Translate

Nov 8, 2010

Kevin MacDonald

 

This essay was written in the winter of 2007-2008:

http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/blog-Weissberg-Weiss.htm

Peace.
Michael Santomauro
@ 917-974-6367

What sort of TRUTH is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth?

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Dr. Robert Weissberg - Relationship Between Blacks and Jews

 

Check out this video on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbkC1LN7xy8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Peace.
Michael Santomauro
@ 917-974-6367

What sort of TRUTH is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth?

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.


Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.


Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.

.

__,_._,___

Outside the Jewish Mainstream: Robert Weissberg

 

Kevin MacDonald Blog




Outside the Jewish Mainstream: Robert Weissberg and Philip Weiss

Robert Weissberg is something of unconventional Jew. An emeritus political scientist at the University of Illinois, he has written articles for American Renaissance, Jared Taylor's publication, and he has spoken at their conferences. His 1999 AmRen article, "In Defense of the Racial Spoils System," argued that because of the intractable cognitive difference between blacks and whites and the propensity of blacks to resort to violence unless they are provided middle class jobs and a constant stream of government benefits, whites have in effect decided to keep the peace by appeasing them. "Most whites, even those dispensing the benefits, understand that this is little more than extortion but they say nothing. Blacks, by contrast, see it all as legitimate 'racial fairness.'"  The racial spoils system, then, is a form of taxation — the price whites pay to keep the peace.

And in a talk to an AmRen conference, Weissberg stated that in his personal experience Jews had a private fear and dislike of blacks because they perceived them as violent and inept. Jews are the first to move away when blacks move into a neighborhood, and they do not socialize or intermarry with blacks. However, they supported black causes—indeed, they were the backbone of the civil rights movement—because of an even greater fear of white anti-Semitism — a view that is at least partly compatible withmine. He also predicted that more Jews would become white nationalists, but only if white nationalism is free of anti-Semitism. In a news report on an AmRen conference, "Weissberg said that while he likes some folks at the conferences and loathes others, he keeps coming because he finds the open discussion of race so rare and refreshing." I guess the idea is that Jews and whites should let bygones be bygones in the event that whites eventually develop an identity and a sense of having interests that conflict with other groups.

But, according a recent comment, the real problem that whites have in establishing an identity is that "our side lacks a sufficient number of loud, obnoxious Jews willing to intimidate those who deny reality."

I spent most of my life in a research university setting where one argued with hard evidence — this study versus that study, my data versus your data, on so on.

When I recently moved to Manhattan, I was amazed at how one "won" arguments. I was equally amazed about how little so-called smart people knew, especially about race. But to listen to the smart alecks talk, they clearly think they have a true grasp on the subject. …

Those who perceive themselves as debate winners reject real science to instead offer a bag of verbal tricks and over the top emotional appeals. If all else fails, they try to destroy tangible evidence by claiming to "be offended" by the truth.

Sadly, these bullying techniques are all very "Jewish". And I say this as a Jew of good standing.

There are a lot of things going on here, but one of them surely is that Weissberg is accepting the "Jews are aggressive" stereotype that has been on my mind quite a bit too (see also here).

Jewish aggressiveness is also much on display in a recent column by Philip Weiss. I first came across Weiss when he wrote a gutsy article for New York Magazine (January 29):25–32, 1996) entitled "Letting go." These were my comments on it in a chapter on Jewish self-deception:

Philip Weiss (1996) created a considerable stir when he acknowledged the unreality of the Jewish self-conception as an outsider and several other self-delusionary aspects of being Jewish in late 20th-century America. … Being Jewish is highly salient to him and strains his relationships with gentiles. He pictures his gentile Yale classmates as "blond and slightly dull witted, while the Jewish professor spews out brilliant lines. . . . We held them [gentiles] in a certain contempt. But we were marginalized. We were the outsiders. I've carried those lessons around with me all my life as I've made my own steady progress in the world. . . . Feelings of marginalization have informed my journalism, my humor, my social navigations" …. (Even the aggressively ethnocentric Alan Dershowitz is quoted by Weiss as saying, "There is in our tradition, understandably but tragically, an anti-Gentile bias that we must root out.") Indeed, his relationships with gentiles are strained by his "relentlessly defensive Jewish identification," another way of saying that he is unable to relate to gentiles without invoking … ingroup/outgroup comparisons … .

