Professor Kevin MacDonald

  

Separation And Its Discontents  (SAID)

Towards an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism

 

Introduction

While reading this second volume of Professor Kevin MacDonald’s trilogy about Judaism, I could not resist noting and commenting on current world events that seem to illustrate so well the various matters raised in MacDonald’s book. I hope I am forgiven if such commentary is regarded as too much of an excursion from the actual topic.

Let me begin by welcoming you to Soviet USA!  Yes, this greeting is not a joke, nor is it an exaggeration, and the four following points, below, will illustrate how the once liberty imbued USA is slipping into a Soviet-style ‘democracy’ wherein millions of dissenting citizens were sent to the GULags. I am aware of the fact that US freedoms have until recently developed into mythic proportions, which has never been a matter of fact. However, since the 9/11 tragedy, the US people have been subjected to the Patriot Act whereby the US federal government gave itself the instrument with which legally to curtail its citizens’ freedoms. President George W Bush’s effort to fight the good fight ‘for freedom and democracy and against terrorism' is merely one such overt act of curtailing individual freedoms.

But fear not! As regards the concept ‘antisemitism’, the USA is not alone in its embrace of this concept as a political weapon with which to eliminate one’s opponents. In Australia we had the NSW state premier address state parliament on ‘antisemitism’, that he then labelled a disease. Likewise in Federal Parliament, Canberra, the ‘antisemitism’ notion was also raised by a few parliamentarians who delivered speeches that sounded unsurprisingly similar to what we have read and heard elsewhere in the world.  The evolutionary group behaviour of this particular world-wide group of lovers of ‘antisemitism’ does not surprise anymore – certainly not since Kevin MacDonald penetrated its corridors of power by focusing his intellectual searchlight upon its structures. The mysterious shroud has been lifted to reveal what has been hidden from our view, namely  the nature of  Jewish group power - how it is obtained, retained and wielded.

But not only in the USA is this lifting of the shroud happening in broad daylight.  Wherever courageous individuals have lost the fear ‘of the Jews’ there is a Renaissance, ever so small, of free thinkers celebrating their creative impulses as they escape the bondage of ignorance, superstition and subservience.

 In Germany it is Berlin lawyer, Horst Mahler, who almost single-handedly has thrown down a challenge - to those Germans who still want to be Germans - to join him in the liberation struggle against the dictatorial grasp that Judaism has on the German mindset. I suggest that anyone interested in such a liberation struggle will find Mahler’s exemplary fight quite exhilarating. His intellectual tool/method for this battle is German philosopher GFW Hegel’s dialectic process. I am aware that some individuals, especially from the religious sector, have an aversion to seeing the name Hegel because for them it spells monism writ large. For me Hegel needs to be augmented with Immanuel Kant's philosophical speculations if the resulting world view is to have a moral dimension because Hegel on his own lacks this. Other critical voices claim that such a direct challenge against Jewish power is detrimental because any overt display of ‘antisemitism’ furthers their own self-interests, something that prevents possible assimilation.

However, such battles of the wills, such moral and intellectual challenges, focus on fundamental human physical and mental processes, and hence Hegel’s inclusive dialectic process merely mirrors the world process of which all humans are a part. It must be noted that we have to differentiate the Hegelian dialectic from the Marxist-feminist dialectic. The latter is a Jewish death-dialectic process (designed for the enemy, of course) whereby the former is a life-giving dialectic process. I am not certain if Horst Mahler would agree with me on this definition, but any elaboration on this point will bring considerations into play that would lead to an unjustified digression to an already long introductory comment to my evaluation of MacDonald’s second book. 

But briefly, the Hegelian dialectic process does not 'exclude' because it is available to anyone who bothers to think things through without relying on superstitious forms of behaviour in order to construct their own world view. The Marxist ‘revolutionary’ battle of opposites - thesis-antithesis - is a life or death struggle while out of the Hegelian struggle there emerges a life-giving synthesis of the opposites: male-female = child. The Marxist-feminist dialectic has male-female battling it out to the death, in the hope the male gets castrated and the androgynous person emerges! All very sad because it is a life-denying process.

Hence, when considering Judaism, it will not help anyone to pull out the God-card, or to quote from the Bible, in order to bolster, to boost or to imbue one’s argument with any ‘special treatment’ or authority. It reminds me how many individuals delight in quoting from Arthur Koestler’s The Thirteenth Tribe, as proof that today’s Jews are mostly converts to Judaism. Little do such followers of this thesis realize that Koestler’s thesis also lays a Jewish claim to parts of Russia!

Professor MacDonald’s developed evolutionary group strategy approach ably assists in focusing a powerful spotlight on those things that used to be hidden under the mantle of ‘sacredness’, ‘holy’, ‘God’, ‘Bible’, ‘Chosen People’, ‘Israel’, etc., and that rendered critics defenceless against Jewish minds. After all, who wishes to argue with God and His appointed Chosen People! A sober critical eye must admire the individual’s (or collective) intellect that dreamt up such a thought - to be chosen by a supernatural being, an abstraction. Then again, one needs to be reminded of the fact that US President George W Bush has advised his people through media interviews that he also speaks with God who tells him what to do. G B Shaw stated somewhere in his works that if Jesus were to return today, then psychiatrists would soon be ordered - by vested interest groups - to certify him and thereby take him out of circulation because he would be threatening their power structures with his message.

MacDonald delicately moves into the regions where intimidated minds fear to venture. It is where battles of the will occur, again something quite normal and certainly most human. Such a clash of human endeavour Huntington labelled the ‘clash of civilizations’. Yet while Huntington focuses on Islam as the protagonist for the USA, Mahler focuses on Judaism as the cultural construct from which Germans need to liberate themselves in order to become German – again!  Mahler is far more specific because he calls for the Jewish God’s death!  Interestingly, Mahler, during one of his many court appearances was stopped, as occurred regularly, by the public prosecutor from continuing his deliberations, and Mahler then countered such interruption by labelling Germany 'Soviet' Germany.

My labelling the USA as 'Soviet USA' rests on the following:

1. After their successful coup against the Russian people in 1917 one of the first laws the Bolshevik-Jews enacted was to enshrine in law the capital offence of ANTISEMITISM. This was no accident because the legal snare was specifically designed to protect the Jews within the new Soviet administration from those Russian nationalists who objected to the Soviet Union not being a Russian nationalist state. Later, as things settled down, this ruthless grab for power naturally mellowed somewhat. But then opposition against the Jewish minority re-emerged. Stalin reacted not only to the inordinate Jewish influence that flowed from the Marxist ideology but also to the actual physical preponderance of Jews within the Marxist Soviet system. As Soviet Marxism spread, countries that came under its influence had no illusion about its Russian nature! Philosophers, such as Bertrand Russell, quickly pointed out the imperialistic nature of Russian Stalinist Marxism! One can thus rightly call the Bolshevik Revolution a Jewish-Bolshevik Revolution, as did a while ago Russia’s eminent literary figure Alexander Solzhenitsyn in his seminal work that traces over a 200-year period the relationship that existed between the Russians and the Jews. Interestingly, Tasmanian Mrs Olga Scully who has a Russian background, has a Federal Court of Australia gag-order that prevents her from discussing this historical aspect of her Russian history.

2. A week after an international conference on Antisemitism ended in Berlin, Germany, the U.S. Senate House Committee on International Relations, on 28 April 2004,  introduced Bill H.R. 4230  - Global Anti-Semitism Review Act – authored by Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH)  -  that empowered the Department of State to ‘Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism’. The Senate unanimously adopted it a week later. This is now one of three annual surveys emanating from the Department of State; the other two are the International Religious Freedom Report and the Human Rights Report. It is expected that wherever reports of antisemitic acts occur, the State Department will become pro-active in combating ‘Anti-Semitism’. Interestingly, the latest Human Rights Report was highly critical of China’s human rights record, but China responded in kind and drew up a list of human rights abuses that the USA is guilty of, and thus effectively shamed the USA in taking a hypocritical stance and exercising selective morality on the issue of human rights.

3. There are now legal precedent cases in the USA that have made it an offence to label anyone ‘antisemitic’. The Jewish Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith – ADL – lost its appeal against a verdict that held it had libelled a couple by calling them ‘antisemites’.

4. Now that the concept ‘Anti-Semitism’ is enshrined within US legislation it can safely be predicted that the number of incidents will also increase. Were this not to happen, then those who pushed for such legislation would have to admit that their concerns are not founded on facts but rather on what I term a ‘neurosis of selfishness’. It will not be difficult to find incidents that will prove the necessity of having such a legally required review of things ‘anti-Semitic’ because the self-fulfilling prophecy begins to kick in. And if there are no antisemitic acts to find, then they will be fabricated, as has happened all too often in the USA, Europe and elsewhere, so that the whole complex of legal constraints is justified.

A while ago, Alex Moïse, who heads a Zionist organisation in France, sent himself threatening letters, and was duly sentenced for perpetrating such fraud. Now Faits & Documents, (BP 254-09, 75424 Paris Cedex 09, France), n° 175 du 1-15 juin 2004 (p. 3), reports that another Jew, Raphaël Schoemann, is facing legal action for having sent ten threatening letters to French public figures, including a bullet with the comment, "The next will not arrive per mail".  Recipients of such letters were the the well-known farmers' leader José Bové, the Greens politician Alain Lipietz, the advocate Isabelle Coutant-Peyre, the film maker Eyal Sivan, and numerous other intellectuals who were all regarded as 'traitors'. Raphaël Schoemann stated in court, "Under the pretext of criticising the Israeli army, these intellectuals propagate revisionist and antisemitic theories. Something had to be done."

We can speak of 'antisemitism' as a growth industry phenomenon, something that I personally witnessed when academia in Australia embraced ‘Aboriginal studies’ during the 1980s, as part of the larger multicultural push. That two decades later, in 2004, the Australian parliament terminated the special commission - Aboriginal & Torres Straits Islander Commission, ATSIC - handling the Aboriginal issue, speaks for itself. The reason for this termination rests on the perception that ATSIC failed to alleviate chronic health, education, housing, etc., issues that are still plaguing rural and urban Aboriginals. There is no excuse in having snotty-nosed children running around while parents sit passively about. What ATSIC succeeded in doing was the creation of a massively bloated bureaucracy that soon lost touch with its own people. It was not accidental that the drive behind the Aboriginal industry was Jewish inspired. Almost identical thought-patterns are to be found within Aboriginal 'feelings' of discrimination, on the line of the current world-wide 'antisemitism' push. Like the Jewish mythology, the Aboriginal historical mythology is also questionable to the point of self-deception, just like Jewish 'Holocaust' mythology that claims to be unique. All too often Aboriginal 'dreamtime'  was generated within university anthropological departments, then seeded back into the community by field workers who then return to reap the rewards of having planted mental seeds about ‘Dreamtime’ events, discrimination suffered, etc. This controversy is still raging within Australian academic  circles where the charge against Keith Windschuttle is one of tolerated revisionism, and a warning to him that he better not become  a 'denier' of the Aboriginal genocide.

The drive to get 'antisemitism' legislation enacted at the UN is accelerating, especially in view of that July-August 2001 UN 'Racism, Xenophobia and related matters' conference in Durban, South Africa, where Israel stood condemned as an apartheid, Zionist, racist, terrorist and European colonial entity in the Middle East. The 9/11 tragedy that struck the USA four days after this - for the Zionist state and for the 'Holocaust' lobby - disastrous conference, brought Israel back into the fold, and instead the Islamic world stood condemned as a terrorist entity.

 

On 22 June 2004 CBN News Reporter, Sarah Pollak, filed the following story:

 

UN Hoping to Pass Anti-Semitism Resolution

Israel is hoping the UN resolution will be passed some time this fall.
CBN.com(CBN News) - Israel is hoping for a new United Nations (UN) commitment to fight growing anti-Semitism. This comes on the heels of the UN 's first-ever conference dedicated to combating anti-Jewish hatred around the world.
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan is promoting a resolution condemning anti-Semitic acts.  Annan said, "It is hard to believe that 60 years after the tragedy of the Holocaust, anti-Semitism is once again rearing its head. But it is clear that we are witnessing an alarming resurgence of these phenomena in new forms and manifestations. This time the world must not, cannot, be silent."

But a professor at Columbia University Law School, Anne Bayefsky, noted that only last fall, Ireland withdrew a general assembly resolution condemning anti-Semitism because of Muslim and Arab opposition. She went further, charging that "the United Nations has become the leading purveyor of anti-Semitism, intolerance and inequality against the Jewish people and its state. Today the UN provides a platform for those who cast the victims of the Nazis, as the Nazi counterparts of the 21st Century."

