It is far easier to reflect on the art of dating than on the art of reading. For a student in humanities the main concern must not be which author he needs to read and which one he needs to discard, but rather how to read and how to interpret the text. Before he flips open a book he must ask himself a question: Who will interpret this text? Over the last several decades the focus in the humanities has not been so much the substance of the author’s work, but rather the biased interpretation of his work. The egalitarian-multicultural “paradigm” in higher education still determines how an author is studied — and hence how he is being interpreted. Here is an example: Johan W. Goethe, the German classic writer of the late 18th and early 19th century had a glowing reception in literary circles in National–Socialist Germany, a glowing reception in the postwar Allied-occupied West Germany, and a glowing one during the same period of time in the Soviet-occupied East Germany. Each political regime interpreted Goethe’s texts in accordance with the dominant political ideas of the time. The same rule of (re)interpretation applies to all authors, regardless whether they are novelists, social scientists or legal scholars.
The Frankfurt School Program in Applied Brainwashing
For many White activists, or would-be college students in humanities, it is still hard to comprehend that since the fateful 1945 the academic program in the West has been subject to a drastic methodological overhaul, which in turn resulted in gigantic brainwashing of students. The steady removal of hundreds of politically incorrect titles from library shelves on the one hand and a radically new interpretation of the classics on the other, only added insult to injury. The notion of just vs. unjust, of beauty vs. ugliness, of crook vs. hero, of truth vs. lie, has been reversed, or rather, the meaning of those words changed in accordance with the dominant leftist-liberal aka “multicultural” teaching philosophy. Very early on, largely as a result of the Frankfurt School Program in Applied Brainwashing, the System managed to conflate the notion of academic integrity with the notion of “humanism.” Any attempt by critically minded professors to examine authors lying beyond the pale of the standard curriculum, was immediately branded as a criminal, fascist enterprise, worthy of penal sanctions, loss of tenure, and academic ostracism.
Today, the choice of appropriate literature by a humanities student, or for that matter by any White activist wishing to learn more about his cultural and racial heritage, is further aggravated by his often clumsy choice of methods. Yes, titans are in town — we know that — and there are only a few honest teachers left to teach the right ropes. Without teachers to guide them, many White nationalists are inclined to start gobbling up heavy literature on race, or they may immerse themselves in academic texts on Judaism, while neglecting the simple prose of their homegrown classics. For a young White student or an activist, the unguided plowing through difficult texts on race, without prior knowledge of some of the classics, will not produce sound results. Also, there may be a strong temptation to focus on racial differences, or even show anger at lower-IQ racial groups, or make tallies of WWII body counts. Sooner, rather than later, such an approach will get a White student into trouble.
The first step for a White student or an activist is to get acquainted with at least a few classics and chose a good roadmap when reading them. Only later on, when their message begins to sink in, will he be able to grasp the criminal motives of the main movers and shakers in the study of humanities in the university. For instance, in order to understand his instructor’s palaver about Karl Marx and his epoch, a student might be well advised to combine the instructor’s mandatory reading list with his own list of authors, such as novelists Charles Dickens or Honoré de Balzac. Both novelists lived during the same epoch as the sociologist Marx, yet both were far better in graphically describing the wretched conditions of workers in early capitalist France and England.
Naturally, Shakespeare always comes in handy, not just for those wishing to understand the timeless issue of human fickleness, treachery and vanity, but also for those wishing to get a first whiff of the world of Shylock and what Shylock thinks of himself and his chosen tribe:
Shylock: “I will buy with you, sell with you, talk with you, walk with you, and so following; but I will not eat with you,
drink with you, nor pray with you.” (I, iii)
Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice is an important work of literature today for students wishing to grasp the language of modern banksters and the meanings of new financial fraud originating at Goldman Sachs, or when the Fed’s “Helicopter Ben” Bernanke preaches “quantitative easing” in order to con the masses into illusions about new job openings. Endless promissory notes about monetary bonds between Antonio and Shylock did not work out, so Shylock demands from Antonio a pound of flesh cut out from his body. This must have been a Shakespearian form of “prime collateral.” The same procedure is finding its mirror image today in “subprime collateral,” or in the grand total of student loan debt which has reached $1 trillion in the USA today.
Shylock: You’ll ask me, why I rather choose to have
A weight of carrion flesh, than to receive
Three thousand ducats. I’ll not answer that. But say it is my humour. (IV,i).
