Apollonian
07-15-2007, 08:13 AM
David Duke debunked by race-realist Chris Brand.'Mein Kampf' for Louisiana:
a review of My Awakening.
CHRIS BRAND, EDINBURGH, U.K.
In Louisiana, the controversial Republican politician, David Duke, has stuck up for IQ against multiculturalism and the White guilt complex. Now he hopes to run for the US Congress on a platform of "education, scholarship and economic self-sufficiency" for Whites. Surprisingly, he forgets that Blacks could do with the same. Duke wants to blame Jews for multiculturalism, and this obsession is a stumbling block for him; but he could still reach a position of race-realistic neoliberalism that would help Blacks and Whites alike.
"[A]mong themselves, [Jews] are inflexibly honest and ever ready to show compassion, though they regard the rest of mankind with all the hatred of enemies. They sit apart at meals, they sleep apart..."
TACITUS (c. 55-120).
"Only 3% of Americans are Jewish, but 27% of American Nobel Laureates have been Jewish (Zuckerman, 1977, Scientific Elite)."
Hans EYSENCK, 1995, Genius: the Natural History of Creativity. Cambridge University Press.
"[According to G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936), Jews] were intent on cornering as much of the world's wealth as possible through an international conspiracy at the same time as being involved in an international Bolshevik conspiracy intent on confiscating as much of the world's wealth as possible."
Gerald KAUFMAN, M.P., Queensman and UK Privy Counsellor, 1998, Times Higher, 2 i 98.
"In deference to the racial principle, even Jews who reject religion support the religious-racial superstructure of their people. Other Jewish strategies can be summarized as follows: they have stressed education and prized scholarship; they have actively encouraged the most intelligent and successful of their race to have the largest families; they have kept alive their history, traditions, culture and values; while they have worked together as a team for their objectives in the Gentile community, they have stressed individual responsibility; they have stressed the importance of the family unit; they speak against intermarriage and elevate genetic purity as one of their highest values (members of the Jewish Priest class are only the purest of Jews, i.e. they are forbidden to marry converts or their descendants); successful and powerful Jews are extremely generous to Jewish causes and never reluctant to use their power on behalf of their own people. All these traits are admirable, and in the multicultural societies we live in we can learn from these successful moral strategies. Of course, the reason why a Jewish problem exists comes from the fact that they inflict on their host peoples an opposite morality to their own. ….they support group loyalty and solidarity among Jews, but individualism and universalism among Gentiles; ….they orchestrate open immigration into Western nations, but rigidly restrict immigration to Israel only to Jews."
David DUKE, 1998, My Awakening. Covington, LA : Free Speech Press.
"I will describe Jewish efforts to shape United States Immigration policy in opposition to the interests of the peoples of non-Jewish European descent, particularly the peoples of Northern and Western Europe. ….An important thesis is that all of these movements may be seen as attempts to alter Western societies in a manner which would neutralize or end anti-Semitism and provide for Jewish group continuity either in an overt or in a semi-cryptic manner. At a theoretical level, these movements are viewed as the outcome of the fact that Jews and gentiles have different interests in the construction of culture and in various public policy issues (e.g., immigration policy)."
Kevin MacDONALD, 1998, Summary of A People that Shall Dwell Alone. At [url]http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/books.htm[/url].
For the last ten years, the London School of psychology has faced a time of trial and needed all the help it could find. As the world's leading differential psychologists have been able to publish their main works only with mail order houses, a question has been whether anyone from outside academia would help keep alive serious and informed discussion of race, IQ and the political implications of human differences.
Plainly, the Pioneer Fund- and American Enterprise Institute-supported work that went into the Bell Curve (1994) produced a growth industry of critical (indeed, almost wholly critical) discussion; but that open-minded book actually made no definite claims about the strength, heritability or race-linkage of the g factor, and its agenda was a tired anti-welfare Reaganism that was hardly enlivened by reverie about lost rural utopias embodying community spirit. Anyhow, even if government policy wonks were said to rate The Bell, its impact on the universities was slight. No more has serious debate resulted from the maintenance by the determined Roger Pearson of his anthropological journal, Mankind Quarterly. Although this journal carried by far the most news of the travails of Phil Rushton, Raymond Cattell, Linda Gottfredson and the present author, its effort has frankly had no detectable impact. Merely to be willing to consider the hereditarian case about IQ has been to invite neglect if not accusations of 'racism.'
The publication of My Awakening is therefore important. Here is a big, popularly written book by the elected Louisiana legislator, David Duke -- a handsome, dashing, daring and likeable 48-year-old Republican (though one who has challenged other Republicans in his time). (The artifices of plastic surgery may have preserved a youthful look, but childhood photos suggest the dare-devil and fan of Tom Sawyer that the text describes.) With lively visual aids, tables, referencing and extensive use of apt quotation, Duke -- who has for some years maintained a responsible and useful website about race and IQ -- provides a rousing characterization of Caucasian attainments (the chapter on Duke's visit to Greece is a high spot). Fired by the opposition he has countered over the years (including nights in jail on arrest) as he has pursued his lifelong belief in the importance of genetic factors (growing up as the son of an Army father and an alcoholic mother), Duke has no doubt of the dead weight being tied to Western culture by egalitarianism, welfarism and multiculturalism; and he has a definite agenda -- wanting nothing less than a "revolution", i.e. "an Aryan awakening."
Yes: there is the problem with this book. While Duke supplies in his first 200 pages slices from his history and a very reasonable coverage of race and IQ , the reader can see looming ahead not only 250 pages on 'The Jewish Question' but further instalments such as 'The Klan Rises' and 'The Grand Dragon and the Jewish Psyche.' Duke provides a popular and more politicized version of Kevin MacDonald's academic theorizing about the Jews (in A People that Shall Dwell Alone). For better or worse, this book is going to be judged by its 'anti-Semitism.'