Jews cherish feelings of exclusion not just because there is wisdom in foreboding but because these feelings are useful. They preserve our position as outsiders, a status that has certain moral and practical advantages. As an outsider you have motivation: to get in. And you get to be demanding without any particular sense of reciprocity: the ADL (which is committed to fighting all forms of bigotry) running its Geiger counter over the goyim while failing to gauge Jewish racism. Perhaps most important, these feelings solidify Jewish identity. (p. 30)

Jews have . . . prevaricated about the question of Jewish influence — whether we have it, how we gain it, what it means. . . . When the NRA exercises political power, it's a hot-button issue. When Jewish money plays a part, discussing it is anti-Semitic. (p. 32)

I couldn't agree more. And Weiss adds to the accusation of a Jewish double standard on concerns about racial purity by noting that many of his family's closest friends emigrated to Israel in order to prevent the marriage of their children to non-Jews.

Which reminds me that the original motivation of many of the early Zionists was that Israel would ensure racial purity. For example, all of the fin-de-si├Ęcle Zionist racial scientists studied by John M. Efron, including Elias Auerbach, Aron Sandler, Felix Theilhaber, and Ignaz Zollschan, were motivated by a perceived need to end Jewish intermarriage and preserve Jewish racial purity. For Auerbach, Zionism would return Jews "back into the position they enjoyed before the nineteenth century — politically autonomous, culturally whole, and racially pure."

In his recent blog, Weiss expands on his point about Jews-as-outsiders. Jews have become an elite, but an elite that does not identify with its subjects — a hostile, estranged but very wealthy elite that still sees themselves as outsiders.

The Republican Party is now losing the money race to the Democratic Party … and meantime the Washington Post reported some years ago that more than half of Democratic presidential giving is coming from Jews, while Steve Rabinowitz, Clinton friend, told me this year that if anyone did a study of how much Dem money comes from Jews, it would fuel conspiracy theories.  … Obviously Jewish wealth is playing a huge part in U.S. politics and foreign policy. My theory is that the strength of the Israel lobby is a reflection of class and economic power in American life. … But because Jews still think of themselves as outsiders, there's nothing like the "noblesse-oblige" ethos which characterized the WASP ascendancy of the previous 200 years. The WASPs resigned. Mutilated by the Vietnam War and sensitive to the criticism of their caste as exclusive and snobbish and racist, they calmly decamped and left the scene. Joseph Epstein wrote that there has never been a sociological surrender like that one, without a shot being fired, in history. I'm hoping for a sociological capitulation on my people's part, a return to other values. Yes we are the kings of the information age. But look how disfiguring it is.  

Jews won the culture war without a shot being fired and without the losing side seeming to realize that it was a war with real winners and real losers — where the losers have not only given up their cultural preeminence, but have failed to stand up to the ultimate denouement: demographic displacement from lands they had controlled for centuries. The new elite retains its outsider feelings toward their new subjects — a hostile elite in the United States as it was in the Soviet Union.

Unlike Weissberg, then, Weiss seems to feel a twinge of guilt about the role of Jews as victors in the culture war — guilt stemming from his understanding that the new elite has some very glaring moral failings of its own, including its own brand of ethnocentrism that seems far deeper than anything imagined by the WASPs.   

The danger for Jews is that non-Jews will come to realize the deep wellsprings of Jewish ethnocentrism and see Jewish involvement in the displacement of European-descended peoples as resulting from ethnic conflict over the construction of culture. Ultimately, Europeans may come to realize that the conflict is really about the ethnic displacement of themselves as a people.

Speaking for myself, it would be difficult for me not to have developed something of a sense of my peoplehood after delving into the 2000-year history of Jews who were intensely concerned about preserving their people and their culture. As I've come to realize, preserving one's people and culture is a virtual human universal. No one would contend that, say, Koreans have a moral obligation to allow millions of other peoples into Korea so that what we would call ethnic Koreans become a minority and their culture would be up for grabs. Certainly, the idea that Israel is a Jewish state is central to its entire self-concept — so much so that the idea that the Palestinians who were basically expelled in 1948 be allowed to return to create a multi-ethnic, pluralistic society is a political impossibility. The idea that European-descended peoples have no right to preserve their peoples and cultures while others do is a glaring double standard.

The fact is that the US did have a sense of being a European, Christian society until very recently. Christianity was an uncontested part of public culture until large-scale Jewish immigration in the early 20th century. The immigration laws were biased in favor of Europeans until 1965 until the long Jewish campaign to change them was successful. Such laws were no different from exactly what Israel continues to do with the strong support of the organized American Jewish community. Nevertheless, my research shows that the organized American Jewish community has led the campaign to make assertions of white identity and interests illegitimate. I see that as hypocritical.


