Retraction of My Article on Jewish Influence
On January 1 of this year my paper “The Default Hypothesis Fails to Explain Jewish Influence” was published in the peer-reviewed Israel-based academic journal Philosophia. As I noted at the time:
This is the first time I have attempted to publish an article on Jewish influence in the mainstream academic literature since The Culture of Critique was published in 1998 by Praeger, so it is something of a milestone. I have updated quite a bit of the material, particularly the scholarly writing on Jewish involvement in influencing U.S. immigration policy—Chapter 7 of The Culture of Critique. I have always felt that Chapter 7 was the most important chapter in the book. …
Besides updating some critical aspects of The Culture of Critique, the paper emphasizes the point that the enactment of the 1965 immigration law did not occur in a vacuum and cannot be understood apart from the wider context of the rise of a new Jewish elite with influence in a wide range of areas. As I note in the article, the rise of this new elite “implies that vital issues of public policy, including immigration, the civil rights of African-Americans, women’s rights, religion in the public square (Hollinger’s “secularization of American society”), the legitimacy of white racial identity and interests, cosmopolitanism [identifying a “citizen of the world”], foreign policy in the Middle East, and many others will be affected by the attitudes and interests of this new elite.” The post-World War II era saw the emergence of a new, substantially Jewish elite in America.
Publication resulted almost immediately in hostile comments from Jewish academic activists, calls for retraction, and condemnation of the journal’s editor for allowing such horrifying breach of academic sensibilities to happen. On January 4th, the publisher, Springer Nature, posted the following statement with the article.
04 January 2022 Editor’s Note: The Editor-in-Chief and publisher are aware of concerns raised with the content of this article and are investigating. Editorial action will be taken as appropriate once investigation of the concerns is complete and all parties have been given an opportunity to respond in full.
The editor or whoever was in charge then sent the paper out for three more reviews. The reviews arrived toward the end of February and I sent in my reply in early March. My reply ran to around 9000 words and responded to each of the issues raised (one of the reviewers was simply blowing off steam, so there really wasn’t anything to respond to). I prefaced my reply with the following summary statement:
General Comments
Far too often the reviewers fail to make an argument or specific criticisms of my work but seem to think that simply providing an invidious summary of my views is sufficient to rebut them. Most surprising to me is that none of the reviewers mention even one objection to the long section on immigration—by far the most critical and longest section in the article (amounting to 13 pages and 6500 words); nor is there any discussion of the rise of the intimately related topic of the rise of a new, substantially Jewish elite in the post-World War II era in the U.S., particularly since the 1960s. This is important because my paper addresses the three “core issues” raised by Cofnas, but the Jewish role in immigration policy is, as I note, “The only claim that, if true, would seriously endanger an important aspect of what Cofnas labels ‘the anti-Jewish narrative.’” The other issues discussed are interesting and important in a general discussion of Jewish issues, but they pale in comparison to the material on immigration policy. And, as noted in the paper, some of the most discussed issues, such as intermarriage and the issue of Jewish hypocrisy—two of Cofnas’s three core issues (not to mention Karl Marx’s Jewish identity), are completely irrelevant to central work Cofnas describes as being part of “the anti-Jewish narrative,” most notably The Culture of Critique (hereafter, CofC), which is what Cofnas is supposedly criticizing. Moreover, none of the reviews critique my analysis for why higher average Jewish IQ by itself fails to explain Jewish influence (i.e., Cofnas’s “default hypothesis”).
But all was for naught. I was informed in mid-May that the paper would be retracted and (amazingly) asking me if I agreed with this decision but notifying me that any objection that I had to the retraction would not be included along with the retraction statement. I of course objected and wrote yet another reply, this time to their retraction statement. This is their retraction statement, including specific statements of my scholarly malfeasance:
The Editor-in-Chief has retracted this article. After publication concerns were raised regarding the content in this article and the validity of its arguments. Post-publication peer review concluded that the article does not establish a consistent methodology or document its claims with well-established sources. The article also makes several comparative claims without providing appropriate comparison data. Kevin MacDonald does not agree to this retraction. The online version of this article contains the full text of the retracted article as supplementary information.
Springer Nature formally retracted the paper sometime in early July—the title and the retraction notice are all that remain on the article’s main page, but the article can still be accessed on their site as “Supplementary Information,” with “RETRACTED ARTICLE” emblazoned diagonally on every page. However, anticipating this, I had enough sense to save a local copy, so it still lives on on my website as it originally appeared in Philosophia.
