Amazon

NOTICE

If you'd like to republish any of my articles, you are welcome to do so. Please add a link to the original post on my blog.

Saturday, 7 March 2015

Essential Introduction to Kevin MacDonald

Multicultural, multiracial crowd in London's Trafalgar Square


I want to introduce to you Kevin MacDonald, Professor of Psychology at California State University.

He received a B. A. in Philosophy, a Masters degree in Evolutionary Biology and a Ph. D. in Biobehavioral Sciences.

Since assuming his position at California State University, his research has focused on developing evolutionary perspectives on culture, developmental psychology and personality theory, the origins and maintenance of monogamous marriage in Western Europe, and ethnic relations (group evolutionary strategies). He is the author of more than 100 scholarly papers and reviews.

His most important book is considered The Culture of Critique (Amazon USA) (Amazon UK) , whose subtitle is "An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements".

In this book, and indeed in the trilogy of which it is part (The Culture of Critique series), he applies evolutionary theory to Judaism, arriving at the conclusion that Judaism is a group evolutionary strategy, namely it helps the interests of the ingroup against the interests of rivals - the outgroups.

Anti-Semitism, on the other hand, is the outgroups' response to Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy that favours only Jewish interests at the expense of all others.

All three books are the fruit of extremely diligent and painstaking scholarly work.

Here's how MacDonald sums up The Culture of Critique (CofC) in the Preface to the First Paperback Edition of the book:
CofC describes how Jewish intellectuals initiated and advanced a number of important intellectual and political movements during the 20th century. I argue that these movements are attempts to alter Western societies in a manner that would neutralize or end anti-Semitism and enhance the prospects for Jewish group continuity either in an overt or in a semi-cryptic manner. Several of these Jewish movements (e.g., the shift in immigration policy favoring non-European peoples) have attempted to weaken the power of their perceived competitors — the European peoples who early in the 20th century had assumed a dominant position not only in their traditional homelands in Europe, but also in the United States, Canada, and Australia. At a theoretical level, these movements are viewed as the outcome of conflicts of interest between Jews and non-Jews in the construction of culture and in various public policy issues. Ultimately, these movements are viewed as the expression of a group evolutionary strategy by Jews in their competition for social, political and cultural dominance with non-Jews.
The "culture of critique" of the title can be described as the constant pattern of theoretical and intellectual attacks to which predominantly Jewish movements and elites have subjected the mainstream White, Gentile and Christian societies in which they've been living, attacks which have considerably weakened these societies' resistance to external and internal threats. Mass immigration, multiculturalism and Islamisation are contemporary examples of these threats, and they have been overwhelmingly not just supported but also promoted by Jewish communities in the West.

The Jewish movements analysed are
Freud, the New York Intellectuals, the Boasians, and the Frankfurt School, in which 'scientific' theories were fashioned and deployed to advance ethnic group interests. This ideological purpose becomes clear when the unscientific nature of these movements is understood. Much of the discussion in CofC documented the intellectual dishonesty, the lack of empirical rigor, the obvious political and ethnic motivation, the expulsion of dissenters, the collusion among co-ethnics to dominate intellectual discourse, and the general lack of scientific spirit that pervaded them. In my view, the scientific weakness of these movements is evidence of their group-strategic function.
Boasians are the followers of Franz Boas, who established a highly influential school of thought in anthropology categorically denying the existence of human races and claiming that genetic differences between peoples are trivial and irrelevant.

It is thanks to this movement, that came to dominate the field of anthropology, that even believing in the existence of races and, more importantly, in differences among them is these days considered as racist.

I will return to MacDonald and his work in future articles but now I wish to introduce an autobiographical element.

During all the time I was in the counterjihad movement, I always felt that something wasn't quite right.

True, Islam is a serious problem, an inherently homicidal and supremacist doctrine disguised as a religion that threatens the whole world. I thought this then and I think this now.

But the question was: Islam is a foreign doctrine to the West, it's never been part of it and therefore it is - or at least it was - an external enemy to us.

The Western world is much stronger militarily, economically, politically, culturally than the Islamic world. How could the Occident be menaced by Islam, then?

If Muslim populations had been kept out of Western lands, they would have still represented a mortal threat to the unfortunate Christians living in Muslim-majority countries, but not to us. At one point someone opened the gates to Mohammedans, so that the invasion has not been by military conquest, as it happened sometimes in the past and was repelled by Christian armies, but by inordinate numbers of economic immigrants and true or false "refugees".