--

Being happy–is it good for the Jews? "Before Professor Dershowitz accused me of being an anti-Semite (news to me), I was a happy person. Since then, I'm still a happy person". –Michael Santomauro

An antisemite condemns people for being Jews, I am not an antisemite.--Michael Santomauro

Most of us are mentally trapped to think Jewish. Actually, it is safe to say that virtually every mainstream publication or or other type of media organ is "nothing more than a screen to present chosen views." The great battle over the last century has been a battle for the mind of the Western peoples, i.e., non-Jewish Euros. The chosen won it by acquiring control over essentially the complete mainstream news, information, education and entertainment media of every type, and using that control to infuse and disseminate their message, agenda and worldview, their way of thinking, or rather the way they want us to think. Since at least the 1960s this campaign has been effectively complete. Since then they have shaped and controlled the minds of all but a seeming few of us in varying degree with almost no opposition or competition from any alternative worldview. So now most of us are mentally trapped in the box the chosen have made for us, which we have lived in all our lives. Only a few have managed to avoid it or escape it, or to even sometimes see outside of it, and so actually "think outside of the (Jewish) box." --Michael Santomauro

Thank you and remember: 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Deconstructing doubletalk in the "Holocaust denial” debate on campus

 



Deconstructing doubletalk in the "Holocaust denial" debate on campus

"Academic Freedom and Holocaust Denial Newspeak" 

A Talk by Michael Hoffman

available for viewing on YouTube:

Hoffman analyzes the thoughtless acceptance of the Newspeak "Holocaust denial" phrase as a universal description of dissenters who dare to question Allied and Zionist dogma. He points to the hypocrisy of approved "holocaust denial " by Zionist professors who deny the 1945 Allied holocaust in Dresden, Germany or the Israeli genocide in Gaza — "denials" which are not a subject of academic controversy or media reproach and do not threaten the university employment or credentials of the deniers. 

In the course of this talk, Hoffman confronts Prof. Cary Nelson's arguments in the Nov. 7, 2010 issue of "The Chronicle of Higher Education," about the "Holocaust" and "Holocaust denial" as it applies to the case of Prof. Kaukab Siddique of Pennsylvania's Lincoln University.

Hoffman is the author of "The Great Holocaust Trial: The Landmark Battle for the Right to Doubt the West's Most Sacred Relic" (forthcoming from Independent History and Research, December, 2010). He is a pioneer in the study of the psychology and epistemology of Newspeak as applied to public perception of World War II historiography. 

Websites:
http://www.RevisionistHistory.org
http://talmudical.blogspot.com
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com

Books by Hoffman:
"The Great Holocaust Trial"
"Judaism Discovered"
"Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare"
"The Israeli Holocaust Against the Palestinians"


LETTER TO THE EDITOR | Nov. 8, 2010
The Chronicle of Higher Education

To the Editor

Cary Nelson's claims ("Does Academic Freedom Protect Holocaust Deniers? It Depends on the Context," Nov. 7), fall by the wayside when we consider that Prof. Nelson unthinkingly accepts and employs the highly partisan and distorting "Holocaust denial" neologism, which has seeped into the language of discourse concerning the vast history of World War II.

"Holocaust denial" Newspeak is limited to protecting one account of history. This is its defect and its function. The doyen in this field is Prof. Deborah Lipstadt, herself a denier of the Allied holocaust against the city of Dresden, Germany (cf. Forward, Feb. 18, 2005). Of course no one would dream of questioning Prof. Lipstadt's academic rights on the basis of her denial of the Dresden holocaust. 

Prof. Nelson states, "...faculty members cannot stand before a class and announce that the Nazis did not kill six million Jews..." 

Why is it that Prof. Lipstadt can drastically lower the number of Germans incinerated in Dresden without fear of interdiction of any kind? How is it that she has the freedom to question German history and deny German casualty figures, while the rest of us mere mortals may not question Allied and Judaic history and casualty figures, including the "six million"? Prof. Nelson believes that one of the evils attendant on questioning the "Holocaust" is that it "denies people their history and obliterates the fate of their relatives..." Yet Prof. Lipstadt is somehow righteously endowed with this right of "denial" and "obliteration"? Why has American academia consented to a two-tier caste that empowers radical questions about certain historical claims and not others? 

Let me anticipate a common rejoinder that is a product of the distorting prism of "Holocaust" Newspeak -- that "denying the Holocaust" is tantamount to denying the American Civil War. The analogy is compelling only if one accepts that skepticism toward specific assertions about World War II, such as "six million dead Jews" or the existence of mass execution gas chambers in Auschwitz, is tantamount to "denying" that World War II happened.

I realize that Prof. Nelson is considered a liberal on the subject of academic freedom, but I believe this is a perception based more on the extremism of his opponents, rather than Nelson's own views, which are actually reactionary to a considerable degree. For example, the medieval ecclesiastical principle held that "error has no rights." Can anyone be a liberal and espouse this standard? Nelson writes, "Siddique maintains that, in promoting Holocaust denial, he is simply speaking for the 'other side' of the issue. But there is no credible 'other side."  As in medieval times, so too now: there is only one "credible" truth. 

