The Professor Of Anti-Semitism

"Blind Leading The Blind III" by Peter Howson 1991, Private Collection, London

 

The anti-Semites of this world have never been perturbed by real massacres and genocides, true viciousness and injustice. No, as Golda Meir once said, "Israel is the Jew among nations" therefore to be an anti-Semite one’s moral compass has to be warped beyond repair.

The academics amongst them for some reason feel that the right to self-determination for the world's oldest nationality extant-- one which has acted, by any moral barometer, with infinitely more compassion, civilization, and care for human life than the new-fangled murderous one they are always championing--seems to be extremely limited if it exists at all. That is the classic definition of anti-Semitism: one standard for everyone else, and then an impossible one for the Jews. Yeah right.

A  warped moral equivalence is a favorite trick of the left, something they did all the time during the Cold War (US no better than Soviets with their gulags, etc.) To quote Tolkien from the Lord of the Rings, when the Ent, Treebeard, muses that he might lash out like Saruman if his home were threatened: "The difference is that you never plotted to cover the whole world with your trees..."

A case in point is Kevin MacDonald, a tenured professor of psychology at the California State University at Long Beach, who has been denounced as an anti-Semite by, among others, the Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization notoriously keen to pronounce anything inconsistent with its far-Left assumptions as “hate” speech. But MacDonald is indeed an anti-Semite.

For an academic, MacDonald has trod an usual path. An anti-war student radical at the University of Wisconsin in the sixties, MacDonald has since migrated to the opposite end of the political spectrum becoming a passionate spokesman for his pseudo-scholarly thesis that Judaism must be regarded as a self-interested “evolutionary strategy” created and used by Jews to deprive non-Jews of resources in an ongoing, zero-sum Kulturkampf. (Although MacDonald identifies himself as a “conservative,” one can’t help but note the similarities between his writings on Jews and Karl Marx’s “On the Jewish Question.”) That the thesis owes no debt to serious scholarship has not deterred a gallery of anti-Semites from David Duke to Israel Shamir from applauding it as an empirical confirmation of the innate wickedness of the Jews.

The source of their enthusiasm is not far to seek. MacDonald’s writings are distinguished by their scarcely disguised subtext that Jews are the enemies of Western civilization. Reading through MacDonald’s books and articles one finds that they bristle with indignation at what he sees as a calibrated Jewish strategy for “destroying Europeans,” part and parcel of “the deep-seated Jewish hostility toward traditional Western culture.” Indeed, the “Western intellectual world has become Judaized,” merely one instance of Jewish “cultural imperium in the West.” But the West is merely the latest target of the Jewish cultural onslaught. Historically, MacDonald argues, Jews have been a “hostile elite--hostile to the traditional people and cultures…they came to dominate.” Far from assimilated, they nurse “historically conditioned hatreds.” 

MacDonald’s conspiratorial claims about the dangers of Jews, especially Jewish intellectuals, find their most febrile exposition in his 1998 book, The Culture of Critique, where he asserts that Jewish cognitive elites have worked in an “overt and semi-cryptic manner” throughout the twentieth century to achieve “cultural dominance” over “the European peoples.” As in Europe, so in America, MacDonald avers: “Jews were unique as an American immigrant group in their hostility toward American Christian culture and in their energetic, aggressive efforts to change that culture.”

In line with these views, MacDonald is determined to portray anti-Semitism as a rational defense mechanism against the all-too-real threat of Jewish domination. “Western anti-Jewish movements have tended to be in response to intense competition from Jews,” he assures readers in his 1994 book on Jews, tellingly titled A People That Shall Dwell Alone. MacDonald also sees much of value in anti-Semitic propaganda. In Separation and its Discontents (1998), MacDonald states that “[w]hile anti-Semitic attitudes and behaviors have undoubtedly often been influenced by myths and fantasies about Jews, there is a great deal of anti-Jewish writing that reflects the reality of between-group completion.” In other words, anti-Semites are right to see Jews as an existential threat.

