May 8, 2008 | 9:07 am
I do not think Jews are living in 1938 Germany. But it really has seemed lately liked I’ve transitioned to the anti-Semitism beat. Besides posting several items on the topic during the past few days, I spent last night at UC Irvine, listening to a speech from Norman Finkelstein, who has certainly been called an anti-Semite, and that followed two weeks of researching and writing a profile of Kevin MacDonald, a psychology professor at Cal State Long Beach whose books have been compared to “Mein Kampf.“
In the above video, which is 41 minutes long, MacDonald appears on the TV program “Current Issues,“ hosted by Palestinian American Hesham Tillawi. The focus of their conversation is the negative influence and clannish behavior of Jews. At the 17-minute mark, MacDonald describes his opinions, detailed in a three-volume series and subsequent essays that can be found at kevinmacdonald.net, as “rational” anti-Semitism.
MacDonald once served as an expert witness for Holocaust-denier David Irving, and many of his theories of Judaism as a “group evolutionary strategy” are controversial. The least palatable are that Judaism has a built in eugenics program—the study of Talmud, which, he claims, stemmed the reproduction of dumber members of the Tribe—and that anti-Semitism, even Nazism, were gentile responses to Jewish success.
He’s been on the faculty of Cal State Long Beach 23 years now, having achieved full tenure in 1994. But the university is under increasing pressure from some of MacDonald’s colleagues and outside organizations to denounce his writings, which, obviously, have very little to do with child psychology and, to his credit, have been kept out of the classroom.
Under the headline, “The Professor Anti-Semites Love,“ MacDonald carries this week’s cover for The Jewish Journal. It’s a long profile—from his childhood in Oshkosh to the origins of his research to the contents of his books and the battle against him—so I’ll just mention now the biggest problem MacDonald has had: his anti-Semitic admirers.
As a warning, there will be some very vulgar language from someone who would like to see the fulfillment of the Final Solution:
In the second of two recent interviews, MacDonald said he is not a fan of anti-Semitism. But he also described his opinions on a Palestinian American TV news program in 2005 as “rational anti-Semitism” and has joked that being branded a Jew hater was a “badge of honor,“ the knee-jerk reaction of a scared Jewish establishment.
The chief concern over MacDonald’s writings about Jews is directed at his fan base: white supremacists like Stormfront.org and Vanguard News Network—whose motto is “No Jews. Just Right.“ The members of these online communities have become his loudest defenders, often in language that is as offensive as possible.
“So the goddam Kikes are getting their way yet again, putting the thumbscrews to a White scholar whose ass they are not worthy to lick…. At least this oppression proves that Prof. MacDonald’s great work is hitting the scum hard,“ a Vanguard commenter wrote in February below a republished story about MacDonald from CSULB’s student paper.
“How much more of this humiliation is our race going to take? How long before this motherf—-ing plague of repulsive, hook-snouted ticks is given a real Zyklon fumigation, as opposed to the fairy tale one?“
MacDonald repudiated such rhetoric as “crazy stuff” but said he supports the ideology behind it.
“White people have legitimate ethnic interests. To the extent that that is all they believe, then we are on the same page,“ he said. “I don’t like to use words like white supremacists. You could say that Koreans in Korea are Korean supremacists if they want to maintain their culture. It is kind of a loaded word; it is a politically charged word of the left, basically, to pathologize any sense of having an ethnicity and culture by people like me. I reject that.“
“I certainly reject the tactics and the rhetoric of these people. It’s very crude,“ MacDonald added. “But to the extent that David Duke is trying to advance a white ethnic interest and so on, I don’t have any problem with that.“
I’ll post later about the basis for MacDonald’s research, which rests on an assumption of “Jewish Genius.“
Posted by Brad A. Greenberg in Book Bits | Jewish genius | Multimedia | 5 Comments — Leave your comment
We welcome your feedback.
Your information will not be shared or sold without your consent. Get all the details.
Advertisement
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
Parshat Vayechi (Genesis 47:28-50:26) God is constantly evolving, constantly becoming, and so should we.
Brad A. Greenberg reports from today's pro-Israel rally outside the Federal Building in Westwood.
What else explains the collective amnesia on display?