Retraction Response
I disagree with the retraction of my article “The Default Hypothesis Fails to Explain Jewish Influence.” The editors of Philosophia should be ashamed of themselves for retracting this article for such obviously spurious reasons. I am quite aware of the reality that academia has become intensely politicized and that Jews in particular are very sensitive about any discussions of Jewish influence. But I really didn’t think that my article would be retracted without any detailed response to my ~9000-word rebuttal to the post-publication reviews—a response that meticulously responded to every claim made by the reviewers. One expects a reasoned give-and-take in an academic venue, but this retraction is simply an assertion of authoritarian control. And to make matters worse, this response to the retraction statement will not be posted by the publisher.
The astonishing thing is that the retraction statement includes the following as the only reasons for the retraction:
Post-publication peer review concluded that the article does not establish a consistent methodology or document its claims with well-established sources. The article also makes several comparative claims without providing appropriate comparison data.
But none of the three post-publication reviews ever mentioned that I had failed to provide a consistent methodology, so obviously I felt no need to discuss this point in my response. And only one reviewer complained about sources, noting that I had cited evolutionary psychologist Edward Dutton. The complaint about citing Dutton is simply ad hominem rather than an honest attempt to dispute what Dutton wrote on Jewish intermarriage—a topic that is, in any case, of only marginal relevance to the main points of my paper. As I noted in my reply, “my practice is that citations should be to information that I consider reasonable and reliable, not what the political affiliations of the authors are.” I cite many authors who have political beliefs that I do not subscribe to, and in fact, the vast majority of my sources come from Jewish authors.
Regarding the issue that the paper contains “several comparative claims without providing appropriate comparison data,” I responded to each proposed instance in my reply to the reviews. But the retraction statement fails to make an argument for why my rebuttal fails.
All of my responses to this issue made the point that I was not arguing—and it was not necessary for me to argue—that Jews are more ethnocentric than any particular group, only that Jews are indeed ethnocentric. For example, in my reply to one of the post-publication reviews, I noted:
The reviewer quotes me: “… Jews under discussion were ethnocentric as indicated by ethnic networking” and comments “Does that mean that blacks are ethnocentric because of their ethnic networking? Or Catholics? Or fundamentalist Christians? This is gibberish because he is making statements about Jews as a group and arguing that they are different from gentiles but he presents no comparison data regarding relative ethnocentrism.”
[My response:] Notice that I do not make a point that Jews are more ethnocentric than any particular group either in the paper under review or in The Culture of Critique—apart from the 2002 Preface to the First Paperback Edition of The Culture of Critique (pp. xviii–xxxi) contrasting Western European and Jewish cultural forms on a variety of traits. The material in the 2002 preface is a preliminary version of the ideas in my book Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition (2019) and is in no way essential to the argument in Culture of Critique as published in 1998, where the only relevant claim I make is that Jews are ethnocentric—a claim that I document exhaustively. However, for completeness, my view is that Jews are in general more ethnocentric than Western European groups (I make no other comparisons), particularly northwestern European groups—the thesis of my Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition (2019). My emphasis on the uniqueness of Western individualism is entirely congruent with Joseph Henrich’s The WEIRDest People in the World (2020) … . When Henrich uses the superlative ‘WEIRDest’ (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic) in the title, he is emphasizing the uniqueness of the Western peoples; individualism is the polar opposite of collectivism and its associated ethnocentrism endemic to Jewish groups.
Thus there is no rebuttal to my argument that between-group comparisons are irrelevant to the argument presented in The Culture of Critique where the only point was that in fact Jews are in fact ethnocentric as indicated by Jewish ethnic networking, not that they are more ethnocentric than any other group. And in my later writing I did provide comparative data based on Western individualism—data that are irrelevant to the argument in The Culture of Critique; these data show that the individualism of the West is unique among world cultures but such data are not relevant for the argument in The Culture of Critique. None of this is considered in the retraction statement.
This retraction is a disgrace to the academic profession. At the very least, this statement should be included along with the retraction statement so that readers can judge for themselves the legitimacy of retracting it.
To his credit, Nathan Cofnas, my adversary in all this, publicly objected to the retraction, posting this on Twitter:
.@TOOEdit‘s reply to me just got retracted from Philosophia. As far as I know this is the 1st time a paper has been retracted from a philosophy journal for political reasons. I emailed Jonathan Haidt & HxA several months ago about the threat to KM’s paper but they never replied. pic.twitter.com/yKH8FwwTHD
— Nathan Cofnas (@nathancofnas) July 3, 2022
Two important points. The retraction is unprecedented: It’s “the 1st time a paper has been retracted from a philosophy journal for political reasons.” And more importantly, his email notifying Jonathan Haidt, one of the founders of Heterodox Academy, that the paper was retracted got no response. Heterodox Academy represents itself as follows:
Heterodox Academy is a nonpartisan collaborative of 5,000+ professors, educators, administrators, staff, and students who are committed to enhancing the quality of research and education by promoting open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement in institutions of higher learning.