This is a process of scrutiny for which this book is better prepared than many such. If the lack of hostility to, or rudeness about Jews were not itself sufficient, the other parts of the book provide adequate testimony that Duke is no embittered paranoid or frothing fundamentalist. Indeed, Duke had a Jewish great-uncle, insists his father admired 'the Hebrews', and only learned his own anti-Semitism along the way once he had already become active in opposing Black welfare-politicking in New Orleans. Admittedly, Duke does little to distance himself from the illiberal version of Christian morality that has lately appealed to US Republicans and made the latter a laughing stock in the civilized world as they tried to bring down the US President for a blowjob. And there is no serious sex in the book -- though Duke's first wife was quite a looker. Yet there is nothing that requires Duke to be dismissed as illiterate, inadequate, psychopathic or psychotic. His arguments on 'the Jewish question' thus have as fair a chance of success as one can imagine without the book being written by a tenured academician or an ex-Rabbi.
Duke's argument is essentially double-barrelled. Unexceptionably, Duke sees no need for any multiculturalist weakening of White society -- especially in view of the low inherited average IQs of the Black people who have usually been envisaged as the main beneficiaries of affirmative action and welfarism in the USA. At the same time, Duke sees the driving force behind Western egalitarianism and 'anti-racism' as being none other than the Jews -- who have apparently had a pretty good twentieth century and are eagerly looking forward, in their secret cabals, to the eventual destruction of Christianity and of the White race itself (except perhaps as underlings to themselves). Thus, inevitably -- without any serious consideration of how happy a Jewish-led world might actually be -- Duke wishes a resurgence of White pride before it is too late. Admirably, Duke seems to have little subjective animus against Jews (he does not even mention anything Jews are poor at, like poetry1); and he avoids illiberal proposals as to what might be done about 'the Jewish question.' However, since critics will doubtless dismiss his posture as one of thinly veiled 'crypto'-fascism, it is important to examine what may be called his cognitive semitophobia and its political ramifications.
Duke's special idea is that the forces for equality, underdog-support and jobs in the welfare empire that culminate today in 'political correctness' (PC) are in effect just the latest means by which the Jewish race is making its bid for world hegemony. Effectively, Duke uses four main lines of evidence. (i) There are plenty of snatches from the Talmud which would be hard to match in official Christian writings: 'Only Jews are human', 'Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed', 'Gentiles prefer sex with cows' are just some of the suggestions that Jewish leaders have chosen to transmit in their 'literature' from one generation to another. (ii) Jews were massively over-represented in the early Russian Communist leadership -- even Lenin having a Jewish grandfather, and all six of the top organizers of the Russian Gulags -- the greatest killing machine in world history -- having been Jewish (according to Solzhenitsyn). (iii) The media of the modern USA is largely Jewish-dominated: a half of Hollywood's film producers are Jewish (like the two most discussed film directors of recent months, Steven Spielberg and the late Stanley Kubrick); and the major opinion-forming organs, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Time, Newsweek, U.S. News and World Report and Atlantic Monthly are all in the hands of Jewish owners, editors or both. (iv) The great Jewish creation of the twentieth century, the state of Israel has been an authoritarian, racist and conspiratorial venture which has even required the USA to conceal from its own citizens the numbers of its servicemen killed by Israeli actions at times when US Middle East policy was not sufficiently obliging.
Spelled out at length, as they are by Duke, all four lines of evidence are thought-provoking. They may impress readers who have never previously entertained the idea that competition in the modern world involves anything more than the social classes or the sexes. Yet to what does Duke's evidence really testify? Religious and racial groups -- just like scientists and philosophers as individuals -- all believe they have a superior command of the truth and that they are entitled to a firm grip on their locality's politics. So what is new? (After all, if a religion did not think itself superior and hope for a big influence on mankind, why would its followers not give up and join another show?)
More especially, is over-involvement in business and politics surprising in a group that research shows to have the highest mean IQ of any long-running racial group on earth?2 Few would doubt what psychometric studies have also tended to testify: that Jews have particular talents with 'verbal' rather than with 'performance' tasks. Not for nothing are Jews the world's most literate people, the acknowledged source of the world's two most successful world-wide religions in recent centuries (Christianity and Islam), and the originators of the current Western sexual code (monogamy + court-supervised divorce).
The over-involvement of Jewish intellectuals in revolutionary and welfarist politics was triggered by the pogroms of late-nineteenth-century eastern Europe which even saw all Jews banished from Moscow in 1890. {The enthusiasm of young Jews for Bolshevism in Hungary of around 1920 is attested by István Deák (1999, New York Review of Books, 8 iv) and by David Cesarani (1998, Arthur Koestler, London:Heineman). For a wider-ranging summary of Jewish Bolshevism, see [url]http://www.hoffman-info.com/communist.html:[/url] apparently Stalin had a Jewish mistress, the sister of his Jewish chief executioner, Lazar Moiseyevich Kaganovich.} Yet it is well-matched by the over-involvement of Jewish brainpower after 1945 in support for right-wing versions of freedom in economics. (As the Jewish joke has it: 'How many Jews does it take to start an argument? -- Two.') Writing from the USA, where Jews long tried to make common cause with Blacks, Duke forgets that Mrs Thatcher's trail-blazing, free-market and union-busting Cabinets in the UK positively over-represented Jewish talent. (Indeed, Thatcherism itself was really the creation of the Jewish academic, Sir Keith Joseph -- just as British imperialism owed much to the converted Jew, Benjamin Disraeli.3) Sadly, Duke makes no effort to survey the modern world of ideas and to recognize the contributions made by Jewish intellectuals like Sir Isaiah Berlin, Milton Friedman, Arthur Koestler, Sidney Hook, Melvin Lasky and Sir Karl Popper to sustaining a West in which there is liberty, stable currency and an appreciation that scientific truth is not merely 'relative.' As Duke's book was coming out, the US Jewish magazine Commentary sought and published from the present Gentile reviewer an account of the de-publication of The g Factor by a frightened Gentile publisher, Wiley Inc.; and the very un-Jewish film 'Shakespeare in Love' was winning all the Oscar nominations. Nor have Jewish people seemed any more united than the Irish, the Afghanistanis or the Kurds in the way in which they have approached their twentieth-century problems. Israel, in particular, always seems on the brink of religious versus secular civil war -- such is the enthusiastic expression of diverse and dogmatic viewpoints that makes that imperilled country's half a century of law-governed democracy a remarkable achievement.4 Jewish music exemplifed the contrast of approaches as the agonized and forward-looking music of Gustav Mahler rivalled the light, sentimental and conventionally popular work of Jacques Offenbach. Altogether, the three towering Jewish giants of twentieth century thought, Marx, Freud and Einstein, say it all: despite their understandable pro-Semitism, their collective politics can hardly be considered more than mildly left-of-centre -- especially since radicals today accuse Freud of individualism and sexism, and Marx of racism.
