Jewish Thought Cops Attack Prof MacDonald For 'Ideas'

[Flint Steel]

Prof MacDonald Under Attack For 'Ideas'
Jewish 'Thought Police' Maneuver To Destroy Scholar's Rising Influence And Reputation
By Mark Green
2-10-8


Kevin MacDonald, author and Professor of Psychology at Cal State University, Long Beach (CSULB), faces censure and stigma on the very campus where he teaches. His crime? Publishing scholarly books which explore expressions of Jewish ethnocentrism and modes of Jewish deception throughout history. Most contentious is his monumental work "The Culture of Critique".

MacDonald is under siege on numerous fronts by an interconnected array of Jewish-lead organizations. These attacks are a back door assault on intellectual freedom. One of the major players in this war on Free Speech is a self-declared 'civil right's' organization calling itself the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). This heavily-funded, highly-positioned and crypto-Jewish watchdog group receives extensive TV exposure and labels MacDonald's scholarship "anti-Semitic" and "neo-Nazi". These tendentious mischaracterizations enable Jewish activists within the SPLC to hide their identity (and ethnic-based motives) while they marginalize dissident scholars like MacDonald and intimidate others from speaking out in his defense. At least one imperious agent of the SPLC paid CSULB a highly-publicized visit some 15 months ago in an ostentatious attempt to undermine MacDonald's reputation there and spread the usual high doses of fear and intimidation for which Jews are now famous.

Now, a coalition of of CSULB faculty (mostly Jewish) are moving to formally repudiate MacDonald by threatening to issue a politicized edict dissociating CSULB's Psychology Dept. from MacDonald's independent scholarship. This is nothing less than a modern day 'inquisition'--and it's taking place in an American university! These despicable attacks on a courageous scholar are a stunning rejection of the cherished value of intellectual freedom. In a previous era, this level of arrogance might embarrass even the most ethnocentric Jew, but the exalted status of Jews-as-victims now affords this group unique privileges to which members have become addicted. Yes, power corrupts.

But why should the University play such a censorious and punitive role? After all, this is 21st century America. MacDonald is a tenured professor behaving lawfully and writing brilliantly. Further, his position at CSULB is little more than a footnote to his career as a critical expert on Judaism. Indeed, it's these Jewish censors who are using the university system to improperly subvert a colleague's constitutional right of Free Speech. In a nutshell, the purpose behind this kosher inquisition is to protect the supreme status of world Jewry.

The multi-faceted assault on MacDonald's position as a tenured professor is a chilling reminder of the level of Jewish excess and Jewish tenacity Americans are now facing. This is especially irksome when one considers that MacDonald's extraordinary thesis has never been successfully refuted by his critics. In fact, this totalitarian mindset behind the anti-MacDonald campaign only confirms MacDonald's provocative paradigm. Thus, the familiar strategy now used by these Jewish supremacists is to attack the messenger when 'attacking the message' fails. This past week, the escalating war against Prof. MacDonald has been playing out via the Cal State newspaper on the campus where he teaches.

http://media.www.daily49er.com/media/storage/paper1042/news/2008/02/07/News/Psy
chology.Department.To.Issue.Statement.On.Professors.Controversial.Literature-3194393.shtml

Smear Campaign

Helping the SPLC along in its smear campaign is an ad hoc lynch mob lead by a handful of Jewish professors though, in typical fashion, they're not identified in the newspaper as Jews. This serves them well since their self-serving motives remain hidden as they "fight anti-Semitism" (i.e., suppress unfavorable information about Jewish behavior). In his writings, MacDonald has identified this stealth strategy as a familiar tactic used by Jews to quietly advance their 'group interests'.

Contrary to the misleading innuendo and provocative headlines, the true source of this brouhaha is Prof. MacDonald's groundbreaking trilogy of books on Judaism and his rising stature among committed anti-Zionists as well as rank and file Americans. MacDonald's books are original, scholarly and deep. But what riles Big Jewry is MacDonald's willingness to break the unwritten rule: all criticism of "the Jews" (especially by non-Jews) must be cautious, respectful and, if necessary, apologetic. Better yet, just say nice things.