And Annan said, "Let us acknowledge that the United Nations record on anti-Semitism has at times fallen short of our ideals. The General Assembly resolution of 1975 equating Zionism with racism was an especially unfortunate decision. I am glad that it has since been rescinded."

But dwelling in the past is not enough, according to Jewish activists. European countries report a jump in anti-Semitic attacks or vandalism linked to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For example, the French-Jewish community now reports more than one anti-Semitic act a day, something the UN says it wants to end.

"When we seek justice for the Palestinians, as we must," said Annan, "let us firmly disavow anyone who tries to use that cause to try to incite hatred against Jews in Israel or elsewhere." Annan is encouraging the UN member states to adopt a resolution that declares that political developments in Israel or elsewhere can never justify anti-Semitism. Annan said, "Are not Jews entitled to the same degree of concern and protection? The fight against anti-Semitism must be our fight, and Jews everywhere must feel that the United Nations is their home too."

Israel is hoping the UN resolution will be passed some time this fall.

That the Jews need ‘antisemitism’ to sustain them as a group has become a truism, and Professor Kevin MacDonald’s second book in his trilogy about his study of Judaism, Towards an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism, sheds light on this matter by addressing this very issue in an anticipatory and scientific way. Interestingly, those who anticipate and then find ‘antisemitic’ incidents use a similar mental framework that however is not scientific because it fails to objectify its findings on account of the us-them framework. MacDonald is scientific because he claims to present his work as objectively as possible, and thus his conclusions are verifiable or falsifiable. More importantly, his theoretical framework is applicable to any human group endeavour. This therefore exonerates his work from a charge of bias, something that the hunters of ‘antisemitism’ do not escape.

A recent article about Professor MacDonald, published by the California State University, Long Beach, spells out the problem faced by those who, with scientific precision, dare to illuminate things Jewish:

"Civil rights" group condemns work of CSULB professor

By Karl Peterson

On-line Forty-Niner

May 17, 2004

The Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights group based in Montgomery, Ala., recently condemned the work of a Cal State Long Beach professor and the Web site on which he publishes as being anti-Semitic and anti-immigration. Kevin MacDonald, a professor in the psychology department since 1985, has published three books and many articles in his career. MacDonald concludes that Jews have for centuries had a strategy to keep their gene pool separate from other races and religions. He also studies the Jewish political influence, writing that Jews are heavily involved in the Bush administration’s pro-Israel foreign policy.
“He put the anti-Semitism under the guise of scholarly work,” said Mark Potok, the editor of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s quarterly magazine, Intelligence Report. “Kevin MacDonald’s work is nothing but gussied up anti-Semitism. At base it says that Jews are out to get us through their agenda.” The Southern Poverty Law Center is a civil rights group that started in 1971 and became renowned in the early ’80s for its work studying and subsequently suing the Ku Klux Klan.

Arlene Lazarowitz, the director of the Jewish studies program at CSULB, said that while she does not agree with many of MacDonald’s conclusions and that they are too subjective, she is happy that CSULB allows its faculty to think and publish freely without the threat of censorship.  In a debate about the validity of MacDonald’s research by members of the College of Liberal Arts it was determined that the tenured professor did not teach any of his research in the classroom and therefore was entitled to publish his research. Lazarowitz added that instead of censorship, the best response to MacDonald’s research is to prove it wrong.

MacDonald said that his work is purely intended to describe breeding trends in the Jewish community, which is very influential the world over. The 60-year-old professor, who teaches child and adolescent development and social personality development, said the Southern Poverty Law Center was too quick to jump to conclusions about his work. “The Jews are a very influential group,” MacDonald said. “All I’m trying to do is describe their breeding patterns.” MacDonald said that people are too concerned about being politically correct and that one cannot write anything about the Jewish community or about cutting off immigration into the United States without being labeled an anti-Semite or anti-immigration.

Joyce Greenspan, the regional director of the Orange County/Long Beach office of the Anti-Defamation League, said that MacDonald’s trilogy of books is about the Jewish people planning to take over the world. She added that whether MacDonald is an anti-Semite is not a yes or no answer but “that some of his concepts are very questionable.” Greenspan said the ADL has been aware of MacDonald for some time and despite whether or not their civil rights group believes his work is anti-Semitic, he is entitled to say whatever he wants under the First Amendment, which the ADL also works to protect. She said that the ADL would only be concerned if there were a violent call to action.

The Web site, www.vdare.com, that Potok said is “primarily white supremacist,” on which MacDonald published an article entitled “Thinking about Neoconservatism,” was also condemned by the Southern Poverty Law Center and is linked on MacDonald’s home page to the CSULB Web site. V Dare also features articles written by controversial figures like Jared Taylor, the editor of the white supremacist magazine American Renaissance and Sam Francis, the editor of a white supremacist newspaper, whose Web site describes blacks as “a retrograde species of humanity. His work is bandied about by just about every neo-Nazi group in America,” Potok said of MacDonald, who received a bachelor’s degree from University of Wisconsin, Madison and a Ph.D. from University of Connecticut. “It is like nuclear energy, you can use it for good or you can use it for evil,” MacDonald said of the white supremacist’s interest in his articles and books.

MacDonald also received attention for his role in the 1996 to 2000 libel trial of David Irving. Irving sued Deborah Lipstadt for libel after her book review caused Penguin books to stop publication of Irving’s book. Irving lost his case when the judge agreed with the statements in the book review that said his book both sympathized with Nazis and that his misrepresentation of evidence amounted to a denial of the holocaust.

MacDonald was the only witness in the trial to appear on behalf of Irving. In his testimony, MacDonald said that he felt Irving was being unfairly targeted by the defendant and other Jewish groups. MacDonald said he has no personal relationship with Irving and that he was involved in the trial because of the free speech issues involved with the trial. Just as MacDonald hoped to protect the free speech rights of Irving he has been granted the same privilege by CSULB.

Ref. http://www.csulb.edu/%7Ed49er/archives/2004/spring/news/volLIVno119-civil.shtml

MacDonald anticipated such an attack on his work because it proves his point that the whole issue of Jewish-Gentile engagement is a one-sided affair. His intellectual unassailability is clearly stated in the theoretical framework presented in A People That Shall Dwell Alone. MacDonald claims that his analysis of Jewish group behaviour has universal application, i.e. his analysis and criticism also applies to any other human ethnic or religious group.

This is MacDonald's contribution to world knowledge, that Jewish group behaviour and individual behaviour is not Jewish-specific. Hence he rejects outright any guilt by association charge against him, for example the fact that so-called white supremacists are quoting from his works. He further rejects a labelling of his work, or his person, as 'antisemitic' by those Jewish groups who cannot tolerate MacDonald's work. It is obvious that his opponents do not open themselves to the arguments that he presents because much to their annoyance MacDonald’s work demystifies Jewish behaviour. They just cry ‘antisemitism’ without engaging in debate with him and at the least they express that perpetually childish hurt feelings.

MacDonald puts it thus:

"No personal or ethnic attacks are intended here, either. Nevertheless, the charge that this is an anti-Semitic book is, to use White's phrase, expectable and completely in keeping with the thesis of this essay. A major theme of this volume, found especially in Chapters 6 and 7, is that intellectual defenses of Judaism and of Jewish theories of anti-Semitism have throughout its history played a critical role in maintaining Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy. Parts of the book read as a sort of extended discourse on the role of Jewish self-interest, deception, and self-deception in the areas of Jewish historiography, Jewish personal identity, and Jewish conceptualizations of their ingroup and its relations with outgroups. This is therefore and foremost a book that confidently predicts its own irrelevance to those about it is written." Preface to the Praeger Edition, 1998, p.xxxvi.

Interestingly, such attacks by world Jewry are not limited to non-Jewish dissidents who dare illuminate the Jewish group power structures. Dr Norman Finkelstein dared review a book with some tragic consequences. His case is one example of a mind dealing with matters ‘Holocaust’ and walking into the thick of things. He labelled a fraud Joan Peters’ 1984 published book, From Time Immemorial, wherein appears the thesis that the Palestinians are recent immigrants to the land claimed by Jews as their own. Finkelstein exposed the American intellectual community as morally and intellectually bankrupt, and he paid dearly for it. He had great problems getting his Ph D from Princeton University. But, again, this suffering, this battle of the wills, is nothing unusual in any human endeavour. One of the world’s leading Revisionists, Germar Rudolf, had a worse experience. Rudolf had already submitted his thesis to Stuttgart University, but then his Rudolf Report led to a court case and conviction. The university authority advised him that though his thesis had nothing to do with matters ‘Holocaust’ he had better withdraw his thesis because it would be rejected. Rudolf withdrew his thesis – and is still looking for a courageous university whose chemistry department will accept his thesis.

That this Jewish persecution does not stop at the US frontier, and that it is far more sinister, is well illustrated by the Ernst Zündel case. Zündel was arrested and imprisoned on 5 February 2003 by US police. He was then deported to Toronto, Canada, where he has been held since while authorities are evaluating his political asylum application. He is one of the world’s most dedicated ‘Holocaust’ non-believers, and he will not – as did California’s governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger – apologize to world Jewry for his rejection of their ‘Holocaust’ lies; nor will he develop and adopt an historically distorted picture of Adolf Hitler and his time as German Chancellor and Führer during the 1933-45 period. Zündel is paying a heavy price for refusing to submit what for him is a perverted world view, and for that he has been termed a Canadian national security risk.

Approaching the subject matter

The above lengthy introduction indicates what problem I had in approaching this topic because things seem to be crowding in on my mind. A similar sense engulfed me when I picked up Separation And Its Discontents (SAID), and so the old timeless literary categories of form and content came to the rescue. 

MacDonald opens his book with a 30-page ‘Preface to the First Paperback Edition’, wherein he elegantly demolishes one of his critic’s argument about the psychological mechanisms of ethnic conflict, and he offers a reply to an economist who took MacDonald to task on matters related to between-group hostility, for example, as in trade. MacDonald’s analysis, so stated his critic, “missed the key point about increased gains from trade”, to which MacDonald replies:

“As a result, it is not in the least surprising, for example, that indigenous merchants and artisans in 20th century Indonesia displaced by ethnic Chinese or the Polish merchants displaced by Jews from the 16th-20th centuries would have negative attitudes toward ethnic outsiders perceived as compromising their individual interests. Their attitudes would not be changed if they were told with absolute certainty that the society as a whole benefited by them losing their livelihoods or accepting a lower social position. Their hostility would only be amplified if the displacing agents were people from another ethnic group because such a situation would trigger social identity mechanisms of between-group conflict.” p. xxi-xxii. 

MacDonald then links this with the role played by Jews:

“Beginning in the ancient world and extending down to the 20th century in Eastern Europe … as willing agents of princely exploitation was a common theme of anti-Semitism: “ p. xxiii.

The fact that rulers and ruled were then divided, with the Jew as the middleman, was not conducive to a society’s wholesomeness. However, the Jew cannot be blamed that such corruption arises, and I am reminded of the telling propaganda film Jud Süß that reveals how a corrupt ruler embraces Jewish financial clout to feed his debauched life-style that is far detached from his subjects.

Paul Rubin, MacDonald’s critic, raises the obvious examples of Jewish persecution as in the Spanish Inquisition, then claims it had a chilling effect on intellectual enquiry and concludes that anti-Semitism has a negative influence on society as a whole. MacDonald disputes this:

“Intellectual stagnation may indeed have a negative influence on society, but it is more difficult to show that, apart from the actions of Jewish groups as described above, anti-Semitism has typically had negative economic effects, at least in the short run. The early years of Nazi Germany were marked by what has been termed an “economic miracle” that eliminated unemployment without inflation and resulted in widespread popular support despite state sponsored anti-Semitism … Similarly, the age of Spanish conquest and exploration began soon after the Inquisition was launched in 1481 and extended well into the 17th century …One wonders what the history of England would have been if the English Jews had not been subjected to this radical form of ethnic hostility … Because of the importance of ethnicity as a social category, competition between ethnic groups inhibits the development of market economies. Individualism is far more conducive to optimal (individual) utility maximization, but is unlikely occur if people from one ethnic group fear losing in competition with those from another ethnic group.” P. xxviii-xxix.

This analysis is powerful and somewhat liberating for the current non-Jewish world that seems to sulk in perpetual guilt-tripping, without having developed a clear self-interest perspective.

Rubin also attacks MacDonald’s views on the benefit of immigration, something MacDonald again disputes:

“Rubin is entirely optimistic that democracies are able to minimize ethnic conflict by simply raising the costs of conflict and discrimination, as has been done in the last 40 years in the U.S. The chronic conflict of Southeast Asia suggests otherwise – that indeed ethnic conflict is a major factor preventing complete democracy and market economies … And the cost structure of ethnic conflict may well change as the United States shifts from a country with a large European-derived majority to a country where Europeans are a nascent minority and thus in a much less powerful political position.” P. xxxii.