None of this is to say that the Jews have not taken risks -- and paid heavy prices -- this century. To have fought well for Germany and brought down the Russian Czar in time of war understandably gave the Jews of 1917 a surge of confidence. As Europe's nation states bankrupted themselves fighting each other, the Jews seized the chance of their own homeland by at once helping a desperate Britain and 'stabbing in the back' the Germany that had been kinder to them than had any other European country: in return for Britain's Balfour Declaration on Palestine, they used their financial influence and knowledge of the extramarital sex life of US Naval Secretary of State Franklin Roosevelt5 to persuade America into the First World War. Sixteen years later, Jewish financiers chose to respond to Nazi provocations by declaring international trade war on Germany when Hitler was made Chancellor. So confident were they of success that less affluent Jews failed to make the necessary escape from the land to which the Jewish leadership plainly felt no loyalty.
Still, very few in the West appreciated the scale of the slaughter that would follow the end of the Nazi-Soviet pact between the world's two great socialist powers -- a slaughter in which each side's purging itself of the 'useless' and possibly treacherous played a major part. Moreover, Jewish demands were no different from those of any other group led in the spirit of those times to pursue 'nationhood' -- as desired by the idealistic organizer of the 1918 settlement, Woodrow Wilson. Merely, the Jews' predicament was worse: long the commercial intermediaries in the covert business affairs of aristocratic Christian governments (even profiting massively by predicting Wellington's victory at Waterloo, according to Duke6), the Jews found themselves with less of a role as government became more open; and they had no territory of their own on which to fall back as nationalism became the rage. After nineteen centuries of Christian complaints that they had 'murdered Christ'7, it was hardly surprising that the Jews should have some anti-Gentile sentiments in their holy books -- though Duke's findings of such passages do not extend any nearer the present than 1935.8 Nor can the Jews be blamed for embracing 'media studies.' Indeed, this seems another example of their good intelligence. After all, the press has become, with the full consent of other Westerners, the modern 'lower house' of most constitutions. (It is in the press that matters are argued out quickly and brutally before being handed on to those unduly sober bodies, the modern parliaments.) Duke's compilation of evidence on the US media certainly helps explain why the American press is so boring (despite employing the world's wittiest columnists). 'Responsible' intellectuals in Britain, too, would like the embarrassing Argie-, Frog- and Kraut-bashing Sun newspaper suppressed if they could arrange it. Yet Duke fails to prove a truly censorious Jewish stranglehold on the media. Most recently, it was a Gentile firm, St Martin's [Macmillan] that declined to publish David Irving's Holocaust revisionism; and another such, HarperCollins, that would not let the last Governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten, have his say about Red China.
In all this there are, additionally, seven real peculiarities in Duke's argumentation.
1. Like many on the political 'far right', one of Duke's main beefs is against immigration to the USA. Yet voluntary migrants are normally some 8 IQ points higher than the populations from which they come, so arguably make a real contribution -- as early-and-late-opening Pakistani shopkeepers have done in Britain. (The mirror image of Duke's odd complaint is the support for immigration often found among those who profess sympathy for ethnic minorities. In fact, Afro-Americans must have suffered considerably by being displaced from the labour market by the USA's recent surge in immigration from south and central America.)
2. Duke's claim that the Chosen People are on the verge of race supremacy is surprising when massive intermarriage with Gentiles has characterized such Jewish heartlands as New York and Johannesburg.9
3. It is peculiar that Duke cannot put his finger on any tricks by which Judaism has advanced in modern times. -- Duke does not even consider the advantages of male circumcision in bringing greater orgasmic satisfaction to wives (though in truth this argument is today more between the Americans and the largely uncircumcised men of the British Commonwealth than between Gentiles and Jews). Duke claims Jews long controlled the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (founded in 1909 by twelve Jews and a mulatto); but he provides little modern detail and he is strangely incurious about the active commitments of the "Marxist Jews" who have led IQ-bashing [Stephen Jay Gould, Leon Kamin, Richard Lewontin, Steven Rose] and, more generally, the PC movement.
4. It is odd that Duke ignores the major contributions to race-and-IQ realism made by such Jewish (or partly Jewish) scholars as Hans Eysenck, Nathaniel Weyl, Richard Herrnstein and Michael Levin; and the recent anti-'constructivist' coup by physicist Alan Sokal. Of course, this omission may reflect Duke's larger problems: after all, his semitophobia contradicts his IQ-ophilia; and he must abjure any eugenic future requiring the abortions that many of today's Republicans wish to criminalize. Still, it is odd for Duke to ignore Jews who have made leading contributions to meritocratic, race-realistic and liberal thinking about how to cope with the problems of low IQ and shameless pseudo-philosophical relativism.
