Re: Jew Lovers

This is appalling. You quote the views of an individual as the basis
of your argument.

If you look at the history of anti-antisemitism, you will see that it
was nurtured and created by the Church. Sure the Jews killed Jesus
(who was also a Jew). Dont Christians realize that Christianity was
actually a small sect in Judaism?

As an immigrant to America, I have always been pleasantly surprised by
the kindness, intelligence and hard work of the Jewish people.

Your attention should be focussed on the people that address most of
us as "infidels". At the current rate that they are breeding, I would
not be surprised if we will all be racing Camels very soon.

-SK



On Jul 12, 6:21 pm, Topaz <mars1...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:50:31 -0700, jgarbuz <jgar...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

First of all, I am NOT a strong believer in "multicultural,
multiethnic, multiracial, multi-anything" countries, because history
has shown that such entities invariably break up into ethnic enclaves
eventually. I do believe that EVERY country has the right to preserve
the predominant political position of its majoritarian group that
fundamentally founded it. Having said that, in the modern globalized
world, every country is going to have significant minority groups
whose civil and religious rights have to be protected.

We should have a nation for White people.

Now, the
original homelands of the European caucasian peoples who settled the
Americas and Australia is Europe. and the British Isles. I am a strong
believer that the citizenry of every country has the right to regulate
and limit immigration in accordance to maintaining demographic
balance, and the predominance of its founding majority group. I also
believe that every ethnic group has to have a tribal homeland where
they can retreat to if they feel discriminated against. Europe is the
homeland of the White peoples; Israel is the homeland of the Jewish
people.

Jews are the mortal enemies of White people.

http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/review-AR.html

Kevin MacDonald's The Culture of Critique

Reviewed by Stanley Hornbeck

In The Culture of Critique, Kevin MacDonald advances a carefully
researched but extremely controversial thesis: that certain 20th
century intellectual movements -- largely established and led by Jews
-- have changed European societies in fundamental ways and destroyed
the confidence of Western man. He claims that these movements were
designed, consciously or unconsciously, to advance Jewish interests
even though they were presented to non-Jews as universalistic and even
utopian. He concludes that the increasing dominance of these ideas has
had profound political and social consequences that benefited Jews but
caused great harm to gentile societies. This analysis, which he makes
with considerable force, is an unusual indictment of a people
generally
thought to be more sinned against than sinning.

The Culture of Critique is the final title in Prof. MacDonald's
massive, three-volume study of Jews and their role in history. The two
previous volumes are A People That Shall Dwell Alone and Separation
and
its Discontents, published by Praeger in 1994 and 1998. The series is
written from a sociobiological perspective that views Judaism as a
unique survival strategy that helps Jews compete with other ethnic
groups. Prof. MacDonald, who is a psychologist at the University of
California at Long Beach, explains this perspective in the first
volume, which describes Jews as having a very powerful sense of
uniqueness that has kept them socially and genetically separate from
other peoples. The second volume traces the history of Jewish-gentile
relations, and finds the causes of anti-Semitism primarily in the
almost invariable commercial and intellectual dominance of gentile
societies by Jews and in their refusal to assimilate. The Culture of
Critique brings his analysis into the present century, with an account
of the Jewish role in the radical critique of traditional culture.

The intellectual movements Prof. MacDonald discusses in this volume
are
Marxism, Freudian psychoanalysis, the Frankfurt school of sociology,
and Boasian anthropology. Perhaps most relevant from a racial
perspective, he also traces the role of Jews in promoting
multi-culturalism and Third World immigration. Throughout his analysis
Prof. MacDonald reiterates his view that Jews have promoted these
movements as Jews and in the interests of Jews, though they have often
tried to give the impression that they had no distinctive interests of
their own. Therefore Prof. MacDonald's most profound charge against
Jews is not ethnocentrism but dishonesty -- that while claiming to be
working for the good of mankind they have often worked for their own
good and to the detriment of others. While attempting to promote the
brotherhood of man by dissolving the ethnic identification of
gentiles,
Jews have maintained precisely the kind of intense group solidarity
they decry as immoral in others.

Celebrating Diversity
Prof. MacDonald claims that one of the most consistent ways in which
Jews have advanced their interests has been to promote pluralism and
diversity -- but only for others. Ever since the 19th century, they
have led movements that tried to discredit the traditional foundations
of gentile society: patriotism, racial loyalty, the Christian basis
for
morality, social homogeneity, and sexual restraint. At the same time,
within their own communities, and with regard to the state of Israel,
they have often supported the very institutions they attack in gentile
society.