Nu, so where is Daphna Ziman when you need her? I guess too busy cynically manipulating the emotions of the Jewish community for Hillary while getting her nails done and making appointments for more botox injections.
Readers interested in a reasonably detailed assessment of the fraudulent scholarship that informs MacDonald’s research may be interested in this:
http://www.people.hbs.edu/dlieberman/lieberman.jewsRaceEmpire.pdf
David Lieberman
It is so amazing the interviewer cannot deal with the fact that McDonald views us as an ethnic group. He wants to compare Jews to Islam, Christianity and Boodyism - his words not mine.
So McD is not as good for Palestinian/Muslim antisemites as he is for white supremacists.
What is your take Brad?
I think that is an accurate assessment, Rabbi Yonah.
As for how MacDonald sees individual Jews, I’m not sure.
I didn’t feel like he was sizing me up, or that he had judged me before I met him (though he later told me he feared the article would be a hatchet job and was glad it wasn’t). MacDonald told me his criticisms were of organizational Jewry, not of individual Jews. In fact, he said, he still had some Jewish friends, though increasingly less.
When I mentioned this to a gentile friend, he was skeptical:
“Seems like his critics tend to think his work just repackages long held prejudices toward Jews. Leads one to think he reached his conclusion long before he checked the results of his research—i.e. he held beliefs about Jews and set out to find evidence to prove those beliefs correct, often (according to his critics) ignoring evidence to the contrary. Could he have held beliefs about Jewish establishment without having related beliefs about individual Jews? Possible, I suppose, but I tend to doubt it. That would take some serious compartmentalizing.“
Interesting… Let’s leave the word “anti-Semitism” out of this completely. Also, let’s get beyond ourselves and admit that many Zionists are, in fact Christians.
Now I ask: Why is it perfectly acceptable for Jews to remain an exclusive, hypocritical culture, which perpetually fabricates laughable, yet effective diversions from their massive control think-tanks, consisting entirely of Jewish self-interests?
Think about it… The U.S. has influential Jews on both sides of the ticket, but they all show unconditional support for Israel. Even when they are the aggressors! Even when they take an immoral position! Unfortunately, many Americans have been duped into taking this position.
(God forbid the Muslims are ever seen as victims.)
In the media, The liberal Jews will mock the Bush administration, even though they are the beneficiaries of the administration’s pro-Israeli actions.
Bill Maher is a classic example of Jewish two-faced ridiculousness.
Jews rant about anti-Americanism, while the only reason they claim to be patriots is because America is forced to be a Zionists
The entertainment industry (the Round Table of the Jews) is the ultimate example of Zionist brainwashing.
Motion pictures (the parables of the Jews) uses manipulative tactics to create new generations of pro-Jewish youth armies…
And, although not all the players in Hollywood are Jews, they are quite submissive to their employers’ views on foreign policy and social values. Plus, many true instances reveal that there’s always a Jew in the content control dept. FACT.
Jews are always painted as the ultimate victim. And occasionally allow blacks (who have actually suffered a sincerely visible oppression) to come in second-place on the victim ballot. I have personally known a few extremely racist Jewish individuals. However, if I were to pen a screenplay including this FACT and present it to Hollywood, the racist would undoubtedly be transformed into an Italian-American, or maybe a WASP.
Screenplays smugly force-feeds caricatures of socially-acceptable ethnic groups, with the obligatory self-denigrating Jew routine (to deflect criticisms.)
Another example is the overemphasized presence of the ‘Italian as bad guy’ formula (in hope to cover or at least diminish the deliberately invisible Jewish crime factor and erase it’s memory forever.)
Hollywood is truly where the ‘psychoanalysis’ brilliance comes into play.
Furthermore, I can give many concrete examples of Jews marrying Christians, only to confuse the child’s religious identity, ultimately creating yet another atheist Zionist.
Now: “Anti-Semitism” is a term used to label both legitimate Jewish-haters, but more deviantly, people who Jews don’t trust to help THEM. (Once again, it becomes all about Jews.)
Obviously, these points should not be used to judge individual Jewish citizens, but as a powerhouse, they certainly hold a bad track record for sincerity and fairness.
Separation is the best solution.