It is refreshing to read MacDonald’s factual refutation of the Rubin view-point, especially because MacDonald then focuses on Jewish group behaviour that clarifies why Jews are so successful, while those that are being manipulated by Jewish self-interest lose out:

“Some groups are already organized effectively to pursue their interests in the modern world. For example, Jewish groups around the world maintain an elaborate network of ethnic interest organisations aimed at countering intermarriage, promoting the interests of Israel, advocating self-interested positions on church-state relations, immigration, etc. The means used to attain ethnic interests in contemporary post-industrial societies utilize domain-general problem solving mechanisms – knowledge of the political process, how to raise money, how to utilize social science research to influence media messages, how to utilize or censor the Internet, etc.” P. xxxiii.

For me personally the MacDonald message to non-Jews is clear: Stop moaning and stop blaming the Jews, and get on with the task of organizing your group into action. But be wary of those who are out to sow discord within your group. Revisionists can sing a song about that one!

A Digression - interposing an item of interest

The following AFP article shows how Jewish group cohesion gets a job done!

Rupert Murdoch's Jewish Roots

By Christopher Bollyn – American Free Press

Christopher Bollyn is an investigative journalist for Washington-based American Free Press

Murdoch “became an American citizen for business reasons,” according to Richard H. Curtiss, editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. Keith Rupert was born in Melbourne, Australia, on March 11, 1931. “Rupert’s father, Sir Keith Murdoch, was a newspaper publisher, and his mother an Orthodox Jew,” Curtiss wrote, “although Murdoch never offers that information in his biographies.”

Murdoch’s father married Elisabeth Joy Greene, daughter of Rupert Greene in 1928. They had one son, Keith Rupert and three daughters. Later in life, Keith Rupert chose to use Rupert, the first name of his Jewish maternal grandfather.

The young Keith Rupert was educated at Australia’s fashionable Geelong private school, and went on to the elitist and aristocratic Oxford University in England, according to Candour (UK) magazine.

“Rupert’s father Sir Keith Murdoch attained his prominent position in Australian society through a fortuitous marriage to the daughter of a wealthy Jewish family, née Elisabeth Joy Greene. Through his wife’s connections, Keith Murdoch was subsequently promoted from reporter to chairman of the British-owned newspaper where he worked. There was enough money to buy himself a knighthood of the British realm, two newspapers in Adelaide, South Australia, and a radio station in a faraway mining town,” Candour wrote in 1984. “For some reason, Murdoch has always tried to hide the fact that his pious mother brought him up as a Jew.”

While Murdoch may have “tried to hide” his Jewish roots, he has been quite forthright about his support for extreme right-wing Zionists, such as Benjamin Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon. Netanyahu, who wrote a book entitled The War on Terror: How the West Can Win in 1986, is a frequent commentator on Murdoch’s Fox News.

Murdoch’s support for Zionism extremists is well known and a matter of record. As New York Governor George Pataki said, “There is no newspaper in the U.S. more supportive of Israel than the [Murdoch’s] New York Post.”

It is through a network of Zionist organizations, in which Murdoch plays a central role, that Murdoch is connected to the individuals who arranged the privatization – and obtained control of the World Trade Center – shortly before its destruction.

These key individuals are: Larry Silverstein and the former Israeli commando Frank Lowy, the lease holders of dubious repute who gained control of the WTC property six weeks before 9/11, and Port Authority Chairman Lewis M. Eisenberg, who authorised the transfer of the leases.

Murdoch belongs to, and has been honored by, a number of leading Zionist organizations in which Silverstein, Lowy, and Eisenberg all hold senior positions. These organizations include the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the United Jewish Appeal (UJA), and the New York-based Museum of Jewish Heritage - A Living Memorial to the Holocaust.

Fifty days before 9/11, Silverstein Properties and Lowy’s Westfield America secured 99-year leases on the WTC. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey turned control of the World Trade Center over to the private hands of Silverstein and Lowy on July 24, 2001.

Silverstein and Lowy then took control of the 10.6 million-square-foot complex, which included the twin towers office buildings and two nine-story office buildings. Silvestein and the former Israeli commando Lowy then controlled all access to the World Trade Center. Lowy leased the shopping concourse called the Mall at the World Trade Center, which comprised about 427,000 square feet of retail space.

“Six weeks before the WTC towers were destroyed, the Port Authority completed the process of leasing them for 99 years to Larry Silverstein, the developer who had built 7 World Trade Center [which mysteriously self-demolished at 5:25 p.m. on 9/11].  “Simultaneously, the retail space underneath the complex was leased to Westfield America, the US division of an Australian company that is one of the world’s largest operators of shopping malls.” Paul Goldberger wrote in New Yorker, May 20, 2002.

“Silverstein and Westfield were given the right to rebuild the structures if they were destroyed, and Westfield has the right to expand the retail space by 30 percent,” Goldberger wrote.

Silverstein is suing for some $7.2 billion in insurance money for the loss of the destroyed World Trade Center – and his expected earnings – for property he had leased with a down payment of $100 million – of borrowed funds.

Murdoch the Zionist

“Murdoch is a close friend of Ariel Sharon,” Sam Kiley, The Times (UK) veteran journalist on the Middle East wrote about the man who took over the once famous British paper. Kiley said Murdoch’s friendship with the Israeli prime minister had caused senior staff at the paper to rewrite important copy.

“Murdoch’s executives were so afraid of irritating him that, when I pulled off a little scoop of tracking down and photographing the unit in the Israeli army which killed Mohammed al-Durrah, the 12-year-old boy whose death was captured on film and became the iconic image of the conflict, I was asked to file the piece ‘without mentioning the dead kid.’” Kiley wrote. “After that conversation, I was left wordless, so I quit.”

Sharon and Murdoch are old friends. On Oct. 15, 1982, a month after the massacres of thousands of Palestinian refugees in the Sabra and Shatila camps of Beirut, war crimes which occurred under Sharon’s direct command, the Israeli defense minister held meetings with Rupert Murdoch and others, reportedly in order to advance his “West Bank real estate grab.”

The visit with Sharon included a trip for Murdoch and his editors from New York and London that “took them on a bird’s-eye tour of Israel aboard a helicopter gunship, flying over the Golan Heights, West Bank and settlements.”

“I have always believed in the future of Israel and the goals of the international Jewish community,” Murdoch said at a spring fund-raiser for the Museum of Jewish Heritage - A Living Memorial to the Holocaust on April 29, 2001.

From the beginning, News Corp., his global media company, “has been supportive of the Jewish national cause,” Murdoch said.

Larry Silverstein, who had not yet acquired the lease on the World Trade Center, attended the fund-raiser with Murdoch and reportedly said about museum chairman Robert Morgenthau’s plans to expand the museum: “I’ll support you…as long as you keep it under 110 stories.”

Murdoch and the ADL

“Henry Kissinger, Rupert Murdoch and Mortimer Zuckerman are on the [ADL] dinner committee,” according to a recent New York Times report on the ADL’s recent fund-raiser in which the controversial Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi received the ADL’s Distinguished Statesman Award.

Silverstein and Eisenberg have both held senior leadership positions with the United Jewish Appeal (UJA), a billion dollar Zionist “charity” organization, to which Murdoch and Lowy generously contribute. In 1997, Henry Kissinger presented Murdoch with the UJA’s award for “Humanitarian of the Year.”

Silverstein is a former chairman of UJA. This organization raises hundreds of millions of dollars every year for a network of Zionist agencies in the United States and Israel. Eisenberg, who was instrumental in obtaining the lease for Silverstein, is on the Planning Board of UJA.

Eisenberg in his role with the Port Authority was the key person who negotiated the 99-year leases for Silverstein and Frank Lowy’s Westfield America, who were in fact the low-bidders for the lease on the 110-story towers and the retail mall.

Murdoch and the Czechoslovakian-born Israeli commando Frank Lowy, a former fighter in Israel’s Golani Brigade, who immigrated to Australia in the 1950s, have had a long friendship, which Murdoch recounted during an American Australian Association fund-raising dinner in honor of Frank’s son, Peter S. Lowy, in New York on November 20, 2002. Larry Silverstein and his wife also attended the American Australian event.

Some reporters refer to the American Australian Association, whose membership includes James Wolfensohn, the president of the World Bank, who raised cash for Rupert Murdoch when he first expanded into the United States, as “the kangaroo mafia.”

“Frank was a brave and determined fighter,” Rafi Kocer, Lowy’s former commander, said. Lowy has donated some $350,000 to build a memorial museum in Israel for his former brigade.

Today, Lowy and his three sons control Westfield Corporation, one of the largest operators of shopping centers in the United States – and the world.

Insured Against Terrorist Attacks

On September 12, 2001, The Jerusalem Post reported: “Frank Lowy, who emigrated to Australia from Israel in 1952, owns the 99-year lease for the 425,000 square foot retail portion of the destroyed World Trade Center…Westfield said today that it has insurance cover against terrorist attacks and its earnings will not be materially affected.”
Lowy, is described by the Sydney Morning Herald as “a self-made man with a strong interest in the Holocaust and Israeli politics.”

The implicit lesson contained in Bollyn’s account of Jewish group behaviour is instructive, though looming large is a possible libel action if that analysis begins to construct opinions directly based on its factual premises, i.e. if prejudicial assumptions are made, perhaps linking the 9/11 tragedy with other possible insurance frauds, as for example the sinking of the Titanic. Critical voices contend that this tragedy involved the Titanic’s sister-ship, the Olympic, and was an insurance fraud gone wrong. Now that technology is able to physically investigate the alleged Titanic wreck, it is possible to empirically confirm suppositions that to date have remained mere speculations.

Unfortunately the physical evidence of the Pentagon and WTC sites, for example, was removed with indecent hast. Why? Usually justifications for some unexplained official action are by referring to some hurt feelings that need to be protected. Is that why the US currently sends back its falled soldiers from Iraq to the USA in the dead of night? Is this not undignified and shameful? Like criminals, these individuals who paid the supreme sacrifice for their country (their country?) are returned to US soil without honour, all for the sake of protecting the ‘hurt feelings’ of family and relatives.

From the above brief comment the 9/11 tragedy will then make all the more sense, especially because the other important front, in tandem with the financial, is the political front. Killing two birds with one stone is an old maxim whose wisdom would not escape anyone following MacDonald’s analysis of evolutionary group strategy of survival of an ancient people.

And now to the specifics of Professor MacDonald’s book that is divided into nine chapters. I shall go through each chapter and pick out the most interesting points, add my comments, if needed, then liberally quote from the text because Kevin MacDonald’s prose is so clear that it does not need to be re-worded. Also, the various passages quoted should tempt the reader to get this definitive three-volume set on Judaism. 

I have also added some current material from other sources that seem to me quite pertinent within a consideration of what MacDonald is elucidating, and I do hope you do not find this too irritating. In this way I avoid having footnotes. MacDonald’s use of footnotes is again exhaustive and done in the classic academic tradition where two or three additional arguments are run about some matter, thereby presenting various points-of-view on issues. That most references are Jewish references must be upsetting to those who wish to label MacDonald’s work ‘antisemitic’!  

 

Chapter 1: A Social Identity Theory of Anti-Semitism

“The theory of group evolutionary strategies … argued that Judaism may be understood mainly as a cultural invention, maintained by social controls that act to structure the behaviour of group members and characterized by a religious ideology that rationalizes ingroup behaviour both to ingroup members and to outsiders. Although evolved mechanisms of group cohesion are also important, it was shown that social controls acting within the group were able to structure the group to facilitate ingroup economic and political cooperation and resource competition with outgroups, erect barriers to genetic penetration from outside the group, and facilitate eugenic practices aimed at producing high intelligence and high-investment parenting ideally suited to developing a specialized ecological role within human societies. Because of these traits, and particularly an IQ that is at least one standard deviation above the Caucasian mean, Judaism has been a powerful force in several historical eras. P. 2.

Kevin MacDonald begins this chapter with a clear and concise statement that mentions concepts such as ‘genetic’ and ‘eugenic’, those somewhat loaded terms that has the non-Jewish world befuddled. Otherwise in his expose, there is little technical jargon, and this makes his book so accessible to the layman, to those who have worried about the Jewish question without having any specific urge to write a thesis on the matter. And yet his theoretical construct clarifies many issues that in the past were illuminated by ‘non-academic’ antisemites! As he is using the scientific method, his analysis is universal, accessible to anyone willing to follow through with his own research. Also, it has predictive power, something he claims is important and should thus be applied when attempting to settle the various tragic ethnic conflicts that afflict the world.

