Overview of MacDonald's Failure
Brief notes follow:–
Nov 13 2023: Looking at the
'Occidental Observer' online, I find with some anguish the same old badly-written evasive articles by obscure people, and much worse comments, usually unable to state anything clearly, except occasional accurate corrections. Sad stuff and rather terrifying.
(14 August 2023)
Review of Black Britain [sic] by Richard Knight looks at a book attributed to 'Chris Knight', called
Black Britain, published by Allen & Unwin in 1973, 'with an account of recent events at the Institute of Race Relations'. With a synchronised comment immediately on cue, 'England and most of Europe self destructed'. Richard Knight says nothing about the parts played by Jews, despite the fact that the last of MacDonald's original books (25 years back) explicitly tried to discuss the Jews and their immigration policies.
The Occidental Observer seems to be still MacDonald's flagship!
(7 August 2023) A good article on 'racism' as a legal intrusion, by Richard Knight, is online. BUT it's like diagnosing a disease, or a malignant weed, without saying it's known to be intentionally spread by Jews. It's a hollow article, asking questions, but not answering them.
(22 July 2023) Eulogy for Richard Lynn (1930-2022) by someone called Kirkegaard is embarrassingly trite. What Lynn called his autobiography is online, a sad thing showing he knew nothing about Jews. It shows how he produced a lot of undistinguished papers.
(16 May 2023): A truly saddening aspect of MacDonald is the
exclusion of people with detailed personal knowledge of Jews, who showed up in the comments of the Occidental Observer, until May 22 2023, when only previous writers or contributors of $10 monthly would be allowed; it's not clear whether they'd be moderated. It's impossible to know what comments are removed; there may be many that never appear. There was a woman with family involvement in Surinam, who has ceased commenting long ago. A man with knowledge of Jews in Russia comments, but has no articles. There are WW2 involvees who only post comments, never articles. Victims of violence or financial frauds get no articles. There is nothing on US war crimes. MacDonald is happiest with peevish whinging anonymous academics, who are only in place in some lightweight pseudo-specialisation.
Another persistent aspect is failure do identify Jewish printed money as a very significant factor. A recent piece included comments (not relevant to the actual article—it's the only way they can get in) talking of Jewish media control, notably of 'movies'. Nobody said that if you print money, you're not at risk, which explains Jewish control of movies, and the lavish funding. So inevitable is this failure it probably results from systematic censorship: the facts of funding of US Christianity never get mentioned, for example.
(5 Feb 2023): A new piece in Occidental Observer online (book reviewed;
Jeffrey Epstein and blackmail credited to 'Jason Cannon', by a real-or-otherwise small press, doesn't mention Jews and doesn't understand such things as nuclear frauds, and faked deaths, assuming Epstein really is dead. And so on. Terribly weak stuff. NB I noticed MacDonald has misspelt 'principal' in
Culture of Critique which he claims to be revising; sigh.
(26 Nov 2022): Briefly ...
The problem is MacDonald's narrowness. He writes as though 1950s USA mass beliefs, and Long Beach University, apply to the world for all time. He is correctly concerned with immigration into the USA, as encouraged by Jews. But he doesn't survey the world, and see Jewish control of weapons and money produce vast numbers of 'refugees'. He's shocked that anyone should consider that US force allowed Jews, and forced others, into the USA. He is correctly concerned about deindustrialisation, but doesn't see Jewish activity in most other countries is used for that end. He presumably is concerned over Jewish money-printing and the vast benefits to Jews, but has no theories about what to do about it. And his lack of investigation applies to the past: he says nothing about the Kahal system, with its huge influence over Jews, and he says nothing about Christianity and Islam, both offshoots from Jews, and the absurdities of Christianity. I see the same thing in Britain, with unthinking support for wars rigged up by Jews.
(19 Oct 2021): When an individual finds a flaw in his or her organisation, there are two common reactions: the said individual may work further, to try for reforms in the organisation to remove the flaw and perhaps other flaws. Or the individual may want a small change, then return to the comfort and familiarity of the previous state.
MacDonald's work omits most of the hateful forms of Jewish activity. He blames them for contaminating the populations of many states, but not much for controlling money, and not at all for mass murders and wars in other parts of the world. He says in effect he doesn't care if American troops cause disasters overseas, getting assets for Jews at the expense of the whites. He doesn't foresee other populations' replies, which in effect may be, in time, saying you did nothing to help us, so die.
Some of the articles published by the
Occidental Observer are just book reviews, of the sort designed to try to increase sales. At the very end of 2021, edited diaries of a rich American were reviewed, showing simple reactions to Jewish power.