Why is this in the interests of Jews? Because the parochial group
loyalty characteristic of Jews attracts far less attention in a
society
that does not have a cohesive racial and cultural core. The Jewish
determination not to assimilate fully, which accounts for their
survival as a people for thousands for years -- even without a country
-- has invariably attracted unpleasant and even murderous scrutiny in
nations with well -defined national identities. In Prof. MacDonald's
view it is therefore in the interest of Jews to dilute and weaken the
identity of any people among whom they live. Jewish identity can
flower
in safety only when gentile identity is weak.

Prof. MacDonald quotes a remarkable passage from Charles Silberman:
"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."

He is saying, in effect, that when Jews make the
diversity-is-our-strength argument it is in support of their real goal
of diluting a society's homogeneity so that Jews will feel safe. They
are couching a Jewish agenda in terms they think gentiles will accept.
Likewise, as the second part of the Silberman quotation suggests, Jews
may support deviant movements, not because they think it is good for
the country but because it is good for the Jews.

Prof. Silberman also provides an illuminating quote from a Jewish
economist who thought that republicans had more sensible economic
policies but who voted for the Democratic presidential candidate
anyway. His reason? "I'd rather live in a country governed by the
faces
I saw at the Democratic convention than those I saw at the Republican
convention." This man apparently distrusts white gentiles and voted
for
a racially mixed party even if its economic policies were wrong. What
is good for Jews appears to come before what is good for the country.

Earl Raab, former president of heavily Jewish Brandeis University
makes
the diversity argument in a slightly different way. Expressing his
satisfaction with the prediction that by the middle of the next
century
whites will become a minority, he writes, "We have tipped beyond the
point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this
country." He is apparently prepared to displace the people and culture
of the founding stock in order to prevent the theoretical rise of an
anti-Jewish regime. Prof. Raab appears to see whites mainly as
potential Nazis, and is willing to sacrifice their culture and
national
continuity in order to defuse an imagined threat to Jews. This passage
takes for granted the continued future existence of Jews as a distinct
community even as gentile whites decline in numbers and influence.

In the same passage, Prof. Raab continues by noting that, "[w]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..." -- just as it tends to make the ultimate displacement
of European culture also irreversible.

Prof. MacDonald traces the development of this diversity strategy to
several sources. It is widely recognized that the German-Jewish
immigrant Franz Boas (1858-1942) almost single-handedly established
the
current contours of anthropology, ridding it of all biological
explanations for differences in human culture or behavior. Prof.
MacDonald reports that he and his followers -- with the notable
exceptions of Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict -- were all Jews with
strong Jewish identities: "Jewish identification and the pursuit of
perceived Jewish interests, particularly in advocating an ideology of
cultural pluralism as a model for Western societies, has been the
'invisible subject' of American anthropology."

By 1915, Boas and his students controlled the American Anthropological
Association and by 1926 they headed every major American university
anthropology department. From this position of dominance they promoted
the idea that race and biology are trivial matters, and that
environment counts for everything. They completely recast anthropology
so as to provide intellectual support for open immigration,
integration, and miscegenation. They also laid the foundation for the
idea that because all races have the same potential, the failures of
non-whites must be blamed exclusively on white oppression. The
ultimate
conclusion of Boasian anthropology was that since environment accounts
for all human differences, every inequality in achievement can be
eliminated by changing the environment. This has been the
justification
for enormous and wasteful government intervention programs.

The entire "civil rights" movement can be seen as a natural
consequence
of the triumph of Boasian thinking. ...

read more »


.

Relevant Pages

  • Why Europeans are receiving what they deserve?????
    ... In 1975 Jewish CBS reporter Mike Wallace journeyed to another Arab ... like for [Jews] there. ... Socialist government under Adolf Hitler encouraged German motherhood ... inserted to an article about the need to strengthen the European ...
    (soc.culture.israel)
  • Why Europeans are receiving what they deserve?????
    ... In 1975 Jewish CBS reporter Mike Wallace journeyed to another Arab ... like for [Jews] there. ... Socialist government under Adolf Hitler encouraged German motherhood ... inserted to an article about the need to strengthen the European ...
    (soc.culture.jewish)
  • The reason for soc.culture.jewish.moderated
    ... permissible for Jews to be buried in this section. ... Conservative Judaism holds with the traditional rules. ... Jew is using a recognized Jewish cemetary, ... detailed laws on how to kill an animal to eat it. ...
    (soc.culture.israel)
  • About Iranian Jews and their great contributions to Iranian culture
    ... of the great contributions of Iranian Jews ... Persian to their kids and have kept the ... I am not Jewish but I would be ...
    (soc.culture.iranian)
  • Re: Billy Joel: Last Play At Shea
    ... both Jew and Gentile! ... Dylan, Gershwin, 100 million gentile artists.> ... Not only for your constant rants on how Jews want to be ... - Jewish actor Michael Tucker. ...
    (alt.sports.baseball.ny-mets)