5. Duke neglects the one big weakness that might be said to exist for any 'Jewish programme' for racial hegemony. Simply, having a race-based religion as the Hebrews do, there has always been a big difficulty in universalizing its many excellent principles so as to attract wider support -- a problem over which St Paul broke with the early Christians like St Peter. Kevin MacDonald has tried to make a virtue of Jewish race purity and clannishness; but it was thus the Jews found themselves finally spurned by Rome -- whose emperors often admired Jewish family life but could never prevail upon Romans to adopt it and so went in for Pauline Christianity instead (thus winning slave support). Still worse for the Jews, as Pauline Christianity's grip eventually slackened in the West, the similarly universal ideals of liberty, equality and democracy proved widely acceptable. None of these allows an easy place for elite minorities. Indeed, the Jews were the first large-scale victims of democracy -- the French aristocracy having been the first. And they have suffered more than most under equality as states in the English-speaking world have declined to fund elite schools and have insisted that elite universities be open to entrants having modest educational attainments. Arguably, in PC, the Jews have now found a principle -- indeed, almost a new religion -- that can instate them securely as trusted managers of the new American imperium. Yet President Clinton's neosocialism of the 1990's has still to be seriously tested against a neoliberalism that will demand the opening up of state processes to choice -- just as the 1980's increasingly saw the economy finally being left alone by socialist politicians to produce its golden eggs. Altogether, it is far from clear that Judaism possesses any clearcut formula for success.
6. The PC movement not only puts into relief that historic problem of the Jews which Duke neglects. It further makes a sixth peculiarity of Duke's book very clear. Beyond being no sufficient cause of socialism and kindred egalitarianism, Jews are not even necessary to such movements. Socialism has never been a particularly Jewish affair in welfare-state Britain (now of 6% non-European descent); nor in Sweden (where high taxation, bureaucracy and state snooping are a legend). Already, in 1999, Duke's view of a Jewish-dominated coalition of minorities looks strange as US Blacks, European Muslims and many leftists show no readiness to venerate Judaism -- and certainly not Zionism. But PC's arrival, supported as it presently is by women, ethnic minorities, homosexuals and the handicapped, is a reminder that Duke is at once right and wrong on two key matters. As Duke says, the West could easily be undermined in its core values -- not to mention its competitive efficiency -- by the arrival of PC which might insist on bringing biological evolution to a halt just when the new eugenics is enabling evolution to be speeded up. Yet such undermining of Western civilization would hardly require any Jewish conspiracy. As in the French Revolution -- which occurred in a country that had banished most of its Jews to then-liberal Prussia -- Whites can think up tyrannical and murderous egalitarian schemes without much help from Jews at all. Duke is correct in seeing dangers in a molly-coddling of society's lower ranks that can only undermine initiative and responsibility and create a nation of welfare-dependents whose men dare not have sex for fear of charges of date rape; but his idea that socialism and PC derive from Jewry is wide of the mark. Jews did not provide the impetus towards 'gay pride', 'lesbian anger' or women who do not marry (and are increasingly unmarriageable). In this reviewer's own case of being condemned in Edinburgh for 'racism', 'elitism' and 'chauvinism', the two leading attackers were both Protestant theologians -- the Principal and the Chaplain of the University.
7. Lastly, at the heart of Duke's problem there is a strange lack of race realism. Duke is good at seeing the joke that a coherent race and culture, that of Israel, should help champion multiculturalist PC for others. Blacks, in particular, seem so unappreciative and are ill-suited to the wheezes of academic education with which sinecured do-gooders would like to supply them. Yet Duke fails to consider what could have been a more reasonable strategy for Jewry; and why the White West should be so prone to run itself down or at least to feel a sense of noblesse oblige in relation to weaker groups. The truth is that any well-placed group in the social hierarchy of a race or nation will always need to engage in a certain amount of hierarchy-maintenance. Otherwise it will risk the overthrow of itself or even of the whole system of which it is a part. Today, the West has developed a meritocracy which -- not least because of democratic constraints -- needs to be 'sold' to the lower ranks. This is especially so since, unlike in previous liberal societies, those at the bottom of the modern West are not going to find it easy to rise -- unless the benefits of genetic engineering come to be applied chiefly to their own children. Whether the lower-IQ and new migrants sucked in by shortages of menial labour are to be offered cash in the hand, breeding prospects, genetic engineering prospects, state sector sinecures or just bread and circuses is the question. It is short-sighted to blame the Jews for egalitarian-seeming strategies which Gentiles have no trouble thinking up and adopting on their own, and which anyhow require proper consideration and evaluation.
The question for the West is whether a future can be found that involves not only productive free markets and the reward structure of unequal incomes but a reduction in irresponsible breeding, welfare dependency, useless officialdom, censorious depublishing and wasted investment; and an increase in reasonable hope and pride for all. In particular, the stark problems that remain at the bottom of the Western social heap need to be addressed by letting youngsters free of current 'education' and 'welfare' -- both of which should cut back so as to let kids have the cash for themselves to invest in capital (whether cars, computers or courses) and contracts with the labour market. Duke is right that much statist effort of recent years has perpetuated when it has not aggravated problems of low IQ; and it has been treacherous in its ceaseless denigration of Western achievements and in its reward of 'need' rather than desired outcomes. As the West faces this challenge, the Jews (who believe in personal responsibility quite as much as do the Gentiles) are more likely to be a help than a hindrance. Hopefully the Jews will take as keen an interest in liberalizing the modern state (opening its processes to individual choice) as they have taken in PC. Their past involvements on the 'right' as well as the 'left' make this perfectly likely.
What David Duke should do about his failure to deliver much from his two decades of open-minded semitophobia is only a little more difficult. After such a débâcle, he would probably be well advised to rely more on his own prejudices, his pleasant character, his evident delight in reading history, and his courage in challenging nonsense. Hopefully, he will come to concentrate on backing intelligence and those who try to study it. In the twentieth century the West wasted a lot of intelligent lives to see off nationalism, socialism and their gruesome combinations in Fascism, Nazism and Communism. Hopefully David Duke will cease to be distracted by his open-mindedness about Jewish plots and get on board for a swift victory of neoliberalism against what will otherwise be the considerable tyranny of 'politically correct' neosocialism imposed on a hapless underclass and on any who try to break the mould.