In November 2022, there is an article by RockaboatUs, deploring the uselessness of most Americans, and hoping they grow poorer and feebler. This seems part of the Jewish opposition, hoping whites will abandon the wonderful cities they built, and secede. RockaboatUs seems to forget what happened to Hitler, and fail to understand the Jew control over the Führer. Incidentally, the site generally shows no doubts re supposed nukes, and little (if anything) on the implications of the COVID fraud. Not for the first time, with regret I have to abandon the site. In any case judging by responses to my own postings, the downloads from it aren't impressive.
Individualism as a concept can have widely different interpretations; MacDonald seems not to bother about this fact, but tends to just take the Jewish-promoted version. There's the simple 'independence and self-reliance' version, and (in the Concise Oxford Dictionary) one subsense, 'self-centred ... egoism'.
To illustrate the problem, consider Bertie Russell praising 'the hermit's temperament' as part of some excellences; he was thinking of a lone researcher pursuing truth on his own in his own way. 'Positive individualism' perhaps. But what of the individualism of a person who simply cares nothing, for example about the Jewish problem? It's individualistic, but of no use—'negative individualism', perhaps. What about someone who joins, and is subservient to, some army, but then does things on his own impulse? Is such a person 'individualistic'?
On the specific topics of the 'Holocaust' and 'Hitler' (Yeager is an unrevised supporter), here's Carolyn Yeager from her site
jan27.org quoting MacDonald:
“Yeah, I guess I’m not, uh, I’ve never had any sympathy really, before – I haven’t seen anything that would really, you know, convince me. And I, frankly, haven’t dealt into it very much. My view is that it’s not important for what I’m doing and I don’t think it’s really important – I think what’s really important is the culture of the holocaust, you know, how it’s taught in school, how it’s used to defend Israel, and it’s used as a weapon against people who oppose immigration, and all those things – ah I think those are very important things to discuss. So whether it actually happened, exactly, and all that is something that I don’t think is possible to even go there anymore, is just … just uh … third rail.”
... about Adolf Hitler. You answered, “Oh God, I think that the only term I can use is a disaster. I think that his own personality … got in the way of [the generals] carrying out their strategic military [goals] in World War Two. I think he was, you know, he thought of himself as a general or something. You know, he interfered with policy that should have been left to professionals and I think that that was … horrible, that was a disaster.”
Let me summarise MacDonald's multiple failures, generally caused by his inability to delve and think deeply.
MacDonald thinks there was a new elite after 1945!—a propaganda triumph for Jews, aware of secret Jewish actions throughout unrecorded history. In fact of course the USA was set up by European elites, a huge project, and Jewish money was a secretive part of European power, notably I think the Bank of England. A lot of revisionist work is applied to discovering the past both of Jews and their collaborators.
MacDonald doesn't see much need to be original, and reconstruct the world away from Jewish language and attitudes. An example is his emphasis on 'resource competition'. In fact, one Jewish methodology is to aim to collect rents and assets; the invention of churches with officials who have a long-term title to incomes is not what would usually be regarded as competition over resources. MacDonald is unconsciously shuffled away from Jewish finance.
MacDonald's work also omits the gross flattery used by Jews for their own purposes. An obvious example was the flattery of Americans as they killed and attacked around the world, in particular from 1913/14. At the present time, Jewish flattery of blacks is a pandemic of absurdities, to be discarded when they've been used.
I doubt that many people view the
Occidental Observer as anything more than a club for disgruntled white lightweights who can't write clearly and don't know much, for example on
Supposed nuke bombs. It often is, especially when there are pages of silly praise.
MacDonald's work even where supposedly expert is very feeble. He loves the idea that Scandinavians, not clearly distinguished by him from Swedes, want to be invaded by blacks. The fact is they had thousands of years to import them, without doing so. On long-term evolution, MacDonald doesn't consider far-reaching hypotheses, apparently believing that if he hadn't thought of them, they couldn't be important. A good example is
Frank McManus's salt hypothesis.
On the smaller-scale, but essential, historical data from which hypotheses are made, MacDonald is weak. I found this when avoiding leading questions with KMac, to see what emerged. Neither fascism nor Mussolini are indexed in
The Culture of Critique for example. MacDonald seems to have got wrong the entire anti-immigration movement in the 1920s, the nominal object being to keep Italians out. (
Tony Benn speaks in 1994 supposedly on Fascism; brilliant propaganda from Benn, carefully regulated, with staged applause. The best revisionist look at Mussolini in my view is
benito.pdf by Miles Mathis.)
Many years earlier, we find the Thirty Years' War. This was notorious for leaving large chunks of Europe in desolation, in a pre-industrial way, something like the war between the US States, but worse. It was clear KMac had no idea of its importance; he thought there must have been tall Swedes in it.