This is well-known recent history. But why not many people, even in the counterjihad, ask themselves and seek plausible answers to the question: who opened the gates and why?

The answers commonly given are not satisfactory: the Left, the politicians, and so on.

I was also giving myself these answers. Cultural Marxism was my best bet.

Now, I didn't then pause to reflect that Cultural Marxism is a typically Jewish movement.

Cultural Marxism's origins are traced back to Jewish intellectual György Lukács and Italian politician Antonio Gramsci, who married a Jewish woman, Julia Schucht; it was then developed by the Frankfurt School, a group of Marxists whose main inspirations and thinkers were overwhelmingly Jewish. Strange coincidences, when you think that Jews are a tiny fraction of the Western population.

Indeed, communism in its modern form is a Jewish creation. Its greatest, most influential authors are Marx for the theory, Lenin for the practice: both of Jewish background.

Bolshevism was disproportionately Jewish, and so has been radical Leftism in Western countries.

Not to mention another force that has been powerfully destructive of Western morality: psychoanalysis, another Jewish creation.

Add to that the strong anti-Christian feelings that Jews have always harboured, and you realise that there's far more than circumstantial evidence to establish a connection between the cultural destruction that has been practised for at least the last seven decades in the countries once collectively known as Christendom (a term Jews might have resented) and Jewish influence.

Let's hear some witnesses, then, only a few of the many from MacDonald's The Culture of Critique. These relate to both the questions of unrestricted immigration and secularisation in the USA:
The well-known author and prominent Zionist Maurice Samuel (1924, p. 215) writing partly as a negative reaction to the [restrictionist, EF] immigration law of 1924, wrote that 'If, then, the struggle between us [i.e., Jews and gentiles] is ever to be lifted beyond the physical, your democracies will have to alter their demands for racial, spiritual and cultural homogeneity with the State. But it would be foolish to regard this as a possibility, for the tendency of this civilization is in the opposite direction. There is a steady approach toward the identification of government with race, instead of with the political State.'

Samuel deplored the 1924 legislation and in the following quote he develops the view that the American state has no ethnic implications.
We have just witnessed, in America, the repetition, in the peculiar form adapted to this country, of the evil farce to which the experience of many centuries has not yet accustomed us. If America had any meaning at all, it lay in the peculiar attempt to rise above the trend of our present civilization - the identification of race with State.... America was therefore the New World in this vital respect - that the State was purely an ideal, and nationality was identical only with acceptance of the ideal. But it seems now that the entire point of view was a mistaken one, that America was incapable of rising above her origins, and the semblance of an ideal-nationalism was only a stage in the proper development of the universal gentile spirit.... To-day, with race triumphant over ideal, anti-Semitism uncovers its fangs, and to the heartless refusal of the most elementary human right, the right of asylum, is added cowardly insult. We are not only excluded, but we are told, in the unmistakable language of the immigration laws, that we are an 'inferior' people...
A congruent opinion is expressed by prominent Jewish social scientist and political activist Earl Raab, who remarks very positively on the success of American immigration policy in altering the ethnic composition of the United States since 1965. Raab notes that the Jewish community has taken a leadership role in changing the Northwestern European bias of American immigration policy (1993a, p. 17), and he has also maintained that one factor inhibiting anti-Semitism in the contemporary United States is that '(a)n increasing ethnic heterogeneity, as a result of immigration, has made it even more difficult for a political party or mass movement of bigotry to develop' (1995, p. 91). Or more colorfully:
The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country.
We [i.e., Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible - and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever. (Raab 1993b, p. 23).
Positive attitudes toward cultural diversity have also appeared in other statements on immigration by Jewish authors and leaders. Charles Silberman (1985, 350) notes that "American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief - one firmly rooted in history - that Jews are safe only in a society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming majority of American Jews to endorse 'gay rights' and to take a liberal stance on most other so-called 'social' issues."

Similarly, in listing the positive benefits of immigration, Diana Aviv, director of the Washington Action Office of the Council of Jewish Federations states that immigration 'is about diversity, cultural enrichment and economic opportunity for the immigrants' (quoted in Forward, March 8, 1996, p. 5). And in summarizing Jewish involvement in the 1996 legislative battles a newspaper account stated that 'Jewish groups failed to kill a number of provisions that reflect the kind of political expediency that they regard as a direct attack on American pluralism' (Detroit Jewish News; May 10, 1996).