And the list goes on. Reading the 18th-century French Enlightenment writer Voltaire and his passages on the religious intolerance of Jews and Christians is a much safer literature for starters than passing out Jew-baiting pamphlets, or yelling silly slogans “Sieg Heil!” or White Power!” In any case, these infantile exclamations are precisely what the enemy’s big ears want to hear. Students must be also careful with Cliffs Notes, as they often hide an oblique meta-message by a stray leftist or pederast interpreter who is smart enough to tamper, or worse, reinterpret the text in accordance with his/her sick hormones. A case in point is Friedrich Nietzsche, the great anti-egalitarian Western thinker whose texts were successfully hijacked by leftist scholars after WWII. A word of advice: always look a the name of the publisher and the pedigree of the commentator, or the name of the preface writer before starting to read the text of a classic.
Plain old novels, dramas and poetry by classic Western writers often reflect better the climate of the socioeconomic and racial environment of a given epoch than heavy handed texts in sociology or ravings by a political science teacher. Only later on can the reading of novels be supplanted by the reading of scholarly works on the subjects of liberalism, race and multiculturalism. By then, a student will be already all pruned up and equipped with the necessary conceptual weaponry for the better comprehension of the horrible world he lives in. My suggestion: The course “Literature and Politics”—of course, in an ideal college environment—should be a standard undergrad 101 course in the study of humanities. The beauty of reading novels is that they provide good conceptual tools for the better understanding not just of the world as it once was, but also as it now is.
Higher Education Fraud
Today’s courses in humanities all over the Western academia are mega-sessions in educational travesty and a waste of students’ time and money. Most college courses in the humanities are in criminal violation of the right of White student to critical thinking and free inquiry. Not that all contemporary professors in the humanities are bad. In fact most of them are just simple turncoats who toe the line of the dominant political myths and who will dump them once new political myths become trendy. More obsessed with their own egos than with the quality teaching, their classes must be structured along the mimicked verbiage on “the power of diversity.” There is no attempt to guide students through the rudimentary lessons of critical thinking; intellectual curiosity is completely left aside. The entire academic fauna — both in Europe and the USA — is made up of pathetic characters sporting fake smiles and indulging in promiscuous brownnosing of their superiors, with all of them being pathologically jealous of each other. Long ago, the so-called multiracial sensitivity training program turned the Western higher education into a grotesque entertainment industry, barring intelligent White students from any critical inquiry into the nature of the beliefs being foisted on them.
A half-decent White professor with a conservative background who wishes to bypass his compulsive neurosis of self-censorship must engage in the ritual of fawning upon the Jews. Or he must deliver occasional laudatory pep talks about the state of Israel. This is just about the only safe strategy to secure himself the miniscule perks available to “conservatives.”
On the opposite side of the teaching spectrum, for a high IQ White student, who possesses some vestiges of introspection, college courses represent emotional abuse — for which neither his teacher, nor the dean’s office, nor the upper government echelons are ever called to account. Such a situation cannot last forever.
In both Europe or the USA, the only way for a White student to survive the well-planned process of educational dumbing down and brainwashing is by setting up his own parallel niche of study in which he can read in peace the right literature. As long as he is in college he should play the game, bite the bullet, and put up with years of mental torture in an ambiance which bears the fraudulent logo of “the place of free academic research and free speech.”
In no way should a White college student ever attempt to wave revisionist literature in front of the noses of his classmates, or taunt his professor with a politically incorrect remark, let alone crack a racial joke in public. This will augur his immediate kiss of death and signal a violent foreclosure of his future professional life. Getting the degree must be his primary goal.
Just about the only advantage of going to college today is its protective symbolism of the degree. Surely, the termination of the prison-like 4-year college enclosure won’t deliver fame, money, or glory. But getting a BA, MA, or PhD and going against the academic consensus will eventually elicit tacit respect from the conformists (who must always show nothing but hatred in public). To be sure, a White student won’t learn a thing from his politically correct humanities professors, whose greatest intellectual achievements consist of working out the details of their pension plan rollovers.
White students and activists whose native tongue is English have an immense advantage over Whites in Europe. The best literature today in the humanities is available in English. Besides, US college libraries, including even small college libraries, are the best in the world. Why not take advantage of it? For a White would-be genius, or would-be writer from Russia, or Germany, or France, let alone for an intelligent young writer residing in some microscopic country in Central Europe, mastering all nuances of the English language is unavoidable if he has any intention of getting into the literary limelight. In any case most scholarly books on race, modernity, on liberal decadence, or on the Jewish question, are published in English. German self-consciousness was destroyed after WWII and along with it the German language, which, although being a very rich language, other than in Germany, is barely spoken in other parts of Europe. The gloire of France is passé and although there are good books published in French, especially in the field of the sociology of postmodernity, few White Americans or English nationalists will bother learning the French language. As a global lingua franca the American English has become the only and the best weapon for cultural battles on all fronts.