But MacDonald's analyses are so compelling (and explosive) that the tactics employed by his adversaries are becoming ruthless. One familiar avenue his adversaries are exploring now is how best to sabotage his reputation as a scholar. Thus, MacDonald is continuously "linked" to in news stories (rumors) involving to "neo-Nazis" and "white supremacists" while other Jewish activists simultaneously question his "scholarship and methodology". This shifts the discussion away from MacDonald's extraordinary findings and towards his now-suspect character and motives.

As these tricks are played out, the geniuses in Hollywood explore 'free speech' issues through films which exalt pornographers like Larry Flynt. All the while, true intellectual heroes like Kevin MacDonald are either vilified or ignored. At the same time, Free Speech zealots in the ACLU just happen to overlook cases like this where Jewish privilege might be threatened. Doubtless, these idealistic ACLU lawyers would rather be protecting 'lawful assembly rights' at a San Francisco pedophile conference or providing free legal services for 'undocumented immigrants' than aiding an heroic intellectual if there's a politicized charge of "anti-Semitism" in the air. The result: Prof. MacDonald is left alone to combat the ruthless maneuvers of the world's most powerful ethnic lobby.

Ultimately, whether one agrees or not with MacDonald's conclusions about Jews is irrelevant. His right to speak and publish should be, must be, protected entirely from academic or 'civil rights' hit squads.

http://rense.com/general80/ideas.htm

[Impérialiste]

I'll cover this in another thread at some point, but MacDonald - though attacked for petty reasons (largely by Jewish activist groups) - is hardly this holy scholar who is completely innocent. MacDonald's scholarship is questionable to say the least. Dangerbot covered this on MacDonald's critique of the Frankfurt School. Others have found him citing forgeries. One Jewish professor crushed his synopsis of the "Jewish-controlled" secret police in Poland after World War II; MacDonald cited that very selectively to the point of blatant academic dishonesty. For instance, you can't assert it was entirely Jewish controlled when there were divisions within that secret police that basically watched Jews themselves (something MacDonald didn't acknowledge, though he undoubtedly knew about).

MacDonald's big dishonesty is in not warning readers that because he focuses solely on Jews, then they'll be portrayed as more important than what they really are and were. Even Werner Sombart didn't make that mistake. And there's a slew of evidence throughout the social sciences to show that gentiles have played just as big of a primary role as Jewish social scientists have. John Watson is a perfect example of this.

In an important paraphrase, Watson once asserted he could take any person of any race, background, or intellect (straight from Locke's tabula rasa) and turn that person to anything he wanted to. That's straight Behaviorism. And Watson has undoubtedly had plenty of influence on America's psyche.

The big factor that matters to ethnic nationalists is the issue of race. But let's face it, it'd be dishonest to argue Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard could somehow withstand scrutiny. It's a materialistic, and there I say, a rationalistic point of view to argue that the Nordics are superior. All empirical evidence - even modern materialistic views by the likes of Charles Murray - largely refutes such notions.

Out of this thesis came the antithesis that race doesn't matter and that environment plays a role. That's the big factor Kevin MacDonald argued, who asserts Jews played a major role in this. Whether this is true or not (and let's just say that it is true, and hardly any gentiles played a role [which is false, I might add]), environment has been shown to matter in many ways. Nutrition undoubtedly affects growth and intellectual development.

Either way, out of this we get a synthesis that both genetics and environment matter. And modern racialists like J. P. Rushton acknowledge exactly that. Now, Jews have played an extraordinary role in swinging back the pendulum from that aforementioned antithesis to the synthesis between the thesis of Nordic supremacy (hereditary) and environment. And why did those Jews play that role? MacDonald's thesis couldn't address that question. And because of that, MacDonald's thesis not only fails but also shows for itself as a largely Antisemitic one and an undeserving one at that. His scholarship has largely been questionable, his thesis has assumed a Cartesian Dualistic constancy of the "Jewish soul" (when even individual "souls" aren't constant), and he's been shown to lie. There are better authors in psychoanalyzing Jews than MacDonald (Yuri Slezkine), and K-Mac himself doesn't do an honest or even thorough job in addressing this.