[center][b][i]FINIS[/i][/b][/center]http://www.crispian.demon.co.uk/McDNLArch7.htm
a review of My Awakening.
CHRIS BRAND, EDINBURGH, U.K.
In Louisiana, the controversial Republican politician, David Duke, has stuck up for IQ against multiculturalism and the White guilt complex. Now he hopes to run for the US Congress on a platform of "education, scholarship and economic self-sufficiency" for Whites. Surprisingly, he forgets that Blacks could do with the same. Duke wants to blame Jews for multiculturalism, and this obsession is a stumbling block for him; but he could still reach a position of race-realistic neoliberalism that would help Blacks and Whites alike.
"[A]mong themselves, [Jews] are inflexibly honest and ever ready to show compassion, though they regard the rest of mankind with all the hatred of enemies. They sit apart at meals, they sleep apart..."
TACITUS (c. 55-120).
"Only 3% of Americans are Jewish, but 27% of American Nobel Laureates have been Jewish (Zuckerman, 1977, Scientific Elite)."
Hans EYSENCK, 1995, Genius: the Natural History of Creativity. Cambridge University Press.
"[According to G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936), Jews] were intent on cornering as much of the world's wealth as possible through an international conspiracy at the same time as being involved in an international Bolshevik conspiracy intent on confiscating as much of the world's wealth as possible."
Gerald KAUFMAN, M.P., Queensman and UK Privy Counsellor, 1998, Times Higher, 2 i 98.
"In deference to the racial principle, even Jews who reject religion support the religious-racial superstructure of their people. Other Jewish strategies can be summarized as follows: they have stressed education and prized scholarship; they have actively encouraged the most intelligent and successful of their race to have the largest families; they have kept alive their history, traditions, culture and values; while they have worked together as a team for their objectives in the Gentile community, they have stressed individual responsibility; they have stressed the importance of the family unit; they speak against intermarriage and elevate genetic purity as one of their highest values (members of the Jewish Priest class are only the purest of Jews, i.e. they are forbidden to marry converts or their descendants); successful and powerful Jews are extremely generous to Jewish causes and never reluctant to use their power on behalf of their own people. All these traits are admirable, and in the multicultural societies we live in we can learn from these successful moral strategies. Of course, the reason why a Jewish problem exists comes from the fact that they inflict on their host peoples an opposite morality to their own. ….they support group loyalty and solidarity among Jews, but individualism and universalism among Gentiles; ….they orchestrate open immigration into Western nations, but rigidly restrict immigration to Israel only to Jews."
David DUKE, 1998, My Awakening. Covington, LA : Free Speech Press.
"I will describe Jewish efforts to shape United States Immigration policy in opposition to the interests of the peoples of non-Jewish European descent, particularly the peoples of Northern and Western Europe. ….An important thesis is that all of these movements may be seen as attempts to alter Western societies in a manner which would neutralize or end anti-Semitism and provide for Jewish group continuity either in an overt or in a semi-cryptic manner. At a theoretical level, these movements are viewed as the outcome of the fact that Jews and gentiles have different interests in the construction of culture and in various public policy issues (e.g., immigration policy)."
Kevin MacDONALD, 1998, Summary of A People that Shall Dwell Alone. At [url]http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/books.htm[/url].
For the last ten years, the London School of psychology has faced a time of trial and needed all the help it could find. As the world's leading differential psychologists have been able to publish their main works only with mail order houses, a question has been whether anyone from outside academia would help keep alive serious and informed discussion of race, IQ and the political implications of human differences.
Plainly, the Pioneer Fund- and American Enterprise Institute-supported work that went into the Bell Curve (1994) produced a growth industry of critical (indeed, almost wholly critical) discussion; but that open-minded book actually made no definite claims about the strength, heritability or race-linkage of the g factor, and its agenda was a tired anti-welfare Reaganism that was hardly enlivened by reverie about lost rural utopias embodying community spirit. Anyhow, even if government policy wonks were said to rate The Bell, its impact on the universities was slight. No more has serious debate resulted from the maintenance by the determined Roger Pearson of his anthropological journal, Mankind Quarterly. Although this journal carried by far the most news of the travails of Phil Rushton, Raymond Cattell, Linda Gottfredson and the present author, its effort has frankly had no detectable impact. Merely to be willing to consider the hereditarian case about IQ has been to invite neglect if not accusations of 'racism.'
The publication of My Awakening is therefore important. Here is a big, popularly written book by the elected Louisiana legislator, David Duke -- a handsome, dashing, daring and likeable 48-year-old Republican (though one who has challenged other Republicans in his time). (The artifices of plastic surgery may have preserved a youthful look, but childhood photos suggest the dare-devil and fan of Tom Sawyer that the text describes.) With lively visual aids, tables, referencing and extensive use of apt quotation, Duke -- who has for some years maintained a responsible and useful website about race and IQ -- provides a rousing characterization of Caucasian attainments (the chapter on Duke's visit to Greece is a high spot). Fired by the opposition he has countered over the years (including nights in jail on arrest) as he has pursued his lifelong belief in the importance of genetic factors (growing up as the son of an Army father and an alcoholic mother), Duke has no doubt of the dead weight being tied to Western culture by egalitarianism, welfarism and multiculturalism; and he has a definite agenda -- wanting nothing less than a "revolution", i.e. "an Aryan awakening."
Yes: there is the problem with this book. While Duke supplies in his first 200 pages slices from his history and a very reasonable coverage of race and IQ , the reader can see looming ahead not only 250 pages on 'The Jewish Question' but further instalments such as 'The Klan Rises' and 'The Grand Dragon and the Jewish Psyche.' Duke provides a popular and more politicized version of Kevin MacDonald's academic theorizing about the Jews (in A People that Shall Dwell Alone). For better or worse, this book is going to be judged by its 'anti-Semitism.'