It is noteworthy also that there has been a conflict between predominantly Jewish neo-Conservatives and predominantly gentile paleo-conservatives over the issue of Third World immigration into the United States. Many of these neo-conservative intellectuals had previously been radical leftists,4 and the split between the neo-conservatives and their previous allies resulted in an intense internecine feud (Gottfried 1993; Rothman & Lichter 1982, p. 105). Neo-conservatives Norman Podhoretz and Richard John Neuhaus reacted very negatively to an article by a paleo-conservative concerned that such immigration would eventually lead to the United States being dominated by such immigrants (see Judis 1990, p. 33). Other examples are neo-Conservatives Julian Simon (1990) and Ben Wattenberg (1991), both of whom advocate very high levels of immigration from all parts of the world, so that the United States will become what Wattenberg describes as the world's first 'Universal Nation.' Based on recent data, Fetzer (1996) reports that Jews remain far more favorable to immigration to the United States than any other ethnic group or religion.

It should be noted as a general point that the effectiveness of Jewish organizations in influencing American immigration policy has been facilitated by certain characteristics of American Jewry. As Neuringer (1971, p. 87) notes, Jewish influence on immigration policy was facilitated by Jewish wealth, education, and social status. Reflecting its general disproportionate representation in markers of economic success and political influence, Jewish organizations have been able to have a vastly disproportionate effect on United States immigration policy because Jews as a group are highly organized, highly intelligent, and politically astute, and they were able to command a high level of financial, political, and intellectual resources in pursuing their political aims...

In this regard, the Jewish success in influencing immigration policy is entirely analogous to their success in influencing the secularization of American culture. As in the case of immigration policy, the secularization of American culture is a Jewish interest because Jews have a perceived interest that America not be a homogeneous Christian culture. 'Jewish civil rights organizations have had an historic role in the postwar development of American church-state law and policy' (Ivers 1995, p. 2). Unlike the effort to influence immigration, the opposition to a homogeneous Christian culture was mainly carried out in the courts. The Jewish effort in this case was well funded and was the focus of well-organized, highly dedicated Jewish civil service organizations, including the AJCommittee, the AJCongress, and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). It involved keen legal expertise both in the actual litigation but also in influencing legal opinion via articles in law journals and other forums of intellectual debate, including the popular media. It also involved a highly charismatic and effective leadership, particularly Leo Pfeffer of the AJCongress:
No other lawyer exercised such complete intellectual dominance over a chosen area of law for so extensive a period - as an author, scholar, public citizen, and above all, legal advocate who harnessed his multiple and formidable talents into a single force capable of satisfying all that an institution needs for a successful constitutional reform movement.... That Pfeffer, through an enviable combination of skill, determination, and persistence, was able in such a short period of time to make church-state reform the foremost cause with which rival organizations associated the AJCongress illustrates well the impact that individual lawyers endowed with exceptional skills can have on the character and life of the organizations for which they work.... As if to confirm the extent to which Pfeffer is associated with post-Everson [i.e., post-1946] constitutional development, even the major critics of the Court's church-state jurisprudence during this period and the modern doctrine of separationism rarely fail to make reference to Pfeffer as the central force responsible for what they lament as the lost meaning of the establishment clause. (Ivers 1995, pp. 222-224)
Similarly, Hollinger (1996, p. 4) notes 'the transformation of the ethnoreligious demography of American academic life by Jews' in the period from the 1930s to the 1960s, as well as the Jewish influence on trends toward the secularization of American society and in advancing an ideal of cosmopolitanism (p. 11). The pace of this influence was very likely influenced by immigration battles of the 1920s. Hollinger notes that the 'the old Protestant establishment's influence persisted until the 1960s in large measure because of the Immigration Act of 1924: had the massive immigration of Catholics and Jews continued at pre-1924 levels, the course of American history would have been different in many ways, including, one may reasonably speculate, a more rapid diminution of Protestant cultural hegemony. Immigration restriction gave that hegemony a new lease of life' (p. 22). It is reasonable to suppose, therefore, that the immigration battles from 1881 to 1965 have been of momentous historical importance in shaping the contours of American culture in the late twentieth century.

The ultimate success of Jewish attitudes on immigration was also influenced by intellectual movements that collectively resulted in a decline of evolutionary and biological thinking in the academic world. [All emphases mine]

30 comments:

  1. http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/08/the-war-on-white-australia-a-case-study-in-the-culture-of-critique-part-1-of-5/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Irish Savant does a similar job of exposing Jewish destabilization through mass migration of Third Worlders in Ireland. But even more horrific is how great is the control of narrative, when the author is credible, as is the case of Solzhenitsyn (and MacDonald, though far from well know, the latter).
      http://irishsavant.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/the-incredible-disappearing-man.html

      Delete
  2. Do Jews want to purposely destroy European civilization? No.