In sum, MacDonald is basically a racist with a vague thesis that fails to explain the 20th century, and he does it in the most tired way possible: the Jews did it. It's another Protocols of Zion. Is there validity to MacDonald's argument?--in spots. Does it address the 20th century changes in public policy or even explain most of it?--no. Does he do this with honesty and good research?--no. Read the critiques on MacDonald both on this forum and in others. This guy is largely talking shit.

[Kim Jong Tha Illest]

Two things - one, the CofC trilogy was not published or written under the auspices of the CSULB psych department. It was an independent project, and therefore there is little reason that the university or the department should be able to sanction him on its basis. MacDonald has written a substantial body of work in his field that has nothing to do with the Jewish question - it is on the strength of that work that his professorship rests, and that strength has, to my knowledge, never been questioned. What I've read of CofC is not particularly strong, the chapter on the ISR is essentially scattershot social theory liberally peppered with the types of mistakes that a PhD candidate in the field would have his thesis flunked for. His attempts to debate his chapter on Polish communism with the author of one of the only sources he actually cited is, well, a bit pathetic. This is not to say that his thesis is entirely lacking in merit - few question the level of influence of the New York intellectuals on the contemporary left AND right in America, and Boasian anthropology has certainly achieved a level of dominance in its field that far outstrips its merits. Nor is MacDonald monomaniacally obsessed with Jews - CofC was written to establish a general thesis about how groups behave in relation to others that, in theory, ought to be generalizable to any ethnicity. The fact that the proposed jewish GES was not contrasted with that of any other group is a weakness that Pinker pointed out and MacDonald acknowledged.

[Basil Fawlty]

MacDonald's scholarship is questionable to say the least. Dangerbot covered this on MacDonald's critique of the Frankfurt School.I tried looking this up using the search function here - no joy - could someone link to it, I'd be very interested in reading it. :thanks:

[Impérialiste]

I tried looking this up using the search function here - no joy - could someone link to it, I'd be very interested in reading it. :thanks:

http://thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22092

[Basil Fawlty]

Thanks!

....

[Vasily Zaitsev]

...CofC was written to establish a general thesis about how groups behave in relation to others that, in theory, ought to be generalizable to any ethnicity. The fact that the proposed jewish GES was not contrasted with that of any other group is a weakness that Pinker pointed out and MacDonald acknowledged.

You may have mistyped here.

CofC was written to put a thin intellectual dross on typical old right notions about Jews in academia.

The two volumes predeeding CofC were written to establish a general thesis about how groups behave in relation to others that, in theory, ought to be generalizable to any ethnicity.

I haven't read the Pinker debate, but it surprises me to hear that KMac gave in so easily on the contrast issue. In either PTSDA or SAID (or both, it's been a number of years since I read the trilogy) he does contrast the Jewish GES with that of northern Europeans. He doesn't go nearly as deeply into the NE GES, but he does provide it to establish some sort of conext.

[Impérialiste]

[H]e does contrast the Jewish GES with that of northern Europeans.

But that's the wrong question to ask, if you will. Kevin MacDonald should have compared Jews to other diaspora groups (e.g. the Chinese, for example) to see if Jews have some "constant soul" due to their religion (hence my reference to that not existing and the reference to Cartesian Dualism) or if Jews, for dependent reasons, act as a diaspora group that can eventually assimilate. And by many accounts, Jews have long assimilated in American society. Others dispute that; Kevin MacDonald seems to as well.

But by him caving in to Pinker, he must assume that the Jewish consciousness (his generalization) is not constant thereby undermining his entire thesis' dynamic. The fact is Jews are largely a prodigal of a diaspora group rather than as a factor of a vindictive religion (what Antisemites largely assert), so the dynamics would change to what diasporas of cognitively-functioning groups constitute as, rather than what their religion teaches. MacDonald would have to re-write his entire thesis and couldn't focus on Jews without examining other groups in the process (which is all the more reason why Yuri Slezkine is far more valid than MacDonald).

[Kim Jong Tha Illest]

You may have mistyped here.

CofC was written to put a thin intellectual dross on typical old right notions about Jews in academia.