This is a process of scrutiny for which this book is better prepared than many such. If the lack of hostility to, or rudeness about Jews were not itself sufficient, the other parts of the book provide adequate testimony that Duke is no embittered paranoid or frothing fundamentalist. Indeed, Duke had a Jewish great-uncle, insists his father admired 'the Hebrews', and only learned his own anti-Semitism along the way once he had already become active in opposing Black welfare-politicking in New Orleans. Admittedly, Duke does little to distance himself from the illiberal version of Christian morality that has lately appealed to US Republicans and made the latter a laughing stock in the civilized world as they tried to bring down the US President for a blowjob. And there is no serious sex in the book -- though Duke's first wife was quite a looker. Yet there is nothing that requires Duke to be dismissed as illiterate, inadequate, psychopathic or psychotic. His arguments on 'the Jewish question' thus have as fair a chance of success as one can imagine without the book being written by a tenured academician or an ex-Rabbi.
Duke's argument is essentially double-barrelled. Unexceptionably, Duke sees no need for any multiculturalist weakening of White society -- especially in view of the low inherited average IQs of the Black people who have usually been envisaged as the main beneficiaries of affirmative action and welfarism in the USA. At the same time, Duke sees the driving force behind Western egalitarianism and 'anti-racism' as being none other than the Jews -- who have apparently had a pretty good twentieth century and are eagerly looking forward, in their secret cabals, to the eventual destruction of Christianity and of the White race itself (except perhaps as underlings to themselves). Thus, inevitably -- without any serious consideration of how happy a Jewish-led world might actually be -- Duke wishes a resurgence of White pride before it is too late. Admirably, Duke seems to have little subjective animus against Jews (he does not even mention anything Jews are poor at, like poetry1); and he avoids illiberal proposals as to what might be done about 'the Jewish question.' However, since critics will doubtless dismiss his posture as one of thinly veiled 'crypto'-fascism, it is important to examine what may be called his cognitive semitophobia and its political ramifications.
Duke's special idea is that the forces for equality, underdog-support and jobs in the welfare empire that culminate today in 'political correctness' (PC) are in effect just the latest means by which the Jewish race is making its bid for world hegemony. Effectively, Duke uses four main lines of evidence. (i) There are plenty of snatches from the Talmud which would be hard to match in official Christian writings: 'Only Jews are human', 'Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed', 'Gentiles prefer sex with cows' are just some of the suggestions that Jewish leaders have chosen to transmit in their 'literature' from one generation to another. (ii) Jews were massively over-represented in the early Russian Communist leadership -- even Lenin having a Jewish grandfather, and all six of the top organizers of the Russian Gulags -- the greatest killing machine in world history -- having been Jewish (according to Solzhenitsyn). (iii) The media of the modern USA is largely Jewish-dominated: a half of Hollywood's film producers are Jewish (like the two most discussed film directors of recent months, Steven Spielberg and the late Stanley Kubrick); and the major opinion-forming organs, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Time, Newsweek, U.S. News and World Report and Atlantic Monthly are all in the hands of Jewish owners, editors or both. (iv) The great Jewish creation of the twentieth century, the state of Israel has been an authoritarian, racist and conspiratorial venture which has even required the USA to conceal from its own citizens the numbers of its servicemen killed by Israeli actions at times when US Middle East policy was not sufficiently obliging.
Spelled out at length, as they are by Duke, all four lines of evidence are thought-provoking. They may impress readers who have never previously entertained the idea that competition in the modern world involves anything more than the social classes or the sexes. Yet to what does Duke's evidence really testify? Religious and racial groups -- just like scientists and philosophers as individuals -- all believe they have a superior command of the truth and that they are entitled to a firm grip on their locality's politics. So what is new? (After all, if a religion did not think itself superior and hope for a big influence on mankind, why would its followers not give up and join another show?)
More especially, is over-involvement in business and politics surprising in a group that research shows to have the highest mean IQ of any long-running racial group on earth?2 Few would doubt what psychometric studies have also tended to testify: that Jews have particular talents with 'verbal' rather than with 'performance' tasks. Not for nothing are Jews the world's most literate people, the acknowledged source of the world's two most successful world-wide religions in recent centuries (Christianity and Islam), and the originators of the current Western sexual code (monogamy + court-supervised divorce).
The over-involvement of Jewish intellectuals in revolutionary and welfarist politics was triggered by the pogroms of late-nineteenth-century eastern Europe which even saw all Jews banished from Moscow in 1890. {The enthusiasm of young Jews for Bolshevism in Hungary of around 1920 is attested by István Deák (1999, New York Review of Books, 8 iv) and by David Cesarani (1998, Arthur Koestler, London:Heineman). For a wider-ranging summary of Jewish Bolshevism, see [url]http://www.hoffman-info.com/communist.html:[/url] apparently Stalin had a Jewish mistress, the sister of his Jewish chief executioner, Lazar Moiseyevich Kaganovich.} Yet it is well-matched by the over-involvement of Jewish brainpower after 1945 in support for right-wing versions of freedom in economics. (As the Jewish joke has it: 'How many Jews does it take to start an argument? -- Two.') Writing from the USA, where Jews long tried to make common cause with Blacks, Duke forgets that Mrs Thatcher's trail-blazing, free-market and union-busting Cabinets in the UK positively over-represented Jewish talent. (Indeed, Thatcherism itself was really the creation of the Jewish academic, Sir Keith Joseph -- just as British imperialism owed much to the converted Jew, Benjamin Disraeli.3) Sadly, Duke makes no effort to survey the modern world of ideas and to recognize the contributions made by Jewish intellectuals like Sir Isaiah Berlin, Milton Friedman, Arthur Koestler, Sidney Hook, Melvin Lasky and Sir Karl Popper to sustaining a West in which there is liberty, stable currency and an appreciation that scientific truth is not merely 'relative.' As Duke's book was coming out, the US Jewish magazine Commentary sought and published from the present Gentile reviewer an account of the de-publication of The g Factor by a frightened Gentile publisher, Wiley Inc.; and the very un-Jewish film 'Shakespeare in Love' was winning all the Oscar nominations. Nor have Jewish people seemed any more united than the Irish, the Afghanistanis or the Kurds in the way in which they have approached their twentieth-century problems. Israel, in particular, always seems on the brink of religious versus secular civil war -- such is the enthusiastic expression of diverse and dogmatic viewpoints that makes that imperilled country's half a century of law-governed democracy a remarkable achievement.4 Jewish music exemplifed the contrast of approaches as the agonized and forward-looking music of Gustav Mahler rivalled the light, sentimental and conventionally popular work of Jacques Offenbach. Altogether, the three towering Jewish giants of twentieth century thought, Marx, Freud and Einstein, say it all: despite their understandable pro-Semitism, their collective politics can hardly be considered more than mildly left-of-centre -- especially since radicals today accuse Freud of individualism and sexism, and Marx of racism.