And they note:
All our members have embraced the following statement:
“I support open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement in research and education.”
But apparently some viewpoints are not allowed, and there can be no disagreement on certain issues. Their commitment to open inquiry is a farce.
Jonathan Haidt is well known to me because of his work criticizing the groupthink that is so prevalent in the academic world; I cite him several times in my book Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition in Chapter 8 where I discuss the academic world as one of the pillars of elite power in the West (“the academic world can accurately be characterized as a moral community of the left in the sense of Jonathan Haidt”[1]). He is Jewish, and one is tempted to conclude that Heterodox Academy is simply another example of controlled opposition in the service of safeguarding Jewish interests in restricting the boundaries of academic debate on Jewish issues.
Jonathan Haidt, “Post-partisan Social Psychology.” Presentation at the meetings of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, San Antonio, TX., January 27, 2011.
Glad you are keeping the ball rolling, Professor.
Use the retraction as leverage to discredit the journal
and the power holders, i.e. those who took power as they complained
about power relations as pertaining to others;
and since then,maintain their power by censoring discussion of power relations when it pertains to themselves.
They had a choice between refuting and further validating the hypothesis. Guess what they did ?
Dr. MacDonald has once again been tried and convicted in absentia by a thug gang of antiwhites for the crime of heresy to antiwhitism.
A bitter pill indeed, fine Sir.
Why do you think there was a new Jewish elite after WWII? What was Henry Ford talking about? The Jews were obviously running things before WWI, or WWI would not have happened. Bernard Baruch. Wall Street. Jew York. The Jews just took the masks off once they got the modern state of Israel.
The Jews had much less power prior to the end of WWII and really it wasn’t until the 1960s that they really were able to flex their muscle. For example, they lost the battle for immigration restriction in 1924 despite an all-out effor.
A subjective opinion. “…much less power”. An 8 versus a 10?
https://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/light-for-nations/
https://concisepolitics.com/2016/08/19/jewish-bolsheviks-mass-murdered-66-million-mostly-christians-in-russia/
https://www.jewworldorder.org/the-jews-in-ancient-history/
True or False?
Jews had completely intermarried with practically the entire English titled nobility, which largely was based on land and territory. This combined with the commercial wealth of the urban Jews, multiplied influence, wealth, and LEVERAGE. This process was started two centuries earlier.
Same with the Junkers of Prussia. (“Want to see my junk?”).
https://nationalvanguard.org/2015/10/reflections-on-jewish-intermarriage-into-native-elites/
Git along little Goyim Dogies. I have no sympathy for the plight of “Whites”. In addition to pathological altruism, also masochism and weak-mindedness are manifest and attendant.
Oh, and BTW, my DNA shows 0 percent Ashkenazi or Sephardic genetic trace.
I said before, in a comment that was censored, that the Germanic peoples were the hosts of Jews, during the ascent from humble origins to the heights of dominance and power of Central Europe nations; from there it was centrifugal force of a high pressure spray West and East. Some people like to keep reptiles and serpents for pets, it seems. Eh What, Caroline Yeager, proud Tcherman?
In addition to pathological altruism, also masochism and weak-mindedness are manifest and attendant.”
Then jews fret over what?
Then jews fret over what?
Anyone who has read Professor MacDonald’s Culture of Critique will know that he discusses, and is careful to call attention to this practice jews have used to marry into wealth and powerful Gentile families.
As for the lengthy, multi-century stranglehold jews have had over banking and the financial institutions – and having this control stretch across the world on an international scale – it has been at least a decade and a half since I read Culture of Critique, and I cannot recall whether he touched on this topic as well.
It might be time to dust off my copy of this outstanding book and read it again.
Thanks for your comment, but actually I discuss it in Separation and Its Discontents.
“Hamlet,” III, 2: [Queen Gertrude] “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”
I have a Niece who is an MD and has quite recently become enamoured of the ‘Ancestry’ style of website, you send them some DNA and they come back with where you likely came from. My Niece, like myself, is part Ukrainian on my mother’s side. At the time of her birth her mother was having marital trouble, she had an affair with a very wealthy young Jew. After she was born the women all felt in the paternity matter odds had settled on the husband, due to physical appearance and much later, scholastic ability as she was able to breeze through medicine, while her ‘father’ was unable to matriculate. In any event she prefers to think of herself as half Jewish because the DNA sample suggested she is 51% Askenazi Jewish with the rest of her DNA is from North Western Europe. A while ago I came across a fellow in the US who had a similar longing to discover his origins, but he mischievously sent the US version of ‘Ancestry’ some DNA spittle from a pet Iguana Lizard he keeps as a pet and, guess what they came back with?