A brief personal digression

Social identity theory postulates that individuals categorize themselves into us: them, which for Jews becomes ‘Jew and non-Jew’. From personal experience I recall that the first thing one particular individual at a conference said to me: “Are you one of us?” The person was quite disappointed when I responded with, “No, I am an Australian of solid German farming stock.”  The next question was, “Are you antisemitic?” Labelling anyone with the semitic label did not make sense to me either because for me this was a language category. Likewise, talking about the Arab-Israel war was confusing because Arabic was a language category while Israel was a national category, and so it should be the Arab-Hebrew war, or what it has now become the Palestinian-Israeli war. The problem did not go away either when individuals talked about the Jewish-Arab war, which should have been called Jewish-Muslim war because we are using a religious category and not the language category as in Hebrew-Arab war. It soon became evident to me that something is not quite right because it did not make sense for me to see this categorical jumping about on issues that were problematic.

Hence during the early 1970s I visited Israel – that “shitty little country” where I found the individuals all pleasant but most of them suffered economic hardships – especially those  living in border settlements -  that did not tally with my perception of the ‘rich Jew’, as many Jews were portrayed in the world media. The divide between rich and poor Jew was striking, something that made me cringe because it did not make sense that such social divide should be present. One Jew from Holland who gave me a lift in his VW bemoaned the fact that he lacked the finance to get out of Israel and return to Holland. Likewise with personal cleanliness - this is mirrored in public buildings and within the social fabric generally. And yet Jews consider gentiles to be unclean! Also physically the Jews in Israel come from all sorts of different racial and ethnic backgrounds. One of my contacts in Israel was an Indian Jew living in Jerusalem.

But my perceptions of the Jew in Israel were kind if one compares it with an insightful statement from Orthodox rabbi Mayer Schiller how non-Jews are perceived. MacDonald quotes him:

“Sadly it is … the granting of humanity to the Gentile either as an individual or as a people … that is so often lacking in Orthodox circles. Suffering from a kind of moral blindness, we find it difficult to see the non-Jew as anything more than a bit player in our own drama.”.  P. 6.

 The two groups will inevitably clash over, for example, resources, and “that anti-Semitism arises when there are perceived conflicts of interest between the Jewish community (or segment of it) and the gentile community (or segment of it). “ P. 10-11.

MacDonald finds that truth is irrelevant when groups form, for example the idea that Jews are a ‘chosen people’ is an irrational belief, but a powerful one. It certainly influences those who have embraced it to construct a negative image of their perceived outgroup.

Likewise, negative beliefs towards Jews that are labelled anti-Semitic can be scrutinized and understood as a reaction to Jewish anti-gentilism. In both instances there is the exclusivist, the authoritarian and the collectivist mindset working on behalf of a group evolutionary strategy so as to guarantee Jewish and gentile survival.

Then again, all this is nothing Jewish specific because it falls into the usual universal ingroup-outgroup form of behaviour, crassly put as the friend-foe divide. I knew of a man in a small country town who had an in- and outgroup list. Needless to say after living for a couple of years in this small town, the outgroup column was full of names and his was the only one in the ingroup list! One night this stock agent left town in a hurry, with wife and dog and horse in tow.

If it wasn’t so tragic, then one may laugh at the absurdity of it all – this being all too human. MacDonald puts it thus:

“The tendencies for humans to place themselves in social categories and for these categories to assume powerful emotional and evaluative overtones (involving guilt, empathy, self-esteem, relief at securing a group identity and distress at losing it) are the best candidates for the biological underpinnings of participation in highly cohesive collectivist groups.

An evolutionary perspective is also highly compatible with the falsity and contradictory nature of anti-Semitic beliefs. Evolution is only concerned with ensuring accuracy of beliefs and attitudes when the truth is in the interests of those having those beliefs and attitudes. In the case of anti-Semitism there is no expectation that specific anti-Semitism beliefs will be accurate, but from the standpoint of evolutionary theory, these beliefs may be eminently adaptive in promoting evolutionary goals. Similarly, truth is not a requirement for the effectiveness of the rationalizations, apologia, and self-deceptions so central to maintaining positive images of the Jewish ingroup throughout history.”  P. 19

No wonder when battling Jewish individuals in court that truth is no defence!

From the above there emerges the individualism and collectivism symmetry. MacDonald surmises that Jews are predisposed to collectivism, which is thus Jewish specific.  However, my own observations of Middle East social interaction indicates that this is also a trait found in Muslim countries. For example, Iran still has a wholeness as a state entity that is reminiscent of pre-Europe before the Reformation, where religious belief acted as a social cohesive force. This cannot be said of Jordan that is far more fractured than Iran whose leadership still commands a great respect, something that cannot be said of the Jordanian Royals.

The ordinary Jordanians do not care much for their royalty because it does not seem to benefit them in any way. Perhaps there is some alienation emanating from the fact that the Queen-mother is not a Middle Eastern-born individual, and that the present king is thus not really a Jordanian. Perhaps it has more to do with basic economic survival. Certainly the religious pull in Iran is socially stronger than in Jordan. Hence the following applies also to non-Jews:

“For individuals highly predisposed to collectivism, ingroup norms and the duty to cooperate and subordinate individual goals to the needs of the group are paramount ... Like social identity processes, tendencies toward collectivism are exacerbated in times of external threat, again suggesting that the tendency toward collectivism is a facultative response that evolved as a mechanism of between-group conflict.” P. 20

Community control is strong within orthodox Jewish societies, as it is elsewhere in any country, and sanctions for those who cannot fit into such community have usually been of the excommunication kind, something that can be quite traumatic for Jews, and other religious groups. MacDonald quotes research that indicates a number of lapsed Jews have flocked to the various charismatic Christian groups where they again feel safe within an authoritarian collective.

Capital punishment – the hallmark of totalitarian regimes (with the exception of the US, of course!) - seems to be losing in popularity, though some Middle Eastern countries still have public beheadings. The effect of instant world imaging of such events may reduce the popularity of such public events, as is currently the case in Iraq where non-Iraqis are beheaded while a video camera records the event. The Soviet Union got away with setting up its GULag concentration camps because a rigorous state controlled media kept such from public view, among other things, of course.

The phenomenon of martyrdom or mass suicide rather than to abandon the group is also part of Jewish group history. I am personally surprised that Jews refuse to acknowledge the facts of Palestinian suicide bombings is an act of martyrdom, which it is, and something quite normal within Muslim societies. Then again, the Palestinian cannot be seen to have any moral credibility and so their final act of sacrifice is conveniently discredited by the Jewish controlled media, and MacDonald would see this as an act of Jewish damage control.

Jews have a high need for group identity, something that is evident in individuals who do not have a sense of the self.

“Social identity processes, ethnocentrism, and the tendency toward collectivism are clearly central to Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy, but they have also been of critical importance in the phenomenon of anti-Semitism.” P.25.

The above insights offered by MacDonald about how Jewish identity is established and what constitutes it could apply to all human groups. He notes this by pointing out that some forms of antisemitism actually mirror the behaviour of Jewish behaviour, but he always points out that the root cause of anti-Semitism is the Jewish exclusivity claim whereby the world is divided up into us: them, where the us is Judeo- ethnocentrisms.

MacDonald’s research has that universal stamp of approval, and anyone who labels his work ‘antisemitic’ is, of course, merely whistling in the dark!

 

Chapter 2: Themes of Anti-Semitism

In this chapter I found what I was looking for – MacDonald’s critical statement about his view on matters ‘Holocaust’:

“In 1936 Chaim Weizmann observed that “the world seems to be divided into two parts - those places where the Jews cannot live, and those where they cannot enter”. Weizmann’s comment illustrates a remarkable aspect of the Holocaust and the years leading up to it: the pervasiveness of anti-Semitism throughout Europe, North America, North Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America …  was an important contributing factor in condemning Jews to Nazi genocide. Public condemnations of Nazi atrocities were perceived by many experts as carrying serious political and military liabilities not only in Germany but also in the occupied areas (where collaboration with the Nazis in their efforts to eradicate Jews was common), as well as among neutral nations and the Western allies.” P. 33.

His outline of antisemitism and how it impacted during the pre-war and war years cannot be disputed, and he explains this by stressing 1. Jewish cultural separatism, 2. resource and reproductive competition between Jews and non-Jews, and 3. Jewish in-group cooperation and altruism, eugenic and cultural practices that yield higher intelligence and resource acquisition abilities, all help to ensure that Jews win over the gentiles when it comes to resource competition.

MacDonald traces the outbreaks of antisemitism throughout the ages - something anticipated by early Jewish writers - from ancient Greece to Rome and Persia, to that of Muslim antisemitism. He claims that individualism in Western societies is an ideal environment for Judaism as a cohesive group strategy. However, once Jews become too successful politically, economically and demographically, resentment and outright antisemitism kicks in.

Basic antisemitic themes re-occur throughout history: 1. Separatism and Clannishness, 2. Jewish economic, cultural and political dominations that included the perception that Jews have negative personality traits, and 3. Disloyalty. MacDonald then takes a detailed walk through world history to recounts historical events and incidents, then shows how these antisemitic themes are played out against Jews. I am reminded of the quip that antisemitism is the longest hatred, something that someone turned around to state that anti-Gentilism is the longest hatred.  

All is not bleak, however, and MacDonald lists some of the factors that mitigate anti-Semitism. He focuses on the USA and claims that because US Jews have generally not adopted a visible otherness-separateness, antisemitism is not evident as such. Also US political tolerance – the aspect of a western liberal enlightenment – ensured that Jews were not seen as a threat. The Hassidims who certainly present visual difference are not considered a threat because they lack financial clout. However, since 1960 US Jews have become more prominent and this may give rise to antisemitism, but ethnically and religiously pluralistic USA  still enables Jews to thrive.

 

Chapter 3: Reactive Anti-Semitism in the Late Roman Empire

Kevin MacDonald states that in the Roman Empire during the 4th century, there developed within the empire mirror-image forms of what Judaism had been doing in order to survive: a successful group evolutionary strategy. Individualism is less disposed to anti-Semitism and usually blames individual Jews for bad behaviour. However, as Judaism marched towards success, any individualism had to take a back seat and adopt a group strategy in order to compete with the Jewish group activity, i.e. behaviour that was collectivist, authoritarian, and exclusivist.

The emerging Roman Empire embraced Christianity as a collective, anti-individualistic, strategy and thus furthered the strengthening of the group that then directly began to challenge Jewish groups that had done well out of the declining Greek empire.

The Development Of Corporate Catholicism In The Late Roman Empire

St Jerome claimed that "If you call [the synagogue] a brothel, a den of vice, the devil's refuge, Satan's fortress, a place to deprave the soul, an abyss of every conceivable disaster or whatever else you will, you are still saying less than it deserves."  P. 111.

MacDonald notes that owing to scanty historical records of this period it is difficult to precisely develop an argument that anti-Semitism was the only driving force behind the establishment of corporate Catholicism in the late Roman Empire.

All too often the actual Jewish forms of fraternising with the enemy, so to speak, followed the pattern that to this day is employed in, for example, the USA, Australia, and Europe, where prominent non-Jewish personalities are sought out to help the Jewish community. Only recently the Australian Prime Minister was honoured with a freedom medal by a peak Jewish group for standing by the US against its invasion of Iraq.

The shift of power from the Greek to the Roman Empire began when Greek individualism rose and, among other things, primary production and fertility fell. Through taxation the peasant farmers were decimated, and hence the custom of infanticide grew, something afflicting today’s Western society. Jewish groups retained their high fertility rates.

MacDonald continuous to focus on this period’s worry about antisemitism in some detail.

 

Chapter 4: Reactive Anti-Semitism in the Medieval Period

I find it difficult to understand that the Christian Church tolerated the Jews "in a subservient, powerless role because of their usefulness as testimony to the truth of Christianity." p. 141. For me personally such a mindset has problems. Does this mean that Christians cherished Jewish slaves?

Perhaps that is why the Middle Ages saw the development of the notion that present Jews had no connection with the ancient Jews in the Holy Land. Later the idea of 'Christ Killers" was followed during the 13th century with a physical exclusion of things Jewish.

Again, what the Jews had once done themselves to others, was now done to them. Resource competition also activated anti-Semitic programs officially enacted by the Catholic Church that specifically had as their aim to remove Jews from Christendom.

Like Edward I of England, King Louis IX of France looked after his subjects and therefore

“viewed the prevention of Jewish economic relations with Christians not as a political or economic problem but as a moral and religious obligation.” P. 143.