None of this is to say that the Jews have not taken risks -- and paid heavy prices -- this century. To have fought well for Germany and brought down the Russian Czar in time of war understandably gave the Jews of 1917 a surge of confidence. As Europe's nation states bankrupted themselves fighting each other, the Jews seized the chance of their own homeland by at once helping a desperate Britain and 'stabbing in the back' the Germany that had been kinder to them than had any other European country: in return for Britain's Balfour Declaration on Palestine, they used their financial influence and knowledge of the extramarital sex life of US Naval Secretary of State Franklin Roosevelt5 to persuade America into the First World War. Sixteen years later, Jewish financiers chose to respond to Nazi provocations by declaring international trade war on Germany when Hitler was made Chancellor. So confident were they of success that less affluent Jews failed to make the necessary escape from the land to which the Jewish leadership plainly felt no loyalty.
Still, very few in the West appreciated the scale of the slaughter that would follow the end of the Nazi-Soviet pact between the world's two great socialist powers -- a slaughter in which each side's purging itself of the 'useless' and possibly treacherous played a major part. Moreover, Jewish demands were no different from those of any other group led in the spirit of those times to pursue 'nationhood' -- as desired by the idealistic organizer of the 1918 settlement, Woodrow Wilson. Merely, the Jews' predicament was worse: long the commercial intermediaries in the covert business affairs of aristocratic Christian governments (even profiting massively by predicting Wellington's victory at Waterloo, according to Duke6), the Jews found themselves with less of a role as government became more open; and they had no territory of their own on which to fall back as nationalism became the rage. After nineteen centuries of Christian complaints that they had 'murdered Christ'7, it was hardly surprising that the Jews should have some anti-Gentile sentiments in their holy books -- though Duke's findings of such passages do not extend any nearer the present than 1935.8 Nor can the Jews be blamed for embracing 'media studies.' Indeed, this seems another example of their good intelligence. After all, the press has become, with the full consent of other Westerners, the modern 'lower house' of most constitutions. (It is in the press that matters are argued out quickly and brutally before being handed on to those unduly sober bodies, the modern parliaments.) Duke's compilation of evidence on the US media certainly helps explain why the American press is so boring (despite employing the world's wittiest columnists). 'Responsible' intellectuals in Britain, too, would like the embarrassing Argie-, Frog- and Kraut-bashing Sun newspaper suppressed if they could arrange it. Yet Duke fails to prove a truly censorious Jewish stranglehold on the media. Most recently, it was a Gentile firm, St Martin's [Macmillan] that declined to publish David Irving's Holocaust revisionism; and another such, HarperCollins, that would not let the last Governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten, have his say about Red China.
In all this there are, additionally, seven real peculiarities in Duke's argumentation.
1. Like many on the political 'far right', one of Duke's main beefs is against immigration to the USA. Yet voluntary migrants are normally some 8 IQ points higher than the populations from which they come, so arguably make a real contribution -- as early-and-late-opening Pakistani shopkeepers have done in Britain. (The mirror image of Duke's odd complaint is the support for immigration often found among those who profess sympathy for ethnic minorities. In fact, Afro-Americans must have suffered considerably by being displaced from the labour market by the USA's recent surge in immigration from south and central America.)
2. Duke's claim that the Chosen People are on the verge of race supremacy is surprising when massive intermarriage with Gentiles has characterized such Jewish heartlands as New York and Johannesburg.9
3. It is peculiar that Duke cannot put his finger on any tricks by which Judaism has advanced in modern times. -- Duke does not even consider the advantages of male circumcision in bringing greater orgasmic satisfaction to wives (though in truth this argument is today more between the Americans and the largely uncircumcised men of the British Commonwealth than between Gentiles and Jews). Duke claims Jews long controlled the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (founded in 1909 by twelve Jews and a mulatto); but he provides little modern detail and he is strangely incurious about the active commitments of the "Marxist Jews" who have led IQ-bashing [Stephen Jay Gould, Leon Kamin, Richard Lewontin, Steven Rose] and, more generally, the PC movement.
4. It is odd that Duke ignores the major contributions to race-and-IQ realism made by such Jewish (or partly Jewish) scholars as Hans Eysenck, Nathaniel Weyl, Richard Herrnstein and Michael Levin; and the recent anti-'constructivist' coup by physicist Alan Sokal. Of course, this omission may reflect Duke's larger problems: after all, his semitophobia contradicts his IQ-ophilia; and he must abjure any eugenic future requiring the abortions that many of today's Republicans wish to criminalize. Still, it is odd for Duke to ignore Jews who have made leading contributions to meritocratic, race-realistic and liberal thinking about how to cope with the problems of low IQ and shameless pseudo-philosophical relativism.