In 1200 A.D. there was no other truth but the truth of the transubstantiated presence of Jesus Christ in the bread consecrated by the priest during the Mass. In 2010 A.D. there is no other truth but extermination by homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau, during the "Holocaust." Nelson is absolutely certain that heretics who have the audacity to doubt this gas chamber dogma are "promoting...hate speech....No respectable historian advocates Holocaust denial." First, no self-respecting independent revisionist thinker subscribes to or ascribes the "Holocaust denier" epithet to himself. Second, any historian who asks forbidden questions about the history of World War II automatically forfeits "respectability." Nelson ought to know this since he is party to demarcating several narrow apertures through which historians on university faculties must filter their research if they wish to retain their employment and, consequently their "respectability."
 
Like the imperial rights of the Israelis in Palestine, it seems that academics like Deborah Lipstadt have imperial "denial" prerogatives which others do not possess. With regard to revisionist historian Mark Weber, Prof. Nelson invokes white supremacy, an easy target.  Has Nelson ever dared to consider the role of Judaic supremacy as a fundamental determinant in the matter at hand? How is that a professor who denies the genocidal bombings of Palestinians in Gaza or the Allied holocaust in Dresden is free to pursue his agenda without fear of "merit(ing) a university warning that he has put himself at risk"?  

The test of any code of law is its universality. By this criterion, even Cary Nelson's "liberal" standards of "academic freedom" are unfair and unethical.
  
Michael Hoffman
Box 849  
Coeur d'Alene Idaho 83816 USA


(We have received no acknowledgement from The Chronicle of Higher Education [letters@chronicle.com] concerning the receipt or disposition of the preceding letter).

_____________________________
 __________________________________




-- 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

International Conference on Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial

 



headder







Our first responses to:
  • "The International Conference on Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial" to
    take place in Dublin in November.

  • Blog Notes by Smith treating with the CODOH Campus Campaign at UC San Diego, UC Irving, UC Los Angeles, and Trinity College in Dublin.

  • Carolyn Yeager's "Appeal to Students at Boston University

  • Jett Rucker's "Elie Wiesel: The Silence of the Sham."

  • Kevin kather's August 2010 Trial in Germany

  • A Message from Vincent Reynouard regarding Freedom of Expression.

  • "Danger, danger" where Smith tells you probably more than you want to know about his health issues, but. . . .

Ruairi Quinn

Ruairi Quinn



International Conference on Anti-Semitism
and Holocaust Denial

On 09 October Greg Allen emailed me a link to a news story about a conference to be held at Trinity College, University of Dublin, on 18-19 November. The event is called "International Conference on Anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial." It's sponsored by the Task Force For International Cooperation On Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research (HETI). HETI describes itself, accurately, as a conglomerate of representatives of government, and governmental and non-governmental organizations. Its purpose: to place political and social leaders' support behind the need for Holocaust education, remembrance, and research both nationally and internationally.(READ MORE)

Donate
Blog
Video

codoh codoh founder inconvenienthistory


Smith's Report #176

Problems or Questions

Telephone: (209) 682-5327
Email: bradley1930@yahoo.com

To donate using Check or M.O.
Bradley Smith
PO Box 439016
San Ysidro CA 92143

PDF


--

Being happy–is it good for the Jews? "Before Professor Dershowitz accused me of being an anti-Semite (news to me), I was a happy person. Since then, I'm still a happy person". –Michael Santomauro

An antisemite condemns people for being Jews, I am not an antisemite.--Michael Santomauro

Most of us are mentally trapped to think Jewish. Actually, it is safe to say that virtually every mainstream publication or or other type of media organ is "nothing more than a screen to present chosen views." The great battle over the last century has been a battle for the mind of the Western peoples, i.e., non-Jewish Euros. The chosen won it by acquiring control over essentially the complete mainstream news, information, education and entertainment media of every type, and using that control to infuse and disseminate their message, agenda and worldview, their way of thinking, or rather the way they want us to think. Since at least the 1960s this campaign has been effectively complete. Since then they have shaped and controlled the minds of all but a seeming few of us in varying degree with almost no opposition or competition from any alternative worldview. So now most of us are mentally trapped in the box the chosen have made for us, which we have lived in all our lives. Only a few have managed to avoid it or escape it, or to even sometimes see outside of it, and so actually "think outside of the (Jewish) box." --Michael Santomauro

Thank you and remember: 

Peace is patriotic!

Michael Santomauro
253 W. 72nd Street
New York, NY 10023

Call anytime: 917-974-6367

E-mail me anything:
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.


Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.


Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.

.

__,_._,___

Gypsie Enterprise | The Occidental Observer - White Identity, Interests, and Culture

 

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/11/gypsie-enterprise/

Peace.
Michael Santomauro
@ 917-974-6367

What sort of TRUTH is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth?

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___