Likewise Pope Innocent III was

“concerned with Jewish sexual domination over Christian females, as shown by his condemning the practice of Jews employing Christian wet nurses because of ‘abuses too shameful to specify’. “ p. 144

This flowed over at the end of the 11th century when the Crusades began with the aim of conquering Jerusalem! Interestingly, the outgroup hatred was directed at the Muslims.

Many Jews faced with forceful conversion to Christianity, killed themselves. Such altruism is again part of MacDonald’s analysis, and if we fast-forward to the current Palestinian tragedy, then suicide bombers are indeed altruistic.

Reactive Racism In The Period Of The Iberian Inquisitions

After the forced conversions of 1391, New Christians, Conversons, and Marranos soon dominated areas of law, finance, diplomacy, public administration and economics. Although measures were undertaken to restrict the activities of these converts, especially through the Inquisition, MacDonald labels these individuals as mere crypto Jews. He regards such conversions as just another group strategy to deflect oncoming danger to Judaism. In 1629, 150 years after the Inquisition Jews were regarded to be proliferating like “the sands of the sea”.  P. 159. Judaism as a highly successful group evolutionary strategy was again a success.

 

Chapter 5: National Socialism as an Anti-Jewish Group Evolutionary Strategy

It is refreshing to read MacDonald’s views on National Socialism because it is so balanced, and there is no shouting match nor competitive urge for him to become apologetic. That’s the virtues of a scientific approach where objective facts speak for themselves.

MacDonald’s main theme in this chapter is that National Socialism uses the same group evolutionary strategies that have become a hallmark of Judaism: protecting the gene pool (eugenics) from outsiders but attempting to dilute the non-Jewish gene pool, and ruthless competition over resources. The National Socialists were mainly influenced by ‘Social Darwinist’ thinkers such as Houston Stewart Chamberlain who in his The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, 1899, laid down his basic tenet that “competition between racial/ethnic groups rather than between individuals was central to human evolution…”  [Much like the Jews, the other factor developed by the German racial theorists that diverged from the Darwinists was that]  “the racial/ethnic purity of a group became a critical factor  in the success of the group.” P. 175.

MacDonald’s comments on Hitler are illuminating because they are so soberly expressed. The following direct quotations (p. 177-79) show how Hitler’s world view is in direct competition with that of Judaism’s world view:

 

  1. “Hitler viewed himself as a unique combination of intellectual and politician – a politician with a Weltanschauung.

 

  1. “Hitler believed that races, including the Jews, are in a struggle for world domination, and he had a very great respect for the ability of Jews to carry on their struggle … ‘the mightiest counterpart to Aryanism’.

 

  1. “Hitler had a clear conceptualization of Jews as a strategizing ethnic group in competition with the Germans…In Mein Kampf he describes his realization that the Jews were ‘not Germans of a special religion, but a people in themselves’.

 

  1. “His attitude that Jews were an ethnic group and not a religion was confirmed by his discovery that ‘among them was a great movement…which came out sharply in confirmation of the national character of the Jews: this was the Zionists’.

 

  1. “Hitler, like Chamberlain, believed that Jews were concerned about retaining their own racial purity while consciously attempting to ‘pollute’ that of others.

 

  1. “Hitler, like Chamberlain, emphasized group-level competition and the importance of racial purity in making the group more competitive. Hitler detailed his beliefs regarding the course of Jewish/gentile resource competition over historical time. Within this struggle, purity of blood was of prime importance.

 

  1. “Hitler viewed the Germans as a unique, distinctive and superior ethnic group. There was an emphasis on Germanic prehistory and the inculcation of ethnic pride … Comparisons between the noble, spiritual, inventive Germans and the parasitic, nomadic, materialistic, unassimilable Jews were common in the Völkische literature.

 

  1. “Interestingly, Hitler believed that the greatest strength of the ‘Aryan’ race was not in its intelligence but in its willingness to sacrifice individual interests to group goals – clearly and indication of his belief that the Aryans constituted an altruistic group and undoubtedly a reflection of the National Socialists’ strong emphasis on the inculcation of self-sacrifice and a group orientation in the Hitler Youth” , p.179, … “In this regard, Hitler’s attitude that death was the only honourable fate for himself and his followers was entirely similar to that of the Jewish resistors of the period…”. P. 195.

It was Chamberlain who stressed the importance of the exclusion of Jews from England from 1290 to 1657 that enabled “a strong, vigorous British race to grow and sustain itself”.  P. 159.

 

Völkische Ideology And Attitudes Of Racial Superiority Among Jewish Intellectuals In The Pre-National Socialist Period

Under this heading MacDonald traces the development of the ‘mirror-image’ ideology/group strategies, ‘eerie sense’, within Jewish Germans who became ardent Zionists., though this was rejected by some Jewish leaders for fear of a re-emergence of antisemitism. Any racial conceptualization of Judaism had its problems, but generally it was accepted as a fact that Jews were superior, as did prominent historian of Judaism Heinrich Graetz (1817-1891).  

The differing viewpoints of Freud and Jung make interesting reading. MacDonald cites D B Klein who inferred that

“The psychoanalytic movement was also characterized by ideas of Jewish solidarity. Freud and his colleagues felt a sense of ‘racial kinship’ with their Jewish colleagues and a ‘racial strangeness’ to others”. P. 191.

Jung stated:

“In my opinion it has been a grave error in medical psychology up till now to apply Jewish categories … indiscriminately to Germanic and Slavic Christendom. Because of this the most precious secret of the Germanic peoples -  their creative and intuitive depth of soul -  has been explained by a morass of banal infantilism, while my own warning voice has for decades been suspected of anti-Senitism. “  p. 192. MacDonald quotes from Yerushalmi.

Both National Socialism and Judaism were exclusivist and stood against the general Western universalism and individualism. The latter required a lack of ethnic group-based competition, as was the case in England and France, where liberalism and unrestrained capitalism took up the slack within society, much to the demise of any powerful sense of community. Still, National Socialism had a much desired within-group egalitarianism,

“that portrayed Hitler as an idealistic, ascetic hero who tirelessly pursued group interests rather than his own interests. This portrayal of Hitler had some basis in reality well before he came to power, and it later became a prominent feature of National Socialist propaganda.” P. 199.

So much for Kevin MacDonald’s revelations that Germans and Jews were in direct conflict with each other. It is refreshing to read such accounts because it eliminates so much rubbish written about ‘evil Hitler’, when such accounts are not even contextualizing the environment out of which Hitler ‘s actions sprang, namely the Germans’ attempt to liberate themselves from Jewish physical and mental enslavement.

When it comes to offering a plausible explanation that made the rise of Hitler possible, then MacDonald's analysis offers us new insights from which lessons can be derived so that "it doesn't happen again"!  Meanwhile at universities, and elsewhere, 'court' historians are still stuck in a one-dimensional Jewish interpretation of what 1933-45 was all about:  "Hitler hated the Jews so much that he devoted all his energy to exterminating them in homicidal gas chambers." Is it little wonder then that in the US, in particular, there has been talk about the closing of the American mind?

 

Chapter 6: Jewish Strategies for Combating Anti-Semitism

MacDonald states that Jews combat antisemitism by developing highly flexible and adaptive strategies that then ensure their evolutionary group goals of survival are secured. This makes sense to me and somewhat explain why Jews seem to be on the run most of the time, or have that ‘feverish mind’, that persecution complex where individuals just cannot find a home within their mind. It does not surprise me because if it is you against the whole world, especially of one’s own choice, then there is no physical or mental balance to be found. The consequence of dividing the world into Jew: non-Jew is thus self-induced neuroticism and xenophobia.  Where there is no feeling of common humanity – being a Mensch, as the Germans say – then there is little wonder that the brain is running hot to find strategies for deception and self-deception, outright lying, if you wish!

One of those strategies is to present a divided front of Judaism to the gentile society as the various factions of Judaism – Reform, Conservative, Neo-Orthodoxy, secular, Zionist -  battle their own perceived antisemitism.

That some level of antisemitism is good for Jewish group cohesion is acknowledged by Jewish leaders. In 1929 Dr Kurt Fleischer, the leader of Berlin’s Liberal Jewish Community Assembly stated:

“Anti-Semitism is the scourge that God has sent us in order to lead us together and weld us together. “  P. 214

 That Jewish communities exaggerate antisemitism is also a given fact, something that facilitates Jewish identity because wherever Victimhood is celebrated, as it is in Judaism, then persecution is a necessity for survival. The Jewish self-conceptualization on account of it embracing a long memory of persecution stretches back to its beginnings, through the Middle Ages, and then, you guessed it, to the HOLOCAUST!

“In Israel the Holocaust acts as a sort of social glue, which helps to integrate the various social classes, ethnic groups, and generations into a cohesive society … ‘as the certificate of its political legitimacy, as safe-conduct pass for its past and future policies, and, above all, for advance payment for the injustices it might itself commit’ . .. this need for a belief in a powerful external threat accounts for the revival of interest in the Holocaust in the 1970s, at a time of general advancement of Jews in American society.“ P. 216

The problem in having to believe in a fictitious event in order to gain a self identity has also highlighted another curiosity but quite an understandable phenomenon if viewed within MacDonald’s group evolutionary strategy theory, that of inventing new types of antisemitism, “relative indifference by gentiles for Jewish concerns”.  P. 216

MacDonald thus formulates what Revisionists have known for a long time:

“If anti-Semitism did not exist, it would have to be invented.” P. 217.

Scapegoating writ large, and MacDonald notes that it is rather ironic that some Jews have attributed their own separatism and clannishness to gentile anti-Semitism,

“… the decline in anti-Semitism in the United States has coincided with a major effort by Jewish organizations to encourage programs that stress the importance  of preserving Jewish identity … a decline in anti-Semitism would actually destroy Judaism.” P. 217-18.

What a horrifying thought for those who keep anti-Semitism alive because without it they would join humanity as just another Mensch. I suppose we can expect anti-Semitism to remain with us for a long time to come because Jews need it to function and to survive as a group. Interestingly I did state to Australia’s leading political Jew, Jeremy Jones, that I do not need him in order to have a life, but that he needs me in order to have a miserable life. I then said to him that he ought to “tell the truth, Jeremy, tell the truth!” Now he seems to be ignoring me, and that is good. Still, no doubt the plans to combat antisemitism in Australia will include his thinking of  Adelaide Institute.

1. Phenotypic Resemblance: Crypsis

Crypsis, or crypto-Judaism, is talked about by some Jews in romantic language, especially when referring to the Marranos – forced conversion - and the following up of this with the setting up in 1481 of the Inquisition. Some Jewish children are taught to practice Jewish rituals in secret – password needed to get into group, and reciting prayers silently. Such crypsis is as old as Judaism itself, from ancient times to the present. MacDonald says that not always is it done because of persecution fears, but also if there is an economic gain to be had:

“There have also been examples of life-long deception, in which an individual, typically a powerful person, “converts” but continues to associate with Jews and furthers their causes ...Taufjuden, baptized Jews.” P. 219-20

MacDonald details from history some of the elaborate deceptions developed by Jews who hid their Jewish background, or converted and became known as the New Christians. I wonder how the ‘Jews for Jesus’ fit into all this? Perhaps it is this:

“Yet while the convert abandoned his people, his peoplehood did not abandon him. It was reflected in many of his characteristics, the product of numerous factors -  ethnic, social, environmental and educational -  that had influenced Jewish life for centuries.” MacDonald quoting Netanyahu.  P.223.

What is not mentioned in Netanyahu’s brief list of characteristics is the practice of genetic-eugenic selection, something that MacDonald continues to highlight in his books as a group evolutionary strategy of Judaism.

2. Abandoning Phenotypic Characteristics that Provoke Gentile Hostility

Since the Enlightenment there has been a conscious reduction in phenotypic characteristics, i.e. special Jewish language, and outward appearances. MacDonald claims this is post-Enlightenment Judaism’s problem because on the one hand Jews want to retain their genetic-cultural separatism-exclusivity and on the other they want to blend into mainstream societies where they are not noticed.

“As Katz notes, ‘The definition of the Jewish community as a purely religious unit was, of course, a sham from the time of its conception.’ While Judaism in other parts of the world was and remains openly ethnic, Reform Judaism I n the West developed a religious veneer because of its usefulness in facilitating perceptions of surface similarity with others, non-ethnic religions, while in Israel the Reform movement is virtually non-existent because the need for protective coloring is not present.” P. 225.

Jewish identity is thus flexible, and there was a shift away from regarding Jews as a nation in exile to a community of religious faith following the Enlightenment, then after World War Two a resurgence of the Jewish ideology of ethnicity, hence the Jewish drive behind cultural pluralism in Western societies. It all makes sense why multiculturalism is not a policy in Israel!