He was told his genetic makeup was 51% Ashkenazi Jewish with the rest mainly from North Western Europe. There is nothing these people will not go out of the way to lie about, no thing what ever.
Thanks for the link. Excellent compilation at vnn. I know Kevin MacDonald knows all this.
Good point. I think many on the pro-White survival side of this struggle have an overly exaggerated understanding of how much power and influence jews have over America in years past. There is no disputing the fact that today, with a 70 plus percent jewish infestation of the Brandon Administration that we are probably now at Peak jew levels, but this has not always been the case.
I do not think that it is any coincidence that, as we hit Peak jew levels of infiltration of the Biden Administration, the 24/7, 365, around the clock gushing of the vilest and most vitriolic levels of anti-White hate and venom and endless demonization of Whites (especially White male Trump voters and 2nd Amendment supporters) suddenly went into maximum overdrive as soon as Pedo Joe was installed in the White House.
We have a jewish occupied and dominated US Government who has declared outright war on the White European founding stock who built the nation that the jews have now stolen out from under them.
I do not beleive that there are many articles that have survived censorship when it involves Jewish sabotage of gentile lands. This sabotage was occuring all the way back in the 1920’s America. God only knows what else they were doing behind the scenes for the last Century.
Excerpt from “The Collapse of the Only Thing in the Garvey Movement Which Was Original or Promising”: Du Bois on Garvey:
“Secondly, Mr. Garvey alleges gigantic “conspiracies.” He said, as reported in the Negro World, May 13, 1922, at Liberty Hall: “Millions of dollars were expended in the shipping industries to boycott and put out of existence the Black Star Line.” In the Negro World of January 28, 1922, he adds: “The matter of my arrest last week for the alleged fraudulent use of the mails is but a concoction decided upon by the unseen forces operating against us to find some criminal excuse by which the promoter of the greatest movement among Negroes could be held up to world scorn and ridicule, thereby exposing the movement to contempt. It is a mean, low-down, contemptible method of embarrassing any movement for human uplift. He also says that [sic] ”Bolshevists” are paying for attacks on the line. (Negro World, December 14, 1921).”
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5121/index.html
This exposes the problem with allowing a minority having influence way beyond its numbers. It now has the power to define cultural norms over objections of those in the majority, as if they did not count at all.
What a terrible and frustrating problem. It seems to be getting to the point where someone such a Dr MacDonald will have to have his papers and books secretly passed around to people open enough to read them. There must be some way around all this.
I am convinced that some sort of grassroots campaign that states: no people and no nation has the right to censor speech in different countries throughout the world. That no people, and no nation are free from criticism or questioning! This will ring true for many people. Then finish by pointing out that the Jewish people, and the State of Israel are not above these principles. We have got to establish this principle first, then we might get some oxygen to spread what we really want to say!
Secrecy, stealthy collusion among “wrongthinkers,” and a samizdat press have a long history. Those who are betting that all three also have a bright future in this country and in the rest of what was once the West are, I think, betting on a winning horse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xGxQXmu7Os
Peer review should comprise of conscious independent scholars and not some “authorized committee”.
Why bother getting any type of literary authentication out of these peer review institutions….
It’s painfully obvious that none of them are interested in any type of deliberation, when the literature itself is critical of particular goings on.
Dr. Macdonald, you are a warrior and seeker of truth, goodness and beauty.
The 9000 or so word response to their rebuttal would have been time better spent presenting other useful information to all your followers.
WE ACTUALLY DO NOT GIVE A RAT’S A** what these unconscious bipods have to say.
Yet reply we must. Lest they think wer’e swallowing their unmitigated shit !
Cofnas said MacDonald’s paper (in Philosophia; note the non-Jewish title!) as far as he [Cofnas] knows was the 1st time a paper has been retracted from a philosophy journal for political reasons.
.
This is course is pure eyewash or BS, or, better, ‘Chutzpah’. Countless papers have been removed, banned, censored, and edited by Jews.
From philosophy journals?
I’m waiting to see what people make of this. And how they interpret ‘philosophical’. Note that in the time of the USSR even Stalin was regarded as a ‘philosopher’.
… ” philosopher and professional bank robber ” !
Non-jewish? The Talmud asserts that all is jewish- therefore all words belong to jews. . .
“2000 mules” demonstrates the sweeping powers Jews(Zukerberg et al) now have in the USA – even to manipulate the outcome of Federal elections beyond campaign donations. Note there have not been any serious investigations into the financing of the “mules” by mainstream media or the government(eg DOJ,FBI ).
The manipulation of the election seems to have been Jewish enterprise to Professor Mac Donald’s point. This should have been an alarming wake up call to the American public.
” This should have been an alarming wake up call to the American public.”