    Jews are genetic merchants: they love capitalism because they love to sell and buy stuff. That is why they are so powerful in capitalist European civilization. It does not make sense that they want to destroy their amusement park i.e. capitalist America and Europe.

    Jews however share responsibility for loose immigration policies in Europe and America. There are definitely evil people who are Jews, Henry Kissinger for example. However most Jews do not have nefarious motives. They do not want to get put in concentration camps again so some support immigration to dilute white cohesion. THIS is EVIL. HOWEVER...

    The majority of Jews are simply idealistic idiots just like European and American Egalitarians. Their Egalitarian views will destroy Europe and America the same way white Egalitarians will destroy their own lands.

    Jews have the merchant genes of the Arabs and the intellect genes of Europeans. This means they are incredible in business. Successful business people understand marketing, and this requires and understanding of psychology. Jews' European DNA gives them both the intellect to understand White psychology plus the internal experience of how White people feel. The result? An incredible mind for manipulation, whether its haggling for a discount on a purchase or convincing white people they should feel guilty.

    Whites have guilty dispositions in their DNA. This guilty conscious allowed our white communities to survive harsh environmental conditions because it leads to ALTRUISM. In other words we make sure our neighbors are doing ok and can survive harsh conditions. A group survival strategy. You scratch my back, I scratch yours. Whites unfortunately are misplacing this Altruism on unworthy non-whites who do not possess the same altruistic character: we scratch their backs, they car jack us.

    The Jew mind has concocted the basis for the two major DOGMAS in our world; Christianity and Race/Gender Egalitarianism; the Torah and Boas' race denial.

    Jews know how to roughly CHANNEL this natural guilt into a belief system. How? Religion. The story of Adam. We are guilty because Adam screwed up. Therefore we should repent to God for our shameful nature. Christianity came along and improved on this guilt channeling mechanism by convincing whites their sins killed GOD; Jesus. 'Repent you unworthy evil-doers.'

    Egalitarians channel white guilt by convincing whites that we're evil just the same. How? Whites' history of conquering and colonization. 'You are evil racist killers, therefore let us in and give us benefits! Repent you sinners!'

    Whites should have ZERO guilt for either killing Jesus or conquering the world. If a white does have guilt, they should not allow that guilt to translate into suicidal actions of repenting i.e. letting your country be flooded with immigrants.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Check out 200 Years Together, Winter in Moscow and see what happens to your writing career if you expose what Jews really think of Europeans and their fate at the former's hands.

      Delete
    2. Mamilla, a Holocaust with real bodies. A whodunnit of no public interest. It kind of figures, the victims Christians, aggressors...
      http://www.fathersmanifesto.net/wm/wm0197a.html

      Delete
    3. anon @ 3:31:
      "If a white does have guilt, they should not allow that guilt to translate into suicidal actions of repenting i.e. letting your country be flooded with immigrants."

      - There was never, in any Western nation, the option to express discontent with the immigration policies. Jews have seen to that. See Chapter 7 for a more exhaustive response.
      http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion2/goyim/je1.pdf

      Delete
    4. To the extent Jews support third world immigration for whatever reason into Europe and America is the extent we should combat their influence. LEFTY EGALITARIANS, and 'WE'RE ALL GOD'S CHILDREN' christians are lock step with those Jews in the destruction of America and Europe via immigration. OUR OWN PEOPLE NEED TO WAKE UP FROM THEIR GUILTY DREAM WORLD. Tell your white guilt friends and family to peruse this, it may stop their white guilt:

      "To all the Christians who repent for their guilt over killing Christ by allowing hordes of third worlders to overrun their countries...please stop. It is a sin to commit suicide, whether by rope or by immigration. Go to confession.

      To all the Egalitarians who repent for their guilt over white colonization by allowing third worlders to overrun their countries...please stop. Your ancestors built the levy that prevents the LAW OF THE JUNGLE from turning into the prevailing law of the world once again. Send your white guilt tribute money to Africa."