“The best strategy for Judaism is to maximize the ethnic, particularistic aspects of Judaism within the limits necessary to prevent these aspects from resulting in anti-Semitism. But at least in Western societies, such a strategy involves walking a very fine line and being very flexibly responsive to changes in external contingencies.” P. 226.

3. Political Strategies for Minimizing Anti-Semitism

MacDonald briefly mentions the use of the mass media to push against those Jews don’t like, for example St Martin’s Press cancelling its contract with David Irving over his Goebbels biography, etc. Also the pressure exerted by the Zionists on Truman for the establishing of Israel; often by mobilising public opinion through the various service clubs – Lion, Rotary, etc.. The Hollywood power-game is all too well known, especially since Mel Gibson stood his ground with his film The Passion of the Christ.

My claim still is, don’t blame the Jews; blame those that bend to their pressure!

4. The Uses of Universalism

Jewish cultural separatism is fundamental to Jewish identity but it creates anti-Semitism, and so the trick is to develop a language that moves this particularistic aspect of Judaism into a universal, which then is accepted by non-Jews as also good for them. Since the Enlightenment, says MacDonald, Jewish thinkers have thought about this problem, how to diminish their own ethnic/nationalistic character.

 One example of this is the ideology of Marxism. Another example quoted by MacDonald is the use of the term anti-Semitism in Germany during 1870-1914 where it was equated with being “un-German”.

Another is the use of gentile leaders to endorse Jewish causes, and MacDonald adds that it can also involve deception. He quotes an example from the ancient world where

“apologetic literature was written by Jews masquerading as gentiles. By adopting a gentile pseudonym the author hoped to make gentiles more sympathetic to Jewish ideas, particularly the superiority of Jewish religious beliefs (e.g. ethics and monotheism), as well as to defend Jewish honor against gentile criticisms … Jewish organizations opposed to anti-Semitism had an active role in establishing and maintaining gentile-dominated organizations opposed to anti-Semitism in Germany in the period from 1870 to 1933, leading to accusations among anti-Semites that such organizations were ‘no more than a front for “money Jewry”’. “

There is the tendency for organized Jewry in England and the USA to claim, for example, that there is no such thing as a Jewish vote because Jews are a mere religious group, but then organized Jewry (Board of Deputies) soon indicates who their favoured candidate is.

5. Focusing on Controlling Behavior within the Jewish Community

As a minority group, Jews realize that the majority must not be offended by inappropriate behaviour of individual Jews. Hence there is great concern if a Jew misbehaves because his behaviour will be generalized and used to stigmatize the Jewish community as a whole, deserved or not.

I am reminded of one such example in Australia where the Jewish president of an Australian-rule football club became too loud about his Jewishness. Financier (Diamond Joe) Joseph Guttnick wanted his Melbourne Football team not to play on Saturdays, though this day is the big football day, and has been for over a century. He refused to resign from his club and so was thrown out. Murmurs of anti-Semitism emerged only briefly because it was irrelevant in this instance. Another football team, also run by a Jew, was not affected by internal strife with its Jewish president because he did not impose things Jewish on to a still predominantly European sports form. Now that Westfield multi-billionaire Frank Lowy has taken over Australia’s soccer association let’s hope that the Guttnick phenomenon will not re-appear in that sport.

The ever-popular charge of disloyalty arose when communism and Judaism were finally equated, as in the Rosenberg spy case where Jewish prosecutor pushed for the guilty verdict, thereby deflecting from a possible public perception that American Jews are disloyal.

MacDonald raises the issue of loyalty to matters Israel and how this also created problems for American Jews. But his comment has become history because the current US Congress is totally in favour of Israel’s murderous policies towards the Palestinians. So much so that in one classroom when the teacher asked what is the capital city of the USA, one student replied: ‘Jerusalem’. Likewise the 9/11 tragedy and the 2003 Iraq invasion are events that are slowly unfolding before our eyes the interrelatedness of Israeli-US world politics.

 

Chapter 7: Rationalization and Apologia: The Intellectual Construction of Judaism

Social identity theory - of which I know nothing! - helps to explain for evolutionists, so MacDonald, why ideological structures are developed and what purpose is derived therefrom.  Rationalization, deception and self-deception make up its components with which the ingroup paints itself a flattering self-image.  Usually there is some paint left to draw a horrible picture of the outgroup. And so the ingroup begins to construct its own ideology that serves to interpret and rationalize world history from its perspective – never mind if such a theoretical account is in accord with the physical or historical facts.  MacDonald then applies this mental framework to Jewish history, beginning with the messianic dream of one day returning to a splendidly restored Israel.

I have been advised that it has become common knowledge that the non-Jewish Masonic order is also propagating such a dream on behalf of the Jews by reminding its members that the great task awaiting them is to restore King Solomon’s Temple.

Most of the Jewish apologetic literature of the ancient world, so MacDonald, had as its aim to defend Judaism’s exclusivist, intolerant, and separatist tendencies. The Greek world’s intellectual thrustings needed to be mastered by the Jews, and so Jews painted themselves as morally superior beings by, for example, celebrating their family life.  I am certain that ‘the hole in the sheet’ matters were blended out and swept under the proverbial carpet because such sexual repression would not have gone down well with the Greeks.

Another tendency was to grasp non-Jewish intellectual products, then fabricate arguments that convincingly traced such thoughts back to original Jewish sources. A direct way of doing this was by claiming prominent Greek writers, poets and philosophers – Homer, Hesiod, Orpheus, Aratus, Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato - were Jews because Greek thinking rested on Jewish religious writings.  Such fabrications continue to this day. It is, however, now common knowledge that, for example, the Hellenistic-Jewish apologetic literature is ethnocentric and derivative and self-serving, as is much of what passes as Jewish literature.

Again, this kind of ethnocentric attitude is not unusual, and one tends to find it in other minority groups who are seeking a self-identity. For example the homosexual lobby, like the Jewish lobby, will claim for the sake of justifying its life-style that prominent historical and other individuals are also homosexual.

Interestingly, MacDonald mentions the 1240 Paris incident where the Christian church charged that Jewish religious writings contained anti-Christian statements, and as evidence the usual suspects were cited:  the Talmud, the Mishnah, and Rashi’s commentary on the Talmud. In their defence the Jews claimed that any negative reference to Christians was not intended because such was meant for the ancient Egyptians and Canaanites.

“The trial resulted in the conviction of the Talmud on all charges, and as a result twenty-four cartloads of the Talmud were burned.” P. 254

Interestingly how Australia’s Jew, Jeremy Jones, responded in court when Mrs Olga Scully cross-examined him on specific passages from the Talmud. Defence counsel Stephen Rothman attempted to block this by claiming that Mrs Scully did not have a proper Talmud with her in court. Unfortunately this tactic failed and Mrs Scully specifically asked Jones to comment on a passage that states it is in order to have sex with a girl three years and one month. Jones claimed that this is not what is meant by the quotation; rather it means that should such a thing have happened to a woman when she was young, then that should not have any consequences upon her marrying as an adult.

During the Inquisition period the Diaspora Hispanic-Portuguese Jewish community developed a large body of apologetic religious writings that aimed to refute Christianity, and replace it with more virtuous Judaism, in the form of the ‘light unto the nations’ theme.

The Enlightenment and its consequences saw Judaism again having to grapple with what gentile intellectuals were producing. For example German philosopher, Immanuel Kant, dismissed Judaism as a religion. In 1793 he wrote in Religion within the Limits of Reason:

“[Judaism] is really not a religion at all but merely a union of a number of people who, since they belonged to a particular stock, formed themselves into a commonwealth under purely political laws, and not into a church; nay, it was intended to be merely an earthly state so that, were it possibly to be dismembered through adverse circumstances, there would still remain to it (as part of its very essence) the political faith in its eventual reestablishment.” Quoted by MacDonald at p. 257.

MacDonald comments:

“… Jewish reformers quickly too up the intellectual challenge of rationalizing Judaism within this intellectual context. The result was a new emphasis among the reformers on purely religious faith as the moral basis of Judaism. Sermons and intellectual defences of Judaism now focused not on the minutiae of ceremonial law or on the eventual reestablishment of a Jewish political entity, but on ideals of virtuous behaviour. ‘Thus, instead of being the religion of no morality – as Kant defined it – the Reformers sought to present Judaism as the religion most exclusively concerned with morality, and hence most worthy of the future; (Meyer 1968). Because of the critical importance of morality, there was an attempt to reinterpret passages from Jewish religious writings that represented a doubtful morality – a project which is of continuing interest in the modern world.” P. 257.

German philosopher GFW Hegel (born in Stuttgart!)  within his idealistic philosophy regarded Judaism as an anachronism. For Hegel the historical progress of the human spirit, the mind , was paramount, and if applied to religion, then Christianity was more developed than Judaism. Jewish writers could not tolerate such demotion and contended that Christianity and Islam are the agents of Judaism who help lead humans to spiritual perfection: MacDonald comments:

“As with many other attempts to rationalize Judaism throughout the ages, this rationalization is a variation of the “light of all nations” theme originating in antiquity.” p. 258

MacDonald continues his analysis of Jewish “history as apologia” and refers to trends that are currently pursued by Jewish apologists, for example the claim that Judaism’s essence is universalistic morality, something the Zionists are also doing. but not for any general human altruism but rather to advance specific Jewish causes.

“Strong personal statements reflecting deep emotional attachment to Judaism are frequently found in the historiography of Judaism written by Jews. Books often begin with emotionally charged dedications to victims of anti-Semitism, especially the Holocaust …to show that the author stands in a morally privileged relationship with the subject matter …Abraham has been accused of deceiving his readers in his use (and fabrication)  of sources in an effort to show that elite gentile businessmen had a decisive role in undermining the Weimar Republic and facilitating the rise of National Socialism.” P. 263

Likewise, Jewish interpretation of history is central to its ideology, and it would not surprise me, as some Revisionists have predicted, that suddenly the whole ‘Holocaust’ issue is dropped because it has outlasted its usefulness. Then the usual Jewish authorities would be trotted out, such as the 1996 Dwork/van Pelt book Auschwitz: From 1270 to the present. It would prove that Krema I had been de-commissioned by Jews telling the truth about the homicidal gas chamber claims.

The opening sentence in MacDonald’s conclusion to this paragraph sums up the matter under consideration:

“The material reviewed here is highly consistent with the general point that Jewish ideology is highly malleable. Jewish intellectuals have been able to opportunistically develop ideological structures that serve immediate needs for rationalizing or disguising behaviour within the Jewish community or among gentiles. When new philosophies or scientific theories of human behaviour or history are developed, Jewish thinkers have been able quickly to develop theories in which the fundamentals of Judaism are preserved and Jewish interests are achieved while being reinterpreted in the context of the new paradigms.” P. 273

In an Appendix MacDonald then follows on with a detailed discussion of HISTORY AND APOLOGIA IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE EVENTS SURROUNDING THE IBERIAN INQUISITION.

 

Chapter 8: Self-Deception as an Aspect of Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy

Although I disagree with Kevin MacDonald’s use of the concept ‘antisemitism’ that he capitalises as ‘anti-Semitism’, it does serve the purpose of clarifying a contentious and somewhat troubling classification: Who is a Jew?  MacDonald’s group evolutionary strategy of Judaism ties together the common tendency to fracture Judaism into its various components - into an exaggerated diversity - which obfuscates the issues that need to be addressed. His analysis is thus timely because to this day

“self-deception regarding personal identity continues as an aspect of contemporary civil Judaism, where it functions to reconcile a strong Jewish ethnic identity with membership in the broader social context of contemporary Western individualist societies.” p. 303.

The opening sentence of this chapter could not state it more clearly:

“It was Jewish historiography with its strong polemical and apologetic bias that undertook to trace the record of Jew-hatred in Christian history, while it was left to the anti-Semites to trace an intellectually not too dissimilar record from ancient Jewish authorities. When this Jewish tradition of an often violent antagonism to Christians and Gentiles came to light “the general Jewish public was not only outraged but genuinely astonished.”

MacDonald took the above statement from Hannah Arendt’s 1968 book The Origins of Totalitarianis. It illustrates the need Jews have for group identification, and self-deception plays a large part in their make-up because “things never are what they seem because they cannot be.” This is a quote from a writer who references the 4th century text of Leviticus Rabbah. This seems to me much like the mindset of the homicidal gas chamber libellers when they claim something is because it could not be otherwise on account of it having happened – end of story. 