It is on the basis of that conviction that MacDonald takes an understanding view of the Nazi Holocaust. Nazism, he explains, was only a “mirror image of Judaism, with its emphasis on creating a master race.” As for Hitler, the worst MacDonald can bring himself to say is that the Führer’s murderous hatred of Jews, “although clearly having a basis in reality, may well have been exaggerated.” Bearing in mind MacDonald’s relentless depiction of Jews agents of cultural subversion, one can’t help but marvel at his restraint.

MacDonald’s empathy for the Nazi genocide has led him into natural alliances with those who deny its occurrence. Although he does not question that the Holocaust took place, MacDonald was happy to testify, in January of 2000, on behalf of David Irving, when the disgraced historian sued author Deborah Lipstadt on libel charges for naming him in her 1993 history of Holocaust denial as one of its leading exponents. (Irving lost.) MacDonald allows that Irving is “not an ideal person.” As always, however, MacDonald is eager to shift the blame onto the real culprits: the Jews. Thus he maintains that Irving’s attraction to Holocaust denial can be seen in part as “a reaction to his demonization by Jewish activist organizations.”  [...]

With its unambiguous animus against Jews and Judaism, MacDonald’s work has unsurprisingly drawn charges of anti-Semitism. MacDonald replies that he is a serious scholar. “For me the only issue is whether I have been honest in my treatment of sources and whether my conclusions meet the usual standards of scholarly research in the social sciences,” MacDonald has written. By his own standards, however, MacDonald’s writings on Jews and Judaism are a spectacular failure.

Not the least of the problems is his thesis. Stripped of its serious-sounding academese, MacDonald’s claim boils down to this: Highly intelligent Jewish leaders have continuously sought to advance Jewish ethnic interest at the expense of, and indeed to the detriment of, non-Jewish Europeans and Americans. But as MacDonald himself acknowledges, “Jewish intellectuals led the battle against the idea that races even exist and against the idea that there are differences in intelligence or cultural level between the races that are rooted in biology.” To account for this contradiction, which makes a mockery of his work, MacDonald has had to invent a decidedly conspiratorial account of Jewish motives. Jews, he explains, are in “denial” about their aims, or else have succumbed to “self-deception.” Elsewhere MacDonald laments that Jews “can’t see their ethnic commitments even when they are obvious to everyone else.” Or, more accurately, to Kevin MacDonald.

0It hardly helps MacDonald’s case that his modus operandi is essentially polemical rather than scholarly. He deliberately strives to paint a negative picture of Jews, a fact he does not deny. “In the end, does it really matter if my motivation at this point is less than pristine?” MacDonald asks. Similarly, in explaining why he penned a new introduction to The Culture of Critique, his assault on Jewish intellectuals, MacDonald notes that the new introduction “tilts the balance in my writing even more on the side of the negative.” That this has led him to exclude all evidence that may reflect positively on Jews is something MacDonald readily admits. There may be good Jews, he allows, but “my book has no interest in recording fond memories of individual Jews.” A scholar of integrity might have considered evidence at odds with his thesis. MacDonald’s only concern is to disparage Jews.

Comments

[Alexandra]

Jill,

Would you perhaps like to change the meaning of it in the English dictionary then? It clearly states it means "hostility to, or prejudice against Jews", no more no less.

We are all aware here who Semites are, but be that as it may, we still rely on the English dictionary to support our written word. To call that propaganda is simply nonsense. Why don't you simply replace the word with anti-Jewish if you feel it offends your senses.

[Jill Levin]

Anti-Semtism is a nonsense word, because it implies that people who are anti-Jewish are anti all Semitic peoples. The Palestinians who have endured two generations of Zionist aggression are not anti ... themselves.

And it is a propaganda word, because if a Gentile is an anti-Semite -- synonomous with bigot, racist, Nazi -- if they discriminate against Jews, then Jews should be given that same level if they discriminate against Gentiles. amren.com

[slowtrain]

There are people who have made careers and fame from professing blind hatred for Jews, as there are those who have equally done very well doing so on African Americans. Sadly, there are even some African Americans like Louis Farrakhan and his goon squad, whose relevance, like Kevin MacDonald and David Duke, absolutely depends on vile incendiary diatribes oozing from their cesspool of putrid ideology of hate. They are opportunists who feed on the gullibility of people obtuse enough to believe and follow them — people for whom, by the way, they have no regard whatsoever and would treat equally disdainfully if their object of hate hadn’t been there. Their followers are essentially pawns and completely expendable in the grand scheme of their affairs.