      Delete
  3. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html

    Stalins Jews.
    Jews taking the supposed moral high ground is a sick fantasy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://www.sunray22b.net/200_years_together.htm

    ReplyDelete
  5. i do not understand the way Enza ferreri is taking this blog. It was supposed to be about saving Western Christian Civilization .But it seems to be morphing into an anti-Jewish super conspiracy site. To take England some leftist /communist Jews backed mass immigration which threatens the destruction of England. But they where leftists among leftists. The Conservative Party of Mrs Thatcher had more Jews in key positions than the Blair Scotish dominated Labour Party which opened England up to levels of mass immigration.out of malice to the English people.
    As for any kind of Zionist global conspiracy what gain would there be for them in bring down the West, So that China and the east would dominate the world. Jewish people number just 14 million in total it is in their interests the white people who they are part of continue to have control of much of the Earth.
    Why would Jews want large Muslim populations hostile to them in Western European countries in which they also reside.
    Its understandable that a generation back Jewish people in England where for clear historical reasons sympathetic to asylum seekers. But that was than this is now and if England with its many pro British Jews is to survive we share common cause.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David Brown, I've clicked on your name and in your blogger profile, among "Blogs I follow", I've noticed you included VDARE.com - Latest Articles. I suggest you read vdare's articles by Kevin MacDonald, Peter Brimelow, Paul Gottfried - who is Jewish -, Pat Buchanan, and articles on Zionism and Israel there. Read The Occidental Observer and the links you find in these comments here. Without knowledge of the relevant historical and current events it's impossible to understand. You should consider that we are all victims of controlled media's brainwashing. I was one too.

      Delete
    2. We cannot solve the problem if we don't address the root cause.

      Delete
    3. Well said and we certainly never address the problem if we stay in denial about the very clear Jewish influence.
      "The English as a race is not worth saving" Straw (Jewish)

      Delete
    4. http://thezog.info/list-summaries/

      There may not be many of them but they sure wield a lot of power.

      Delete
    5. Their power came from their ability to hide unseen, exposure to light will be the cure.

      Delete
  6. The cause of the decline of whites is summed up by Pat Buchanan is his Suicide of a Superpower. It's Egalitarianism and loss of our European culture, specifically Christianity.

    Pat Buchanan is Galileo Galilei returned. He will never work in MSM again because he dare question their Dogma; Egalitarianism. He is on 'Press Arrest' similar to Galileo's house Arrest. We are not all equal and to believe this is to destroy our country. Buchanan is a genius. EVERY PERSON YOU KNOW SHOULD READ SUICIDE OF A SUPERPOWER. It is on youtube for free.

    Yeah yeah yeah evil Jews are behind the plot to destroy Europeans. This Evil Conspiring Jew is Dogma. Our enemy right now is ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR EUROPEAN PEOPLE AND CULTURE VIA EGALITARIANISM, IMMIGRATION, SOCIAL MARXISM, 'WE ARE ALL GOD'S CHILDREN' CHRISTIANS. This means white, black, Jew, and Arab and whoever else. We are minutes to midnight.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "He will never work in MSM again because he dare question their Dogma; Egalitarianism."

      The MSM is Jewish.

      In the words of Uncle Nasty a commentator at Irishsavant.bogspot .com we will never get anywhere untill we find a way to defeat the MSM.

      It is the mainstream that make us think everyone around us is a true liberal when in fact they are not, but just like yourself they wait for someone else to say it first.

      Shame the Jews and their hypocrisy and their ill gotten possesion of the MSM.

      We are many.
      Spend as much time as possible to awaken others.

      The quickest way to switch all the lights off is to go for the main switch.



      Delete
  7. http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stat/cost.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. Watch the youtube video Welcome to Sweden Now
    As there only 20,000 Jews in Sweden it seems doubtful they have played a major rule in the liberal death wish of the Swedish ruling elite.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The evil Jew Dogmatists will argue that those Jews control the MSM and therefore program the whites to commit suicide by immigration. This is true to some degree. However Jews foist Egalitarian dogma onto whites via the MSM not because there's a worldwide Jew conspiracy to destroy whites. It's simply because the majority of Jews are Egalitarian idiots like the majority of whites are. Whites LOVE suicidal Egalitarianism and so do Jews for the most part. However the Jews do have an enormous amount of influence. I do think its wise to put pressure on Jews to stay honest.

      Delete
    2. David,

      You seem to greatly underestimate the easiness to manipulate public opinion in the age of the mass media.

      When I was in the counterjihad movement, nobody disputed the fact that mainstream media can easily brainwash the public into believing that black is white and white is black.

      Now, take a look at Jewish ownership and management of the media. Starting from the US, and on to Western European countries, Australia, and so on, if you examine the issue you'll see that Jewish elites do have expensive control of the media. I'll publish articles about it on this blog.