MacDonald finds that

“the most important example of self-deceptive Jewish religious ideology, reiterated as a theme of Jewish self-conceptions begins in the ancient world, is the view that Judaism is an ethically superior, altruistic group and is therefore morally obligated to continue as a cohesive, genetically segregated group purely for the ethical purpose of providing a shining example to the rest of humanity.” p. 299 

He then raises the issue of the Zionists’ awareness of such mental fabrications of their coreligionists, and of the apologetic nature of Jewish historiography, especially that of the diaspora Jews. The prime example of the latter is the almost assimilated Jews in Germany before World War Two:

“They accepted the ideology that Judaism was nothing more than a religion despite the fact that most of them had no religious beliefs and many had developed ‘Jewish feeling which no longer had anything to do with religion’... the image of being submerged in completely ‘German ’activities coexisted with the reality of engaging in activities that only Jews engaged in, and also taking great pride in Jewish accomplishments, Jewish suffering, and in a Jewish history that was very different from German history. They took great pride in their invention of monotheism (sic) and in the concept that Christianity was the ‘daughter religion’ of Judaism – and ideology that clearly places Judaism in a superior role vis-à-vis Christianity.” P.300.

An example of current self-deception among Jewish historians is clearly pointed out. When writing about the contribution Jews made to pre-World War Two German culture, G Scholem, in his On Jews and Judaism in Crisis: Selected Essays, 1965, MacDonald says:

“Put together, the passages imply that Jews sought the love of the Germans via their contributions to culture despite the fact that a prominent feature of this cultural contribution was to subject German culture to intensive criticism and despite the fact that this critical sense provoked German hostility. At the same time, Jews failed to critically analyse their own role vis-à-vis German culture. It makes no sense to suppose that Jews actually sought the love of the Germans while simultaneously subjecting the loved one to intensive criticism and failing to critically examine why they were doing so. Failure to see the contradiction in his own analysis is self-deception.” P. 302.

And the problem of deception is still writ large in today’s world when it concerns the over-representation of Jews in, for example, American society at large, such as the media-Hollywood and in economic success generally, which is not beneficial to non-Jewish society. Hence there is the tendency to downplay – deception - such disproportional success because the fear of antisemitism is ever present. And now we know that any Jewish contribution to a gentile society always contains that element of separateness, hence the reason why Jewish power and influence remains a taboo topic and cannot be discussed, and everything is done to suppress airing of such views as ‘illusory’. This suppression then becomes “a potent source of anti-Semitism since the Enlightenment … failure even to mention these considerations may be interpreted as another example of self-deception.” P.307.

Another example of deception/self-deception comes from England about the Jewish vote, something one did not talk about because it was denied such existed. However, Jews then discussed how best to influence Jewish voting behaviour on issues important for Jews.  While on the political bandwagon of deception/self-deception, MacDonald does raise that old controversy about the extent of Jewish involvement in the Bolshevik movement because denialism surrounds this issue as it portrays Jews as radicals, from which ‘assimilated’ Jews wish to distance themselves.

 

Chapter 9: Is Diaspora Judaism Ceasing to Be an Evolutionary Strategy?

MacDonald surmises that according to historical data the ‘ever-dying people’ in contemporary Western societies - Judaism - may have abandoned the 'group evolutionary strategy'. As separatism is the hallmark of any group evolutionary strategy, then any genetic integration of Jews with gentiles would indicate such demise. Research indicates that there is none of that among the Orthodox and Conservative Jews.

However, in the case of diaspora Judaism there is some concern because intermarriage rates cause some Jews to ring the alarm bells, “Jewish leaders described the findings as indicative of another Holocaust. Their response was to divert funds to Jewish education, and there were proposals to fly every child to Israel.” P. 319.

The problem of conversion remains unsettled because the progressive side of Judaism accepts such as valid while the conservatives reject such as not fulfilling the definition of who is a Jew.

MacDonald uses the model of ‘concentric circles of commitment to Judaism’ as developed by D J Elazar, in Community and Polity: Organizational Dynamics of American Jewry, 1980, where a committed cor group acts as a magnet to a less committed outer group.  In data from the late 1970s it appears that only 5-8 percent live as full-time Jews “in a religious and/or ethnic nationalist sense”. This is followed by 10-12 percent labelled “Participants”, i.e. those “employed in the ‘Jewish civil service’; 30-35 percent  are affiliated with Jewish institutions only.  There are the 25-30 percent who are classed as ‘Contributors and Consumers’ who occasionally make contributions to Jewish causes ‘”for personal milestones’. Then comes the group of ‘Peripherals and the Repudiators’. P 323.

The universal application of this model to any other group would also be instructive. For example, the Revisionists make up such a group – but of individuals and not a collective – where Arthur Butz, Robert Faurisson, Ernst Zündel, Germar Rudolf, Jürgen Graf, and others - make up the core.  I shall, however, not continue with this diversion because where would I have to place myself? Should I begin to use deception and self-deception as we saw in 8 above? We may then again get into a senseless rivalry match where individuals label others as lightweight-heavyweight, etc.; it is the typical human in-fighting that the above concentric circle of commitment illustrates. It’s the competitive strain where jostling for top-dog status saps one of productive energy.  It is all talk and no action politics because the quiet achievers always produce the goods that continually re-focus Revisionist endeavours on the fundamentals of our mission. One such fundamental prerequisite consists of the courage to say: Yes, there were no homicidal gassings, and to date no-one has shown or drawn the murder weapon. Why not?

There are other factors that influence group cohesion. For example, Jewish identification and assimilation can be influenced by perceived threats whereby the inner and outer circle would both become more committed to Judaism.  Revisionists know the role played by the old 'Holocaust' threat whereby Jews are either in a 'Holocaust', expecting a 'Holocaust', or just coming out of a 'Holocaust'.

Then there is the resurgence of Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox Jewish fundamentalism that may “result in a schism of the Jewish people along lines of racial purity”. P.324

The Jewish/gentile group distinction may well in the future become blurred through intermarriage, as suggested by social identity theory. I wonder if the Jews for Jesus group is fulfilling such a function. But such dilution of the Jewish gene pool by Reform Judaism is also vehemently resisted by Orthodox Jews, and problems occur because converts are not considered to be real Jews. This rejection of converts may weaken the outer ring of Judaism but it certainly strengthens the inner hard core.

MacDonald concludes that diaspora Judaism is alive and well because gentile society has been broken down to their benefit. Policies of ethnic and religious pluralism serves both internal (within-group) and external (between-group) Jewish interests because in this way Jewish interests are openly pursued.  He implies that what is good for the Jews is not good for the gentiles, for Western Man:

“The transformation of Western societies into ethnically and culturally pluralistic entities is well under way. This transformation will mark the end of peculiar Western form of social organization of muted individualism and hiearchial harmony in the context of ethnic and cultural homogeneity.” P.332

A recent article from the Jean Raspail the author of The Camp of the Saints spells out such concerns. It appeared on 17 June 2004 in Le Figaro www.lefigaro.fr/debats/ and was translated by Peter Wakefield Sault sault@cyberware.co.uk

What is it to be French today?

BY JEAN RASPAIL*

I circled around this topic like a dog handler in the presence of a parcel bomb. It is difficult to approach it directly without having it explode in one's face. There is danger of civilian death. It is, however, the main line of investigation. I hesitated. Especially as in 1973, by publishing The Camp of the Saints, I had already said it all. I do not have a great deal to add except to say that the deed is done.

Because I am convinced that the fate of France is sealed, because "My house is their house" (Mitterand), inside "Europe whose  roots are as much Muslim as Christian" (Chirac), because the situation is moving irreversibly towards the final swing in 2050  which will see French stock amounting to only half the population of the country, the remainder comprising Africans, Moors  and Asians of all sorts from the inexhaustible reserve of the Third World, predominantly Islamic, understood to be fundamentalist Jihadists, this dance is only the beginning.

France is not the only concern. All of Europe marches to its death. The warnings are precise - the UN report (which delighted  some), incontrovertible work by Jean-Claude Chesnais and Jaques Dupachier, in particular - yet they are systematically buried  and the National Institute for Demographic Studies [INED] pushes disinformation. The almost sepulchral silence of the media, governments and community institutions on the demographic crash of the European Union is one of the more striking phenomena of our time. When there is a birth in my family or in the homes of my friends, I cannot look at this baby of our house without reflecting upon that which prepares itself for him in the negligent governments and what he must confront in his manhood...

Without taking into account that those of French stock, bludgeoned by the throbbing tom-tom of human rights, of "the welcome  to the outsider", of the "sharing" dear to our bishops etc., framed by a whole repressive arsenal of laws known as  "antiracist", conditioned from early childhood with cultural and behavioural "crossbreeding", with the requirements of  "plural France" and with all the by-products of old Christian charity, will no longer have any other means but to lower their  children and to merge without kids into the new mould French "citizen" of 2050. All the same let us not despair. Without  doubt, there will remain what is called in ethnology some isolates, some powerful minorities, perhaps about 15 million French  - and not necessarily all of the white race - who will still speak our language more or less unbroken and will insist on  remaining impregnated with our culture and our history such as was transmitted to us from generation to generation. It will not be easy for them.

Facing the various "communities" which one sees being formed today on the ruins of integration (or rather on its progressive reversal: it is us whom one integrates into "the other", now, and more the opposite) and which in 2050 will be permanently and without doubt institutionally installed, it will be to some extent - I seek a suitable term - about a community of French continuity.  This one will be based on its families, her birth-rate, its endogamy of survival, its schools, its parallel  networks of solidarity, perhaps even its geographical areas, its portions of territory, its districts, even its places of  safety and, why not, its Christian, and catholic faith with a small chance if this cement still holds.

That will not please. The clash will take place some time or another. Something like the elimination of the Kulaks by suitable legal means. And then?

Then France will no longer be peopled, all confused origins, except by hermit crabs who will live in shells left behind by  the representatives of a species gone forever which was called the French species and unannounced, by one does not know which  genetic metamorphosis, that which in second half of this century will have been clothed with this name.  This process has already started.

There is one second hypothesis that I could not formulate otherwise than privately and which would require that I consulted  my lawyer beforehand, it is that the last isolates resist until initiating a kind of reconquest undoubtedly different from  the Spanish but taking as its starting point the same reasons. This will be a perilous story to write about. It is not me who will be charged with this, as I have already done my bit. Its author has probably not yet been born, but this book will see the light of day at the appointed time, I am sure...

What I cannot understand and which plunges me into an abyss of sorry perplexity, is why and how so many informed Frenchmen and so many French politicians contribute knowingly, methodically, I don't dare to say cynically, with the certain immolation of France (let us avoid the qualifier of eternal which disgusts the beautiful consciences) on the altar of an aggravated utopian humanism.  I ask myself the same question in connection with all these omnipresent associations of rights to this, rights to that, and all these leagues, these societies of thought [think tanks? - PWS], these subsidized headquarters, these  networks of manipulators insinuated into all the wheels of State (political education, judiciary, parties, trade unions,  etc), these innumerable petitioners, these correctly consensual media and all these "clever" folks who day after day and with  impunity inoculate their anaesthetic substance into the still healthy body of the French nation.

Even if I can, at a pinch, credit them on the one hand with sincerity, it sometimes saddens me to admit that they are my countrymen. I feel the sting of the renegade word, but there is another explanation: they confuse France with the Republic.  "Republican values" have deteriorated ad infinitum, one knows it fully, but never with reference to France. However France is from the outset a country of [common] blood. On the other hand, the Republic, which is only one shape of government, is synonymous for them with ideology, ideology with a capital "I", the major ideology. It seems to me, to some extent, that they betray the first for the second.

Among the flood of references which I accumulate in thick files in support of this assessment, here is one which under the [deceptive] appearance of a good child illuminates the extent of the damage well. It is drawn from a speech by Laurent  Fabius to the socialist congress of Dijon, 17th May 2003: "When the Marianne [statue of Liberty] on our town halls takes the  beautiful face of a young immigrant Frenchwoman, this day France will have crossed a line while bringing alive fully the  values of the Republic..."

Since we are [left] with quotations, here are two, to conclude: "No amount of atomic bombs will be able to dam up the tidal  wave comprising human beings in their millions which one day will leave the southernmost and poor part of the world, to  irrupt the relatively open spaces of the wealthy northern hemisphere, in search of survival."  (President Boumediene, March  1974.)

And this one, drawn from the 20th chapter of 'Revelations': "The thousand years is expired. Those are what departs the nations which are at the four corners of the Earth and which are equal in number to the sand of the sea.  They will go forth in expedition across the surface the Earth, they will surround the camp of the saints and the beloved city." [This appears to be an inaccurate quotation - PWS]

* Writer, novelist.

(1) "The delicate Imam of Vénissieux, in accordance with jus soli [the right to nationality by place of birth], has engendered only sixteen small French citizens."