The two volumes predeeding CofC were written to establish a general thesis about how groups behave in relation to others that, in theory, ought to be generalizable to any ethnicity.

I haven't read the Pinker debate, but it surprises me to hear that KMac gave in so easily on the contrast issue. In either PTSDA or SAID (or both, it's been a number of years since I read the trilogy) he does contrast the Jewish GES with that of northern Europeans. He doesn't go nearly as deeply into the NE GES, but he does provide it to establish some sort of conext.

Isn't CofC also the name of the trilogy? There wasn't much of a debate between Mac and Pinker, basically Pinker said he wouldn't review the trilogy because it failed the minimum standards necessary to qualify as science, one of which being the use of a control group (and I think Imp is correct that contrasting a diaspora group to the majority group in which they are dispersed is not exactly using a control), and Mac basically said that, while Pinker was obnoxious and clearly hadn't read the trilogy, he was correct on that point, and that he regretted not doing so, if only to silence the incessant accusations of antisemitism leveled against him. It ought to be up on Mac's website somewhere.

[Vasily Zaitsev]

Isn't CofC also the name of the trilogy? There wasn't much of a debate between Mac and Pinker, basically Pinker said he wouldn't review the trilogy because it failed the minimum standards necessary to qualify as science, one of which being the use of a control group (and I think Imp is correct that contrasting a diaspora group to the majority group in which they are dispersed is not exactly using a control), and Mac basically said that, while Pinker was obnoxious and clearly hadn't read the trilogy, he was correct on that point, and that he regretted not doing so, if only to silence the incessant accusations of antisemitism leveled against him. It ought to be up on Mac's website somewhere.

The second edition of PTSDA includes the essay Diaspora Peoples which compares the Jewish GES to that of Gypsies and overseas Chinese. It is, however, comparatively short when viewed next to KMac's three volumes of work on Jews.

[Kamandi]

Two things - one, the CofC trilogy was not published or written under the auspices of the CSULB psych department. It was an independent project, and therefore there is little reason that the university or the department should be able to sanction him on its basis.
Interesting that this theory wasn't applied to Dershowitz.

[Kim Jong Tha Illest]

Interesting that this theory wasn't applied to Dershowitz.

Huh? Let me know the next time MacDonald tries to interfere in the tenure process in a uni he has no affiliation with whatsoever.

[Kamandi]

That has nothing to do with the (bogus) charges of academic plagiarism made against Dersh, despite his publishing in a trade paperback and not an academic journal, as MacDonald did.

[Kim Jong Tha Illest]

That has nothing to do with the (bogus) charges of academic plagiarism made against Dersh, despite his publishing in a trade paperback and not an academic journal, as MacDonald did.

Nor does Dersh have anything to do with the subject of the thread. By the by, one can still plagiarize in a non-academic context, although I don't think that Dersh actually plagiarized Peters (or at least I would hope not). It is, however, worthwhile to point out, in advance of a possible defense offered by the department, that MacDonald's academic conduct is not marred by the same kinds of indiscretions as Dershowitz's.

[Julian Curtis Lee]

...a diaspora group that can eventually assimilate. And by many accounts, Jews have long assimilated in American society. Others dispute that; Kevin MacDonald seems to as well.
My observation is that Jews have not assimilated, but they PRETEND to have assimilated. This is not universal and uniform. I think they have assimilated more in some areas, less in others. So the pretending is more in some areas; less in others. It's the pretending that gives me issues with them. It puts them in a basically deceitful situation culturally. These pretenders sit there telling all peoples they should not be Peoples, while hanging on to their status as a People and the advantages it gives them. They view any European racial identity as anathema, decry it, and work to erode and corrode it (by maligning it as "white supremacism" and other bullshit), while hanging onto their racial identity. This is the basic Jewish deceit, and the real source of instinctive Jewish Guilt.

You have to be hypervigilant and watch your back when you know you are involved in treachery and deceit. That's why Jews are hypervigilant and take notes at the slightest sign of independent thinking among the Gentiles. Just my observation.

[Kamandi]

Nor does Dersh have anything to do with the subject of the thread.
Actually, it does. A defense for MacDonald's conduct is given here that was specifically denied Dershowitz elsewhere on this forum.