“the American public”
( aka Christian sheeple herds )
are no more likely to wake up to real world existential political threats from their jewmasterss than actual sheep herds which in ten million years have not yet woke-up to the permanent threat of wolves whom routinely feast on mutton chops .
I have to give Cofnas credit for his very sly self-serving move. By criticizing the retraction of Prof. McDonald’s article he bags two birds with one stone. First, he presents himself as an incorruptible academic in whose mouth political butter does not melt. Second, he inserts himself into this shameful affair, eager to associate his name with that of Prof MacDonald again, like a sticky chewing gum to the shoe. The subtext he is weaving in his deluded arrogant mind is something like: “No need to silence him. I have destroyed his arguments once and can do so any time.”
False syllogism, or fake “coincidentia oppositorum”, or to put it less academically, newspeak, i.e. doubletalk, subverts the reader. A new form of Western msm & academic inquisition, sponsored largely after WW2 by the Frankfurt School, now by US neocon scholars. Check also the latest link where our talks/writs (Bolton’s, Sunic, TOO) are subject to such false syllogism by a Jewish activist. https://scoutnews.substack.com/p/exclusive-britains-biggest-bookseller
I would not disagree, but there are more aspects to this. This guy’s operating manual is Alinsky SOP. And very effective, but requires an AMORAL operating system. No lie too great, no action too extreme. Meanwhile, at the refugee camp, the cud-chewing bovine Goyim are trying to make sense out of the contradictory and confusing script of some version of the Bible, written by “God”. Unfortunately, it offers no clear direction, priorities, or otherwise guidelines of practical, concrete, This Universe, to steer through the vicissitudes of wind and waves. Designed to fail; a map that cannot de adequately deciphered and interpreted. In fact, interpretation should not even be necessary for any manual or map.
At some point Goyim have be able to summarize and make generalizations that are operant. Noise is noise. It is defined as not useful, misleading or distracting. And the Jewish noise will always be noise. It does not have to be dissected, anal-ized time after time. Why do we waste time with these sideline, peripheral wasted issues?
It takes me little time to process the comments on this site, because so many of them are repetitious of the same items, themes, and observations. Novel insights, perspective are rare, just as on a battlefield or power plant, observers and opinion givers never leave base camp or the air conditioned Control Room.
News flash: Jews have vaulted to the top of all our institutions, controlling not only actions be overt coercion, but directing cognition, values, ideals, content of personas, and defining root meanings of the Gentiles.
Another Breaking News Story: their top enablers are the Christian “leaders”-clergy, influencers, opinion makers. There is no demonstration or proof needed to validate this conclusion. A yeoman’s knowledge of history, some curiosity, and open eyes confirms.
What was the main inciting factor leading to post-war Jewish dominance?
Was it that structural changes (technology, markets, and politics) and freedom allowed for the most intelligent Jews to subvert?
Did post-Holocaust White guilt also play a major factor?
One variable surely cannot explain all the differences. I am just confused as to what Gentiles could have done different.
Holocaust guilt is a big factor, but the endless money supply is the biggest factor of all.
With massive amounts of money, jewish donors can easily buy off every leader on both “sides,”
and control of the media and academia solidify their control.
The GOP/DNC are filled with shabbos goy sellouts doing the bidding of the jews.
And it’s easy to see what’s going on once you understand what the jews want….and what the jews want is ALWAYS very very bad for white people. Whites have had no voice for the last 70 years.
But whites are waking up, so the jews are coming down hard against any sort of criticism.
. . .but the endless FAKE money supply is the biggest factor of all.
Real money makes a sound when it hits the ground- that’s why it’s called sound money.
“The GOP/DNC are filled with shabbos goy sellouts doing the bidding of the jews.”
This statement hides what’s really going on here. If you remember, the NSDAP persecuted both jews and catholics, removing them from influence, and it was the pope w/ help from catholic spain and portugal, that facilitated jews exodus from europe the US, in exchange for the power sharing arrangement we see now between jews and jesuits. These catholics are the shabbos goy of which you speak, as they are both involved in conspiracy against the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, and nation as a whole.
The USA went along for about twenty years after the war feeling proud of itself for winning he war. We didn’t feel guilty for the “holocaust” and we didn’t even feel guilty for slavery or what happened to the Indians. Meanwhile the Jews were cranking out books the whole time that exhibited their complete domination of the USA at all levels long before WWII. That’s how I saw it when I learned how to recognize a Jewish name and pick up the clues of a Jewish bio.
Jews were very active throughout the 20th century pushing immigration, multiculturalism, Black power. But they didn’t win until the 1960s with the immigration law, etc. and consolidated power in the 1970s.
Kevin is very keen to assign jewish power to the post-1945 era. If people believe in post-1945 film, dvd, newspapers, and TV, this is not surprising.
.
But there was Jewish activity via the ‘British’ Empire many centuries before this, including the Cromwellian, Dutch William Era, the French ‘revolution’, and other secretised events — Hundred Years War, US ‘Civil War’, Turkey and Armenia.
.
Recent interesting revisionist reconsiderations include Japan (see Miles Mathis for interesting articles on Pacific Wars) and China (it’s not be chance that ‘Chinese Communism’ was coined). Mathis has some material on the East India Company (which included Holland) and on Jewish habitations around the world. (Including pirate strongholds).
.
Going back, we find material on central and Eastern Europe.
.
KMac seems to concentrate on the 1920s, not the late 19th century massive movements (“prompted by pogroms” of course). But it seems unlikely the 1920s Bills and Acts were genuine; more likely feints. Did Jews really want to awaken whites to the possibilities of alien immigration, especially as Jews had prior experience? Maybe they wanted to keep out Italians, nominally their enemies in WW1?
.
I hate to say it, but KMac looks like an old retainer, from the ‘Old Time Religion’ crowd, unaware of work on Lindbergh, JFK, the ‘Moon Landings’ and ‘nukes’.
I would guess abortion and color television had something to do with it.
When I heard that Abortion/s is a Jewish Sacrament to Moloch and the key to jewish endless power, I dismissed it as superticious rumors. But I was totally shocked by the reaction from jews to the SCOTUS decision to overturn Roe/Wade,I see these masses of JEWS and only jews foaming at the mouth like wild savage animals full of fury and psychotic violence. It lead me to wonder why are JEWS and only jews/Judaism obsessed with keeping abortions/legal? .Here I began researching the connection between/among Jews/Judaism/Abortions..Turns out that indeed ..Jews have a covenant of power with Moloch since ancient times..Abortion is the continuation of cult religious INFANTICIDES to keep the jewsih covenant with Moloch,,thats the real reason they are psychotically mad about SCOTUS..they see their power/covenant threatened. And the jewish reacation has gone where no other reactionaray group has ever gone before..JEWS power cabal has used an INSANE senile President Biden to use the Nuclear Option..signing/issuing an Executive Order to undermine/disregard the SCOTUS decision to overturn Roe/wade. This nuclear disastrous executive order is a clear and present danger to our Constitutional Order a direct attack on the basic principles of our democracy; separation of powers, check and balances etc. The JEWS are going ballistic, insane, blinded by their hatred pychotic NARCISSM. JEWS are willing to blow up the country..the jews see themselves ABOVE the laws/Constitutional ORDER that governs 99% of our gentile Christian Nation inpose upon America a jewish Talmudic/Moloch cult of DEATH….For their sake for our sake for the sake of this country..someone..MUST STOP this JEWISH Madness going utterly insane..
Where does the text of this covenant with Moloch appear?
There are several references in the Dead Sea Scrolls, early versions of the Torah, and many references in the Talmud..
The TALMUD.
The Talmud? I have never read the Talmud, although I read a book about it. I do not remember anything like that. Where is this idolatry to Moloch found?
” For their sake for our sake for the sake of this country..someone..MUST STOP this JEWISH Madness going utterly insane..”
Not a JC “someone” unless you believe in the Christian religious dogma of the actual deity status of the presumed existence of an historical JC ;
and not a Pope Francis “someone” whom retains the enemy Jews to manage the inordinately immense wealth of The RCC .
The notion of investing any one human person
with enough political power
to [ save ] numerous White cultures
around the world ,
from the ongoing
anti-Christian genocidal extinction ,
would be an exercise of applied lunacy .
The only other possible “someone”
would be a [ group ] of supreme Nordics —
assuming such an organized group
does or will soon exist —
whom would have the political power
in reasonable accord with
God’s Law of Power Distributions
to lead humanity on the way to
thrive-n-survive beyond the
( guaranteed inevitable )
{{ Solar TOTAL Extinction Event }}
whereby ALL extant Humanity
here on planet earth
will perish forever
into the abyss of
The DOOM of OBLIVION .
Remember at the height of all this how Nathan Cofnas was so eager to help publish Kevin MacDonald’s reply in Quillette, or some Quillette-adjacent publication? Neither do I. Furthermore, an unambiguous refutation of Kevin MacDonald (and by extension the articles on The Occidental Observer) would simply be to find an overrepresentation of Jews who promote White ethnocentricism regarding immigration, education, etc. Of course no overrepresentation will ever be found. Indeed quite the reverse. Cofnas’s worthless paper is certainly nothing of the sort.
The problem is not just Glaubenjuden inflluence in the USA but USA influence in the World.
At the end of WW2 the communists suggested a very sensible plan to develop the World which would have left the Europeans in Africa with the Americans developing the Americas.
The American president refused (the shopkeeper not the cripple) and started the cold war instead. The rest is history. I am a disowned peasant but my family are still in the club and I hear things you other peasants don’t hear.
We’re all trying to reason with Beelzebub here. The Jews live in a subjective reality, we live in an objective one; in God We Trust. Jews: In ourselves and what’s best for us we trust.
This is a win. What are they so afraid of that they retracted it? Why won’t they even address Kevin’s discussion of the 1965 immigration act? Is it because, the current situation at the border, which has caused over 107,000 American drug overdose deaths from the fentanyl coming into the country, or the recent deaths of over 50 border crossers, left in a tractor trailer where temperatures reached over 130 degrees, and well over a million illegals have come into the country, mostly unvetted, since the Jewish Biden administration assumed power, is the worst it has ever been? And all overseen by U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, who is a Sephardic Jew.
They know we know and that’s a great thing even though it might not seem like it at the moment.
God bless you Kevin and all of you. Keep fighting the good fight everyone. Keep spreading our message, knowledge, and information. The masses are suffering under Jewish control of this country and they are listening. Gently tell them what’s going on, with facts.
In “Inventing the AIDS Virus,” Peter Duesberg openly declared what many other academics and scholars had long known but thought it too risky or impolitic to say: that the peer-review system that underlies scholarly publication has less to do with research and discovery than with control and suppression and maintenance of the status quo of raw power. Although Duesberg is writing of his own field, the hard sciences, what he says is equally true for the soft sciences and the humanities.
The cynical contempt for honesty and substantiated research that is evident in the retraction statement issued by the editor in chief of “Philosophia” plainly came as the equivalent of a blow on a bruise to our honored host, Kevin MacDonald. But in light of his decades-long experience with backhanded dismissal of his work by cowardly colleagues with a third of his insight and a tenth of his integrity, can it truly have come as a surprise?
Albert Einstein surely would have received financial support and funding in today’s world, because he was dishonest and a fraud. His Theories of Relativity were plagiarized from several other real researchers-those who worked full time in experiemental and research laboratories, validated by inductive evidence.
Meanwhile, Einstein-hater of Goyim, clandestine Zionist, anti-Christian-barely had his PhD accepted, and subsequently worked as a patent clerk in the Swiss Patent Office. I have seen the evidence provided to support this assertion, and have NOT seen any evidence that Einstein provided anything original or advanced scientific knowledge. He was like a Wall Street financier, making money on the labors of others by craftiness and dishonesty.
In today’s hyper-dishonest pay for fore ordained conclusions and findings, Albert would be Sanhedrin honor roll.
https://sayanimnetwork.wordpress.com
The same can be said for many Jewish luminaries. The Beatles went from lollipop tunes to complex melodies and arrangements. What was not made know to the adoring public was this musicology was provided by long time Jewish arrangers and facilitators, George Martin and Son. Did anybody notice that when the Beatles broke up, their individual effects were lackluster and elemental? What about Bob Dylan? After a period of fertile output of simple yet catchy tunes and lyrics, suddenly there was…nothing. It was reported he stayed in a drugged cliched stupor for years. His appearance in come movies revealed a wooden person, two dimensional, with no lyrical or artistic content. Who were the “invisibles” behind the curtain and behind closed doors. America’s poet laureate. Did you ever read his free association book in the 1960s? Kamala Harris is a genius wordsmith by comparison. “It ain’t me, Babe”. No shit.
https://yandex.com/search/?text=albert+enstein+fraud+plagerist&lr=102685
While we are on the subject of scientific research, it is edifying and necessary to know that 95% of all scientific research is invalid or inadequately supported in its conclusions and findings. What???
https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?type=printable&id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
https://www.aier.org/article/who-is-john-ioannidis/
I did science before 1971, for 5 years, from whence I left the university for real life experience. Then followed after a pause, to engineering school. Engineering is applied science in the real world of building and creating things that do useful work. Putting engineers in all levels of government, would create a superlative society, closer to ideal than any other group could direct or generate.
False syllogism, or fake “coincidentia oppositorum”, or to put it less academically, newspeak, i.e. doubletalk, subverts the reader. A new form of Western msm & academic inquisition, sponsored largely after WW2 by the Frankfurt School, now by US neocon scholars. Check also the latest link where our talks/writs (Bolton’s, Sunic, TOO) are subject to such false syllogism by a Jewish activist. https://scoutnews.substack.com/p/exclusive-britains-biggest-bookseller
How do Brits “Sneak into Britain” (ie, Their Own Country’s Consensus) and function among other Britains in Great Britain??