5. Duke neglects the one big weakness that might be said to exist for any 'Jewish programme' for racial hegemony. Simply, having a race-based religion as the Hebrews do, there has always been a big difficulty in universalizing its many excellent principles so as to attract wider support -- a problem over which St Paul broke with the early Christians like St Peter. Kevin MacDonald has tried to make a virtue of Jewish race purity and clannishness; but it was thus the Jews found themselves finally spurned by Rome -- whose emperors often admired Jewish family life but could never prevail upon Romans to adopt it and so went in for Pauline Christianity instead (thus winning slave support). Still worse for the Jews, as Pauline Christianity's grip eventually slackened in the West, the similarly universal ideals of liberty, equality and democracy proved widely acceptable. None of these allows an easy place for elite minorities. Indeed, the Jews were the first large-scale victims of democracy -- the French aristocracy having been the first. And they have suffered more than most under equality as states in the English-speaking world have declined to fund elite schools and have insisted that elite universities be open to entrants having modest educational attainments. Arguably, in PC, the Jews have now found a principle -- indeed, almost a new religion -- that can instate them securely as trusted managers of the new American imperium. Yet President Clinton's neosocialism of the 1990's has still to be seriously tested against a neoliberalism that will demand the opening up of state processes to choice -- just as the 1980's increasingly saw the economy finally being left alone by socialist politicians to produce its golden eggs. Altogether, it is far from clear that Judaism possesses any clearcut formula for success.
6. The PC movement not only puts into relief that historic problem of the Jews which Duke neglects. It further makes a sixth peculiarity of Duke's book very clear. Beyond being no sufficient cause of socialism and kindred egalitarianism, Jews are not even necessary to such movements. Socialism has never been a particularly Jewish affair in welfare-state Britain (now of 6% non-European descent); nor in Sweden (where high taxation, bureaucracy and state snooping are a legend). Already, in 1999, Duke's view of a Jewish-dominated coalition of minorities looks strange as US Blacks, European Muslims and many leftists show no readiness to venerate Judaism -- and certainly not Zionism. But PC's arrival, supported as it presently is by women, ethnic minorities, homosexuals and the handicapped, is a reminder that Duke is at once right and wrong on two key matters. As Duke says, the West could easily be undermined in its core values -- not to mention its competitive efficiency -- by the arrival of PC which might insist on bringing biological evolution to a halt just when the new eugenics is enabling evolution to be speeded up. Yet such undermining of Western civilization would hardly require any Jewish conspiracy. As in the French Revolution -- which occurred in a country that had banished most of its Jews to then-liberal Prussia -- Whites can think up tyrannical and murderous egalitarian schemes without much help from Jews at all. Duke is correct in seeing dangers in a molly-coddling of society's lower ranks that can only undermine initiative and responsibility and create a nation of welfare-dependents whose men dare not have sex for fear of charges of date rape; but his idea that socialism and PC derive from Jewry is wide of the mark. Jews did not provide the impetus towards 'gay pride', 'lesbian anger' or women who do not marry (and are increasingly unmarriageable). In this reviewer's own case of being condemned in Edinburgh for 'racism', 'elitism' and 'chauvinism', the two leading attackers were both Protestant theologians -- the Principal and the Chaplain of the University.
7. Lastly, at the heart of Duke's problem there is a strange lack of race realism. Duke is good at seeing the joke that a coherent race and culture, that of Israel, should help champion multiculturalist PC for others. Blacks, in particular, seem so unappreciative and are ill-suited to the wheezes of academic education with which sinecured do-gooders would like to supply them. Yet Duke fails to consider what could have been a more reasonable strategy for Jewry; and why the White West should be so prone to run itself down or at least to feel a sense of noblesse oblige in relation to weaker groups. The truth is that any well-placed group in the social hierarchy of a race or nation will always need to engage in a certain amount of hierarchy-maintenance. Otherwise it will risk the overthrow of itself or even of the whole system of which it is a part. Today, the West has developed a meritocracy which -- not least because of democratic constraints -- needs to be 'sold' to the lower ranks. This is especially so since, unlike in previous liberal societies, those at the bottom of the modern West are not going to find it easy to rise -- unless the benefits of genetic engineering come to be applied chiefly to their own children. Whether the lower-IQ and new migrants sucked in by shortages of menial labour are to be offered cash in the hand, breeding prospects, genetic engineering prospects, state sector sinecures or just bread and circuses is the question. It is short-sighted to blame the Jews for egalitarian-seeming strategies which Gentiles have no trouble thinking up and adopting on their own, and which anyhow require proper consideration and evaluation.
The question for the West is whether a future can be found that involves not only productive free markets and the reward structure of unequal incomes but a reduction in irresponsible breeding, welfare dependency, useless officialdom, censorious depublishing and wasted investment; and an increase in reasonable hope and pride for all. In particular, the stark problems that remain at the bottom of the Western social heap need to be addressed by letting youngsters free of current 'education' and 'welfare' -- both of which should cut back so as to let kids have the cash for themselves to invest in capital (whether cars, computers or courses) and contracts with the labour market. Duke is right that much statist effort of recent years has perpetuated when it has not aggravated problems of low IQ; and it has been treacherous in its ceaseless denigration of Western achievements and in its reward of 'need' rather than desired outcomes. As the West faces this challenge, the Jews (who believe in personal responsibility quite as much as do the Gentiles) are more likely to be a help than a hindrance. Hopefully the Jews will take as keen an interest in liberalizing the modern state (opening its processes to individual choice) as they have taken in PC. Their past involvements on the 'right' as well as the 'left' make this perfectly likely.
What David Duke should do about his failure to deliver much from his two decades of open-minded semitophobia is only a little more difficult. After such a débâcle, he would probably be well advised to rely more on his own prejudices, his pleasant character, his evident delight in reading history, and his courage in challenging nonsense. Hopefully, he will come to concentrate on backing intelligence and those who try to study it. In the twentieth century the West wasted a lot of intelligent lives to see off nationalism, socialism and their gruesome combinations in Fascism, Nazism and Communism. Hopefully David Duke will cease to be distracted by his open-mindedness about Jewish plots and get on board for a swift victory of neoliberalism against what will otherwise be the considerable tyranny of 'politically correct' neosocialism imposed on a hapless underclass and on any who try to break the mould.
[center][b][i]FINIS[/i][/b][/center]http://www.crispian.demon.co.uk/McDNLArch7.htm