus "helping" parents raise a generation of kids that have as much sensitivity and compassion as the Gestapo in Nazi Germany.
But none of this is what I'm charging. All I am saying is it's not WHO dominates a film industry, it's the fact that ANYONE dominating it is unhealthy. By attempting to draw our attention to the straw argument that Hollywood is alien and sinister BECAUSE OF Jews, Stein draws our attention AWAY from the fact that a lack of diversity is, again, unhealthy in a mass communications-dependant society. You see, it looks like people like Stein are trying to keep his fellow Jews in power in Hollywood, even to the detriment of America or doing what's fair and just: giving everyone a chance to make movies. Thus the only people that are sinister are apologists that use subtle and sinister methods to maintain an unjust status quo.
>Maybe it's so basic when it comes to Jews that it just will never go away. Or maybe it will take so long to go away that Hollywood will be Korean by then.
Or maybe Jews need to grow up and stop using their victim status to justify their right to continue a bad star, or studio, system. And maybe Jews need to stop being so paranoid that they see an anti-Semite around every corner.
>For now, Hollywood, in many ways the most successful cultural enterprise of all time and the most potent messenger of American values of all time,
Looks like Stein is acknowledging, in a round about way, what the Supreme Court, and we at FIRM, have said about Hollywood as being the most powerful communications channel yet devised. See Burstyn v. Wilson at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?COURT=US&VOL=343&INVOL=495
>is changing, but it is still largely Jewish. And a very angry voice in my curly head makes me add, "What the hell of it?"
Oh brother, Ben. Why don't you have a drink and go out and see a movie.
Source of Stein article: