Featured Articles

Maureen Dowd on Slithering Neocons: Why Isn’t the ADL Outraged?

/132 Comments/in , /by

Maureen Dowd recently wrote a column dripping with what is routinely labeled “anti-Semitism” by the ADL and other guardians of political correctness  (“Neocons Slither Back“). Most commentators (see here) focused on her claim that Dan Senor is Mitt Romney’s guru on all things related to Israel. Jeffrey Goldberg weighs in:

Maureen may not know this, but she is peddling an old stereotype, that gentile leaders are dolts unable to resist the machinations and manipulations of clever and snake-like Jews. (Later, Hounshell wrote, “(A)mazing that apparently nobody sat her down and said, this is not OK.”)

This sinister stereotype became a major theme in the discussion of the Iraq war, when critics charged that Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, among other Jewish neoconservatives, were actually in charge of Bush Administration foreign policy. This charge relegated George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Stephen Hadley and the other Christians who actually set policy to the status of puppets.

Of course, no one would say there was anything sinister about saying that Karl Rove had inordinate influence on Bush on domestic issues. It’s only a problem when a Jew is said to have influence; the implicit (ridiculous) theory is that no Jew could ever have a strong influence on a president, especially on issues related to Jewish ethnic interests—prototypically Israel. As usual, the actual facts are irrelevant. Simply saying that a Jew has such influence crosses the line—even though Dowd never mentions that Senor is a Jew. Read more

As The War Drums Beat

/78 Comments/in /by
I contemplate my recent trip to the Islamic Republic of Iran and ask myself who wants war between America and Iran. I quickly surmise that it is not the American people, nor the Iranian people, but globalists (international bankers and their multinational beneficiaries). They control Israel, the American media and most of our politicians…and by extension our foreign policy.
My journey to this exotic and little understood land began with an invitation to “New Horizon – The First International Independent Filmmakers Festival”. It was a conference and festival held in Tehran from September 2nd through September 7th. Filmmakers and intellectuals from around the world attended. It was one of the most stimulating experiences that I have ever had and an effective bridge between diverse cultures and perspectives – with the purpose of promoting truth, justice, liberty, and peace.
This initiative was undertaken, not by America or other world leaders, but by a country unfairly besieged with sanctions and threats of war. My observations were in stark contrast to the perceptions of most Americans. What I experienced was a devout country with a love of God, family, and nation – and an uncompromising respect for the noblest of human endeavors. Read more

The Man Who Kissed the Pope’s Ring

/68 Comments/in , /by

In the spring of 2011, while living in Rome, I met the Israeli Ambassador to the Vatican. I was attending a speech he was giving in a Franciscan monastery overlooking the ruins of the ancient Forum. Earlier in the day, he had given a similar speech before Pope Benedict XVI and his advisors. Then, that evening, he appeared before a group of about one hundred Catholic guests and clerical members of the Franciscans, an Order historically associated with the Spanish Inquisition. Ambassador Mordachay Lewy was presenting his government’s position on creating peace in the Middle East, which would come through its plan for a two state solution. Although the final plan could not yet be made public, he promoted its inevitability with words backed by the full weight of Tel Aviv, a world power more formidable than the Vatican, even if not defended by its vaunted Swiss Guards. Everyone, he said, in the Israeli and Palestinian governments interested in peace had come to understand that there was no other alternative than to have two separate states – one for the Jews and one for the Palestinians.

In order to bring this about, he said, there were many political obstacles to overcome. But, first it was necessary to distinguish between the possible and the impossible. Everyone must realize that the ideas of “peace” and of “justice” are two separate ideals. The Ambassador invoked various philosophical arguments to support his and his government’s belief that the two words must be considered in two different ways and in two separate spheres. Peace, he said, is for humans and was meant for this world. Justice, he said, is God’s alone and meant only for the next. Behind his presentation, for those aware of the Palestinian side of the equation, were the unspoken and regularly smothered words – “Right of Return.” Read more

Nature and Nurture Revisited: A Chronicle of the Landmark Minnesota Twin Study

/239 Comments/in /by

On August 15, 1992, Arthur Jensen delivered a well-received speech to a packed audience at the Centennial Convention of the American Psychological Association in Washington, D.C. Jensen’s invited address, “The Cyril Burt Scandal, Research Taboos, and the Media,” focused on the investigative findings of two meticulously researched books (Robert Joynson’s The Burt Affair and Ronald Fletcher’s Science, Ideology, and the Media: The Cyril Burt Scandal) which all but exonerated Cyril Burt, the eminent British psychologist, of allegations of fraud in his study of identical twins reared apart.

Burt’s detractors seized on suspicious statistical anomalies to claim that he fabricated data in his twin study findings. Insufficient details of the collection and analysis of data on Burt’s part helped fuel the speculation that Burt fudged some of his work. Joynson and Fletcher independently concluded that the totality of the evidence of fraud was based on conjecture, innuendo, and exaggerations. Both authors presented a compelling case that Burt’s critics intentionally set out to discredit one of the most distinguished reputations in the annals of British psychology. Fletcher and Joynson marshaled enough counter evidence to show that Burt’s detractors rushed to judgment, made claims that were eventually found to be untrue (such as missing assistants), and omitted crucial evidence, some of which was intentionally destroyed, that may have exonerated Burt of misconduct.

The International Ballroom West of the Washington Hilton Hotel was packed with several hundred APA attendees, including a number of noteworthy psychologists. Jensen showed photos of Burt from his own collection, relayed what it was like to work as Burt’s understudy, and summarized the case for Burt’s defense. He explained some of the animosity of Burt’s detractors and the likely personal and political motivations for discrediting such a distinguished psychologist. Read more

The High-Mindedness of the British: New Zealand and the United States

/242 Comments/in , /by

Fairness and Freedom: A History of Two Open Societies, New Zealand and the United States.
David Hackett Fischer
New York: Oxford University Press, xxv + 629 pages.

I have to start off by saying that David Hackett Fischer’s Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America has shaped the way I see American history and much else. He provides a compelling account of how the four main British-derived groups (Puritans, distressed Cavaliers, Quakers, and Scots-Irish borderers) differed and their struggle for dominance in America. To me as an evolutionist, a big part of the attraction is that Fischer roots these cultural differences in the distant past—in English pre-history. Thus the tendencies of the two main groups, Puritans based in East Anglia and the Cavaliers in Southeast England, go back to the murky period of English pre-history. These types (Puritans relatively egalitarian, Cavaliers elitist and hierarchical) indicate very strong cultural differences and thus likely to be influenced by ethnic-genetic differences.

Fairness and Freedom continues his comparative approach, this time comparing two different British-derived societies, New Zealand and the United States. The basic thesis is that New Zealand political culture is much more infused with “an abiding concern for fairness” (p. 14), while the U.S. is more focused on an ideology of individual freedom.

Interestingly, until the mid-20th century and then doubtless because of Western influence, there are no words for fairness in languages apart from English, Danish, Norwegian, and Frisian. Moreover, the words for fair and fairness have no Greek or Latin roots, but are nevertheless traceable to an Indo-European origin where they appear only in the above group of Northern European languages (and notably excluding German). The original Indo-European word meant “to be content,” later giving rise to the Gothic fagrs, meaning pleasing to behold and often connoting blond hair and fair complexion. It eventually came to mean something that could be agreed on by most parties—e.g., a fair price. Read more

Mr. Derbyshire, Get Right with the Lord

/165 Comments/in , /by

It’s hard to believe it’s been four and a half years since I wrote a column about British polymath John Derbyshire. That was well before Lehman Brothers collapsed, before the world economy teetered on the brink, before the U.S. government gave untold bailout money to the largest banks and corporations.

In my column, I was critical of Derbyshire’s views on the writings of our editor, Kevin MacDonald. The column discussed Jewish power and the taboos surrounding that very power. (See a recent account of Jewish power here —”Elena Kagan’s “diversity problem” and Jewish privilege” by Patrick Slattery.)

Derbyshire began his ruminations on MacDonald’s writings in the March 10, 2003 issue of The American Conservative under the title “The Marx of the Anti-Semites.” There his take on the books was mixed, beginning with “The Culture of Critique includes many good things. . . . Kevin MacDonald is working in an important field.” Derbyshire even validated an important point in MacDonald’s work: “These Jewish-inspired pseudoscientific phenomena that The Culture of Critique is concerned with — Boasian anthropology, psychoanalysis, the Frankfurt School, and so on — were they a net negative for America? Yes, I agree with MacDonald, they were.” Read more

The Future of the European Peoples, Part 2

/119 Comments/in , /by

The following is part 2 of the translation of my speech delivered in the German language ( Die Zukunft der Völker Europa) at the NPD Summer Academy in Saarbrucken, Germany (August 23-26, 2012).  The meeting and the lectures were also attended by several representatives of the Front National from the nearby Alsace, France. The original speech in the German language can be downloaded here. 

*                       *                       *

A Forthcoming War in Europe

A likely war in Europe is not going to have clear cut demarcation lines between “good White Europeans” vs. “evil dark-colored non-Europeans,” as many nationalists in Europe and the USA often anticipate. The pending war will demonstrate nasty features of combined class struggles, racial struggles and messy interethnic struggles within, between and amidst Europeans themselves. And yet, the aforementioned distorted and politically biased historical narratives must not be an excuse for Europe’s age-old small time nationalisms. Petty nationalism, whether of the German, Croatian, American, English, or French extraction, has inflicted immense damage to all European peoples. Only in retrospect can wee see the disastrous legacy of the nation-state which has bequeathed upon us, in the span of the last two hundred years, murderous religious wars, ongoing territorial disputes, and false historical memories. Last, but not least, we must all raise an embarrassing question: What does it mean today to exclaim “I am proud of being a German, a Fleming, a French, or an American,” considering that more than 10 percent of Germany’s citizens, 15 percent of  France’s  citizens and 30 percent of the U.S. population are of non-European descent? Read more