The tragedy is that these are people who have chosen to tell themselves and others alike lies then get caught in the web of lies that create, spend their whole lives trying to convince themselves and others that those lies are truths. The culmination is the self fulfilling prophecy that comes from lying to themselves and others long enough, that they forget the truth and so much so that they eventually believe those lies and often lead gullible people to die for them. There is nothing more tragic than dying for a lie.

But there are also pathological racists incapable of objective thinking or reasoning. They are slaves to prejudice that refuse to be emancipated by common sense, truth, and objective reasoning. Hate and prejudice have blinded their sense of reason. Their minds are like the black hole; no matter the amount or intensity of light that is beamed into it, it will remain dark. It is the duty of fair-minded people to expose them for what they are, lay their little schemes bare for their pawns to see and put them to shame.

[gringoman]

The injection of muslim moolah (especially Saudi)into U.S. academia has been well-documented (The recent sums received by Harvard and Georgetown are just the icing on the sandy cake.) The only question about a tenured anti-semite hack today is whether he's a true believer hack, regurgitating old cliches and platitudes, or whether he pimps cynically for the Wahabbis, knowing the American system will protect his ass.

[epaminondas]

This moron and Arthur Butz are heroes to my arab acquaintances. Of course for a long time so was David Duke, until I releatedly pointed out that after he he got done killing the jews, he would be dragging them and their wives behind his pickup truck.
What's unfortunate is the the university system protects such racists. Could this occur say at Northwestern, or U Cal if such complete idiots published theses stating that blacks since slavery had engaged in an inchoate-choate plan to genetically inbreed the 'subspecies' for physical excellence and dancing? (Mcdonald)
There's no difference, but with jews the target it is tolerated.
Can someone explain this?

[Crysader.NoRegrets.]

I suggest an experiment: substitute the word "Muslims" in place of "Jews" in MacDonald's work.

Now what you get is still a hate-filled diatribe, but at least it isn't self-contradictory and illogical. You have to defeat it by attacking the premises. But in MacDonald's anti-semitic rantings, that is not even necessary.

Kevin MacDonald: living proof that ANYONE can get a Ph.D.

[RunningRoach]

Alexandra,

I guess I didn’t have an opportunity to experience McDonald’s world view. Poor me. I guess I was, in the mid sixties, a pro-war student radical, (Air Force ROTC) and as such wasn’t much into looking over my shoulder for someone or some group that was trying to dominate my race or my religion. I guess I just missed out on the whole thing. Still am, as a matter of fact. I would have to conclude that my mildly perverse and naive world view was a direct result of the failure of my undergraduate college professors to expose me to such realities. I mean just how does one weave Anti-Semitism into a thermodynamics class or any other course I took as an engineering student. I grew up and was educated in Newark, New Jersey, and at that time the city was in essence a microcosm of Europe. Every neighborhood had its distinct ethnic roots. While there were “gangs”, mild by today’s standards, and a few race riots, the people of Newark got along simply by getting to know one another. This happened first at the high school level, as students of several contiguous neighborhoods were mixed and began to get to know one another on a different level. There was a Jewish neighborhood in what is still called the Vailsberg Section. I can’t for the life of me remember Jewish gangs venturing out into the rest of the city in an attempt to gain control of a block here or there or set fire to, or desecrate a Catholic church. And to this day, I am unaware that this has ever happened! If Jews are trying to take over the west, they are not doing a very convincing job. I’ll have to ask some of my close Jewish friends and associates to give me an update on the progress of their “revolution”.

Regards, and belated best wishes for your birthday,

JCC

[Michael Galien]

Frikking unbelievable that people like him actually still exist. This *censored* should be ashamed of himself. (sorry for argumentum ad hominem Kenny; couldn't help myself)