Is it the same as “Germans were wrong for being themselves in Germany?? …Declared by separatist outsiders that swindled an entire nation for themselves outta the deal?? ……………does this sound logical to anyone?? is this how we go out?? I don’t think so!
in response to this>>> “Far-right authors who deny the Holocaust have sneaked into Britain’s largest bookseller, Scout can reveal.”
Jews, you’re going to have to explain yourselves better soon to a Panel of OUR Authority, not yours. not even shared. We’re Not jewish. Back tf Off!
“In any case, the Holocaust is actually a good yardstick by which to measure someone’s attachment to reality.”
That is the only statement in scoutsnews I can agree with…
Thanks you for the link, Dr Sunic
Professor one good question is what could White Christians have done differently to combat this stuff? Say a rich and powerful leader of the 1940’s or 1950’s?? It just seems we were sitting ducks to this propaganda. I think the big question is if their was a replay or time machine and we were sent back to that time, what could we all have done differently?
I think things could have gone quite differently if Charles Lindbergh had run for president. But I can’t think of others who had any kind of shot.
Nothing. We’re not preemptive and will Not be forced to become it. It’s far from done or over or moot… it’s still happening now until WE sacrifice convenience for asserting ourselves and stand our ground, come what may… we can no longer stand by like deer in headlights as their genocide white gentiles gains critical mass like Dr KM said 15 years ago +/- “it looks like they’re well on their way to succeeding”
The question has been asked for years but still can’t seem to gain any traction because of it’s salacious premise… “why did the gentiles allow this to happen”?? “What could we have done differently to combat it??” well, what could the person have done differently to avoid getting sucker punched in a game that they were not informed they were in called the “knockout game?? kind of a stupid question.
Fallacious*
as their genocide of* white gentiles gains critical mass.
“it looks like they’re well on their way to succeeding” Dr KM might have said it a little differently…
One thing I always thought hurt was the collapse of small business and local communities in the 1980’s. If we supported smaller and local businesses our own people run, versus large globalist conglomerates. Professor your view of the big corporations and Republicans falling into this trap of always supporting them? The Jeff Bezos types hate us the most. I dont see why we should support tax cuts for him??
Where do you get the idea that I always support big business and the GOP? Weird.
I did not mean you professor, I meant the GOP and White Republican voters in general. Do you feel Tucker Carlson is the one mainstream voice that disputes this narrative? I also wonder if there are a few small businesses you know of that would be good to support? Medium sized businesses?
That was not my intent professor. Do you have a president you think who more managed a social and fiscal conservatism better? Calvin Coolidge? Eisenhower?
Cockroaches scurry from the flashlight of truth, Kevin. What you write about (((them))) is more like an aerial spotlight. Their hypocrisy is there for all to see. Keep up the good work on disseminating truth. It is an indomitable weapon and will lead us to ultimate victory.
They redact and censor because they everything to lose in a free exchange of views.
Professor Mac would wipe them out and they know it.
The editors of Philosophia: YET ANOTHER BUCNH OF COWARDS OR JEWS CONTROLLED REVIEW….
MOST OF THE BIGGEST CRIMES COMMITTED SINCE NAPOLEONIC TIMES HAVE BEEN PLANNED BY JEWS (ROTSHCHILD, ROCKEFELLER, SOROS, NOWADAYS PFIZER CEO IS A JEW TOO) AND ALWAYS DELIVERED BY THEIR GENTILE SERVANTS WHICH THEY CALL GOYIM…
THERE IS NO OTHER RACE THAN THE WHITE ONE WHO IS STUPID ENOUGH TO DESTROY ITSELF TO SERVE THE INTERESTS OF ALL OTHERS, INCLUDING JEWS, BLACKS, ARABS AND ASIANS.
NO JEW WOULD EVER DO TO JEWS WHAT WHITE PEOPLE DO AGAINST THEIR OWN KIND.
WHY ARE WE SO STUPID?
JEWS MUST BE PUT BAC IN THEIR IGHTFUL PLACE WHICH WAS WELL UNDERSTOOD UNTIL THE 18TH CENTURY…
THERE IS A REASON WHY FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS THEY AHVE BEEN CHASED FROM EVERYWHERE….
That’s seems to be the narrative from (((their))) perspective or part of it at least… you should join them. seems like you have the left perspective
“THERE IS NO OTHER RACE THAN THE WHITE ONE WHO IS STUPID ENOUGH TO DESTROY ITSELF TO SERVE THE INTERESTS OF ALL OTHERS, INCLUDING JEWS, BLACKS, ARABS AND ASIANS.
NO JEW WOULD EVER DO TO JEWS WHAT WHITE PEOPLE DO AGAINST THEIR OWN KIND.
WHY ARE WE SO STUPID?”