By the by, one can still plagiarize in a non-academic context, although I don't think that Dersh actually plagiarized Peters (or at least I would hope not).
In most university departments that I'm aware of, a professor guilty of plagiarism even in a popular media context would be sanctioned or reprimanded because, as faculty, they have a responsibility to conduct themselves professionally in a manner that reflects well on the university.

That would hold as long as they were discussing their field in public. That is, for example, why Northwestern allows Arthur Butz to continue his Holocaust denial activities without penalty in his spare time, but BYU canned Steven Jones (among other reasons). Jones was a tenured physicist, while Butz isn't a professor of history.

It is, however, worthwhile to point out, in advance of a possible defense offered by the department, that MacDonald's academic conduct is not marred by the same kinds of indiscretions as Dershowitz's.
Can't say I agree that Dersh has been 'indiscrete,' as I don't think his efforts to bar Finkelstein from earning tenure, for example, constitute academic misconduct, as I understand it, and I agree that the plagiarism charges were bogus.

That doesn't mean he isn't arrogant or a loudmouth, but those aren't necessarily academic offenses per se.

[Kim Jong Tha Illest]

Actually, it does. A defense for MacDonald's conduct is given here that was specifically denied Dershowitz elsewhere on this forum.

Well, that has more to do with my failure to be omnipresent than any operative double standard. I am the only person that I am aware of to have made this particular argument, and I made it on this thread and not on any Dershowitz threads because I've never got involved matters pertaining to the Dershowitz plagiarism accusations.

In most university departments that I'm aware of, a professor guilty of plagiarism even in a popular media context would be sanctioned or reprimanded because, as faculty, they have a responsibility to conduct themselves professionally in a manner that reflects well on the university.

Indeed.

Can't say I agree that Dersh has been 'indiscrete,' as I don't think his efforts to bar Finkelstein from earning tenure, for example, constitute academic misconduct, as I understand it, and I agree that the plagiarism charges were bogus.

Most academic misconduct policies are suitably plastic to allow for ad hoc charges to be filed against professors the department considers an embarrassment (although this is certainly less the case for a tenured prof, and even less so in the current era of FIRE and assorted other free speech on campus advocacy groups). Dersh's intervention in Finkelstein's tenure case were, in my mind, distinctly unprofessional, but probably nothing he could be fired over. If MacDonald had done something similar, however, it would probably be used to buttress the image of him as a disaffected crank who does the university a disservice by teaching there.

[Kamandi]

I wasn't referring to you specifically with my remark about Dershowitz. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

And, although I don't what standards of conduct Harvard has for its law professors, I doubt his actions regarding Finkelstein were unprofessional according to them. As a scholar, he felt he had a responsibility to prevent an academic he believed to be guilty of malpractice from getting employment for life. If you believe that it was motivated by personal animus and not professional concern, so be it.

[harjit]

My observation is that Jews have not assimilated, but they PRETEND to have assimilated.

I wonder if "getting it" enough to be able to pretend effectively might be considered assimilation.

I know immigrants who are not assimilated and they certainly don't "get it" nearly well enough to pretend.

It would be cool if Jews can then be considered "post-assimilated", and are in fact leading the way. :D

[Keystone]

My observation is that Jews have not assimilated, but they PRETEND to have assimilated. This is not universal and uniform. I think they have assimilated more in some areas, less in others. So the pretending is more in some areas; less in others. It's the pretending that gives me issues with them. It puts them in a basically deceitful situation culturally. These pretenders sit there telling all peoples they should not be Peoples, while hanging on to their status as a People and the advantages it gives them. They view any European racial identity as anathema, decry it, and work to erode and corrode it (by maligning it as "white supremacism" and other bullshit), while hanging onto their racial identity. This is the basic Jewish deceit, and the real source of instinctive Jewish Guilt.

You have to be hypervigilant and watch your back when you know you are involved in treachery and deceit. That's why Jews are hypervigilant and take notes at the slightest sign of independent thinking among the Gentiles. Just my observation.
Julian,

The Nazi Party called---they want their ideology back.