      Add to that Hollywood - nobody denies that it's Jewish-managed - and you can see how few can achieve a lot.

      Even Muslims, who don't have the average IQ of Jews, have obtained in the West much, much more power and influence than their sheer numbers would suggest.

      Cohesive minorities, especially if they are strongly determined, can be very effective among non-cohesive, divided, discouraged majorities who are not sure in what to believe and have lost hope.

      I have another video about Sweden for you to watch:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFE0qAiofMQ&list=PLxXK8h_rXzBt3HrQi6ix0ImKRIfqCk5JC

      And this:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5wBih3XMC4&list=PL4L6dtw-zOZbTTZIuEvcBE8qU2xNVF8fz



      Delete
    3. Another video worth watching; real information, as opposed to media indoctrination, is the first step if we want to free our mind and get out of the mess we are in at the moment:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_R8wvE65J7s

      Delete
    4. In my message above, for "expensive" read "extensive".

      Delete
  9. please can name the youtube video as your links are not active. Yes the Jewish people are prominent in so many things would not a greater number with superior intelligence be the best explanation supported by evidence see www.rlynn.co.uk also on eugenics on youtube.
    The Nobel prize judges are not controlled by Zionists in awarding some 25 per cent of the awards in science to Jews.
    Jewish media control well they are responsible for Superman.Batman. Spiderman and creating most of the comic book superheros..
    All Jewish media owners are not following a leftest agenda. In the UK Desmond with the Express, Barclay Brothers The Telegraph and Murdoch The Times.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Have you thought about his thesis for two seconds?
    He believes that promotion of leftism and cultural marxism is a Jewish survival strategy. On every level this is false. There is no evidence of this strategy occuring prior to 1800, making it new. It is limited Western Jews and even then there are major dissenting groups: Oriental Jews living in the West, Jews who fled the USSR or so called "Russian" Jews from the Soviet Block, and Orthodox Jews. Nor is this behavior limited to Jews. As Amy Chua shows, it is common to all market dominant minorities dependent on government protection. http://www.vdare.com/articles/amy-chua-tiger-mother-or-market-dominant-minority
    In fact, non-dominant groups act in a similar manner. the Irish in England and Scotland support Irish nationalism, but vote for anti-nationalist and multicultural parties. The Irish in the US acted in much the same manner for over a century (1840s-1968). http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/012145.html
    Finally, this strategy is not a survival one. Leftism is killing off Jewish communities due to low birth rates and high inter-marriage rates.
    A a group of beliefs found among the least Jewish Jews, practiced by others, that is recent and destructive to group survival is not an evolutionary group survival strategy.
    MacDonald's thesis is a laughable fallacy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have not read a line - let alone an article or a book - written by Professor Kevin MacDonald, I can see it clearly from the type of comments you make.

      Just a couple of them:

      "There is no evidence of this strategy occurring prior to 1800". There is plenty.

      "Nor is this behavior limited to Jews." You are admitting that Jews do have this behaviour, then, something that elsewhere you reject. Professor MacDonald never says that it is limited to Jews. In fact, most human races are particularist like the Jews. It's the Whites who are unique in being universalist.

      Delete
  11. "Finally, this strategy is not a survival one. Leftism is killing off Jewish communities due to low birth rates and high inter-marriage rates."

    Awesome point. Jews supposedly are conspiring to destroy Whites. If this is true, how come they are destroying their own identity also? The answer is that they are simply Egalitarian idiots like the majority of white people in Europe and America

    ReplyDelete
  12. You need to educate yourselves before it's possible to have any meaningful discussion.

    This education cannot be imparted in the comments section of a blog. If you can't click on a link, I don't think it's beyond anyone's abilities to copy and past the URL.

    Video and article titles for those who can't copy and paste (but if you can't even do that, will you be able to understand complex ideas?): "The Jew Harvard Professor Noel Ignatiev on how terrible white people are ", "Barbara Lerner Spectre calls for destruction of Christian European ethnic societies", "The Ethics of Killing all White Babies", "Ideological and Geopolitical Origins of the EU, Part I: Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi's Pan-Europa".

    There are already plenty of resources indicated in these comments here to start getting non-media-controlled information, if you are really interested.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.magnoliabox.com/art/642408/the-royal-camp-of-james-i-king-of-aragon-during-the-siege-of

      Wikipedia and most other sites refer only to the besieged as "Moors", but the flag on the battlements is not an Islamic one and its bearer is of light complexion.. Plus ça change...

      Delete