 

Conclusion

Anyone who still remains in awe of, or is puzzled by, or feels hatred towards Jews has failed to understand MacDonald's message in this book. It is ignorance and superstition of Jewish behaviour that fuels fear and hatred of Jews. MacDonald clearly reveals that the group evolutionary strategies employed by Jews ensure their own survival. That a clash between the Jew-Gentile world is inevitable is a given fact, and that the concept 'anti-Semitism' plays a crucial role in Jews gaining supremacy over the non-Jewish world, is also a fact. The implication is that the non-Jewish world needs to spruce up and get its act together, and likewise look after its own interests if it does not wish to be subverted by the Jewish worldview, the new world order!

Kevin MacDonald is a thorough scholar, something that is evident in his Notes that follow each chapter. Therein further examples and illustrations of points are given so that anything raised within the chapter is exhaustively treated.

The book's  Bibliography is impressive. Eight major primary sources are mentioned, including both Babylonian and Palestinian Talmud. Over 840 secondary books and articles were consulted, and a brief glance through this list indicates the breadth and depth of scholarship that MacDonald then synthesized into his book. I am reminded of the philosophical encyclopedia that the former German Democratic Republic (DDR-GDR) published during the early 1970s. It was a two-volumed work celebrating Marxist philosophy. At the same time the Federal Republic of Germany (BRD-FRG) began issuing a definitive philosophical encyclopedia that contained over eight volumes. The former Marxist thinkers simply subsume everything under the 'Marxist scientific viewpoint', and that was a sad reductionist-mutated viewpoint, which failed to take account of all inclusive human intellectual endeavours. The Jewish use of 'antisemitism' as a concept that explains every opposition to things Jewish, is such reductionist viewpoint. Little do some Jews realize that their worldview is for most non-Jews simply too restrictive, too narrow, too limiting intellectually because the creative impulse has no home within such a moral and intellectual worldview.

MacDonald even mentions Richard Wagner’s  Das Judentum in der Musik. Wagner described Jewish speech as "creaking, squeaking, buzzing snuffle", and Wagner found that Jews do not participate in their host culture's Volksgeist. This inability of the Jews failing to identify with their surroundings prevents them from developing their own artistic spirit, something that makes Jews perpetual outsiders. Wagner's vision of a community where the Volksgeist rules, and not the Jews, is expressed in the following:

"...the particular atmosphere which my Lohengrin should produce is that here we see before us an ancient German kingdom in its finest, most ideal aspect ... Here is no despotic pomp with its bodyguards pushing back the people to make way for the high nobility. Simple boys make up the escort for the young woman, and to them everyone yields gladly and quite voluntarily." p 169.  

This picture of a Volksgeist in action is quite in contrast to what we see today masquerading as democracy where so-called politicians, claiming to represent the people, are wearing flack jackets, etc. because they fear their own people. Now we know this is so because there is an artificial divide between the rulers and the ruled.

Definitive works can be expected to exhaust their subject matter, something not easily achieved when the topic is philosophy. Professor Kevin MacDonald certainly has achieved exhaustion level in this book, though as he indicates in his Preface to the First Paperback Edition, via his website he continues to publish and update themes and issues that remain alive, and of which there are many.

All in all, Professor Kevin MacDonald has delivered the goods, just as the title of his book suggests he would. And Revisionists will realize that the topic of 'Holocaust' Revisionism is just another one of those Jewish self-deceptions, scams if you like, which will in time quietly be dropped from the Jewish evolutionary group strategy.

Germar Rudolf has anticipated this and in 2003 he published Don Heddesheimer's The First Holocaust. Jewish Fundraising Campaigns With Holocaust Claims During And After World War One

It is appropriate that I end this review of

MacDonald's Separation And Its Discontents

by quoting Germar Rudolf's summary of  the Heddesheimer book:

 

"We all know that the suffering and death of Six Million Jews during the Second World War was an event unparalleled in world history. But do we really? The First Holocaust is an extremely irritating book because it proves us all wrong. Supported by many publications from mainstream US media, in particular The New York Times, Don Heddesheimer provides the evidence to show that between 1916 and the late 1920s, mainly American Jewish organizations were claiming that up to six million Jews (!) would suffer terribly in poverty-stricken Eastern Europe. In this context, it was claimed that eastern European Jewry would face a Holocaust if it did not receive massive aid. With such claims, millions of dollars were raised in the United States, which were partly used to finance the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. This book is a key to understanding the much more successful Holocaust propaganda which was unleashed during World War II.

Ref.:  chp@vho.org 

www.vho.org/store

 

 

 

As an item of interest, here is poet

Ezra Pound’s 15 March 1942 broadcast

that led him to be tried as a traitor, then certified insane after the war.

The enemy is Das Leihkapital. Your Enemy is Das Leihkapital, international, wandering Loan Capital. Your enemy is not Germany, your enemy is money on loan. And it would be better for you to be infected with typhus, and dysentery, and Bright's disease, than to be infected with this blindness which prevents you from understanding HOW you are undermined, how you are ruined.

The big Jew is so bound up with this Leihkapital that no one is able to unscramble that omelet. It would be better for you to retire to Darbyshire and defy New Jerusalem, better for you to retire to Gloucester and find one spot that is England than to go on fighting for Jewry and ignoring the process.

It is an outrage that any clean lad from the country - I suppose there are STILL a few ENGLISH lads from the country - it is an outrage that any nice young man from the suburbs should be expected to die for Victor Sassoon, it is an outrage that any drunken footman's byblow should be asked to die for Sassoon.

As to your Empire, it was not all of it won by clean fighting. But however you got it, you did for a time more or less justify keeping it, on the ground that you exported good government or better government than the natives would have had without England.

You let in the Jew and the Jew rotted your empire, and you yourselves out-jewed the Jew. Your allies in your victimized holdings are the bunyah, you stand for NOTHING but usury.

And above metal usury; you have built up bank usury, 60% against 30 and 40%, and by that you WILL NOT be saved. Corrupting the whole earth, you have lost yourselves to yourselves.

And the big Jew has rotted EVERY nation he has wormed into. A millstone. Well, an exceptionally good swimmer MIGHT conceivably be cast into the sea with a stone tied round his neck. He might perhaps untie it. If he were a Scotchman, he would remember his jackknife, before being thrown overboard.

You seem to remember NOTHING. It were better you were infected with typhus. As to federal union, or JEW-nion. There is NO question of race in Streit's proposition. It is as proposed a union of slaves, under jewry. Offered by liars and abettors of thieves.

You have stolen land from your late Allies, and land slips from your control. The ONLY conquests of Britain and Rosenfeld are conquests FROM their alleged allies.

All right, say that Franklin Delany swipes ALL South America - to what end? And ruin the United States of America while he is doing it. What's that to you? It is not England's salvation. Will you ever LOOK at the story of empire? You are NOT even in the mercantile system, you are in a fake mercantile system, not even mercantile. It was for a time called mercantile or the mercantilist system and defined as considering the happiness of a nation to consist in the amount of MONEY it owned, and its process to consist in STEALING, welching, pouching the greatest possible amount of same (i.e., of money) from other nations.

That defines the USURY system, the ONLY system Anglo Saxons have known or used in our time.

And it will not save you. NOR will Judaized Russia. Nor will the Kahal, the Jew's central committee of bleeders. WHAT is their system?

Unvarying, cheap goods, sweated out of cheap labor, dung dust hurled on the world, the WORLD conceived as sweat shop, to hell with the 8-hour day, down with abundance. DUMPING sweated goods, dumped against any and every nation that pays a just price for labor. That is your ALLY.

And in your past a trail of blood and of infamy. You bought Hessians to kill your own blood in America. You bought 'em from a stinking feudal overlord, who was in the hands of the ROTHSCHILD; that is HISTORY. You stirred up the American savages against your own kin IN America. But now Eden and Cripps have called in the Muscovite, to bum and destroy all Eastern Europe, and kill Finland, for the sake of the stinking Jews nickel mines.

Your infamy is bound up with Judaea. You can not touch a sore or a shame in your empire but you find a Mond, a Sassoon, or a Goldsmid. YOU HAVE NO RACE left in your government.

God knows if it can be found still scattered in England.

IT must be found scattered in England. The white remnants of England, the white remnant of the races of England must be FOUND and find means to cohere; otherwise, you might as well lie down in your grave yards.

You have for years had cheap goods DUMPED in from Russia. Your alliance with Moscow will bring no relief to that wound. Your Jews have ruined your home manufactures. Loans from the city of London, loans to the Orient, interest paid in cheap cotton goods, loans to the South American countries, interest paid in beef from the Argentine, and ruin of English grazing. The laws of durable government have been known from the days of King Wen. When empires go to ROT, they go to rot for known reasons.

The Times, Telegraph, Manchester Guardian, are there to conceal these reasons. Your press is an infamy, has been throughout our time.

The laws of durable government have been known from the days of King Wen, and when the Roman Empire perished it perished from the same follies that your kikes, your Rothschilds, Beits, Sieffs, Schiffs, and Goldsmids have squirted into your veins.

Cheap grain dumped from Egypt, ruin of the Italian farming, usury, and more usury, THAT is the answer.

For two centuries, ever since the brute Cromwell brought 'em back into England, the kikes have sucked out your vitals. A mild penetration, for a hundred years they have bootlicked your nobility and now where is your nobility? You had at least the semblance of control; you had, let us say, some influence with the Lords of Judaea as long as they WANTED your titles, as long as Levy Levinstein Lawson WANTED to be addressed as Lord Burnham. You could turn the worst edge of their avarice, or rather you could turn it OFF, the upper or huppar clawses; and turn it ONTO the peer. As you did without mercy.

But when the same scroungers have moved over to New York City, how will you manage 'em? The same bloody minded extortioners, or their descendents. The same FINANCIAL HOUSES. The same Rothschilds who plotted with Sherman, and Vandergould to KILL the American nation, who betrayed the United States in the "sixties". Head office in London, agents in the U.S. of America.

Now the address is altered. Main office in Wall Street and Cohen in London. You send Willie over to spy on us. You send 5000 usurers'  pimps over to Washington and give special passports, diplomatic, to inveigle the United States into your plans to get cannon fodder from Idaho and from Iowa to weld your slaves cellar on Europe. And this time you get dumped into the ash can.

You have even forgotten your Kipling. Pig Baldwin has forgotten his cousin; if his obscene and treacherous mind ever grasped the meaning of Rudyard's stories. Let me recall one passage to the sow face:

"The Americans," wrote Rudyard, "obligingly slaughtered each other in order that the Czechoslovaks might inherit Boston Common." Cras tibi, tomorrow is your turn. Damn it all, you slaughtered the flower of England in the Boer War. Then in 1914 in the first three months, the best of you went out and got slaughtered.

 . . .been seen only too clearly. And your foul papers, the filth of your newsprint has been subsidized to keep your minds off it.

A dirty bit of meat by the name of Gollancz has used your book trade to conceal it. You have almost NO means of communication.

When a Brooks Adams writes five volumes that would help you to see it, six copies reach England. You have LOST the health of the mind. God knows how the scattered handful of Englishmen still in England can still speak one with another.

I see NO remedy in your parliament. I don't mean as parliament. I mean in the personnel. It is your problem. You do not NOW even elect your own parliament. Whether WITH an election you could get anything save old dead meat, I do not know. During the last war a few men had a glimmer of instinct. On whatever formula, they called it pacifism. Was it? All of 'em I ever met were pugnacious. Was it an instinct to save the butt end of the RACE by not fighting? Is it a mistake to combat Germans by force?

Is there a RACE left in England? Has it ANY will left to survive? You can carry slaughter to Ireland. Will that save you? I doubt it. Nothing can save you, save a purge. Nothing can save you, save an affirmation that you are English.

Whore Belisha is NOT. Isaccs is not. No Sassoon is an Englishman, racially. No Rothschild is English, no Strakosch is English, no Roosevelt is English, no Baruch, Morgenthau, Cohen, Lehman, Warburg, Kuhn, Khan, Baruch, Schiff, Sieff, or Solomon was ever yet born Anglo-Saxon.

And it is for this filth that you fight. It is for this filth that you have murdered your empire, and it is this filth that elects your politicians.

You have lost your tradition. You have not even learned what Lord Byron told you. You are, as even that foul rag the Times tells you, a little late in making a start.

In the year 1942 Anno Domini, there is only one start you can make. And that is a start toward being England. A refusal to be a province of Israel, or an outpost of Yankee-Judaea.

Quando tutti saremo forti.

 

Next

 

The Culture Of Critique

An Evolutionary Analysis Of Jewish Involvement In Twentieth-Century Intellectual And Political Movements

 

 

 

Top of Page | Home Page

©-free 2004 Adelaide Institute