I noted KMac on China; he seems not to have heard of the immense destruction there—I'll leave him to investigate, certain he will not. With reference to a map by a Mr Murray. 'Chinese Communism' has been a long-term Jewish aim. So has the takeover of Japan. And, behind all this, there have been Jewish world-wide activities, energetic, largely secret, Freemasonic, and possibly uncorrectable.
For my last entry here, we have, on schedule, an unreliable article 2022/08/04/the-plot-against-australia, attributed to Jason Cannon, and based on Patrick Mullins. It looks at
Portnoy's Complaint, described as something like 'The first great novel about masturbation' at the time by Jews in for example
The Times Literary Supplement. We have a dual cast—on the one hand, Jews ('the anti-censorship cause', some Australian State leaders, Jewish money in secretive form, 'blasphemous, indecent or obscene' works from a list. (Cannon says nothing useful on these). The Australian Communist Party appears here. Journalistic types, book publishers from Europe (fat bottomed, hook-nosed, small minded), publicists, Jewish newspaper controllers, property developers, funded legal persons, acting in unison, spent years on this.
This is where the fun starts, but MacDonald's site knows nothing of it. As I said, 'blasphemous, indecent, or obscene' books might have been targeted. However, let me step outside the Jewish-imposed limits here. Jews have a well-deserved reputation for lying—where that reputation has been allowed to exist. There's no 'anti-censorship movement' run by Jews to expose Talmudic lies. There's no 'anti-censorship movement' to expose the control of churches and Christians by Jewish money. There's no 'anti-censorship movement' attempting to expose Jewish actions against China. Or against Vietnamese people, where of course Jews have done everything possible to hide truths. There's no attempt to improve Australian education above the pitiful level of these Jewish t*rds.
[Sigh. On Sep 22, 2022 KMac wrote a piece on Martha'a Vineyard [rich island off east coast USA] inhabitants' hypocrisy on having a small number of third worlders dumped there before being thrown out.] ‘Those 50 illegals represent less than a millionth of the “enrichment”, that’s already been foisted on the rest of America. (They’re 1/100,000th of the illegals admitted just under Biden.) Vastly poorer [USA] towns have been forced to turn nearly their entire annual budgets over to feeding, housing, educating — and incarcerating — great heaping portions of Third-Worlders, while douchebags in places like Martha’s Vineyard (88% White; 3.7% Black and 1.7% Hispanic) preen about their higher morality..’ — A bit late to be saying that! Figures should have been given decades earlier!
All this is a tragedy. Jewish issues need many experts to decode and interpret. They need to co-operate in the way that engineering is made up of many subdivisions—civil, housing, transport, military, structures—and medicine should be made up of biology, physiology, biochemistry, epidemiology, history—and history itself of many specialities. Please, dear reader, become expert in Jews, but try not to generate rivalries and hostilities.
I'm tempted to blame the tenure system. Bertrand Russell concluded that Cambridge University was a 'good place' even if tenure 'was carried very far', and where 'independence of mind could exist undeterred'. This latter point was untrue, unfortunately.
—RW
In mid-February 2022, The
Occidental Observer online started to carry syndicated stuff from
Patrick Buchanan and Ann Coulter, who seem to be still quoted as 'Conservative' by the ridiculous Jewish media. I wrote a short review of Buchanan's oddly-titled
... Unnecessary War.. though the effort of disentangling his attitude to the necessary part seems not worth the effort. Neither of these 'writers' address Jewish issues. MacDonald gave no information on his motives or payments.
MacDonald's sites are worryingly unsophisticated, and accept ridiculous Jewish media myths, in place of the critical skepticism which is necessary in dealing with skilled liars.
[Scan from Concise Oxford English Dictionary]
, looking at the
Occidental Observer, we find Buchanan writing on 'vital American interests'. Buchanan will not say the Jewish interests differ from American interests. So his material is worthless. We have a video of Sam Dickson, a lawyer in Georgia, lamenting the hypocrisy of lawyers singing their own praises while not defending cases which ought to be defended, according to traditional rules. All the example he gave (e.g.
Leo Frank) were from Jewish sources. He was introduced by someone resembling a bald lumberjack. We see a plaintive letter, which might be fake—a white son of a single mother. MacDonald refers to him superciliously as 'working class', although the person might presumably be where he is through someone's refusal to bow to Jews. The
Observer censors anything to do with post-1945 discoveries, keeping rigidly in the mental backwaters of network TV and other US media. The site knows nothing of the truth about J F Kennedy, the 'Cuba Crisis' with Marrano Jews, the mythology of nukes... Their website trying to discuss the Ukraine has an obsolete feel, with outdated propaganda on every topic everywhere. Commenters never seem invited to contribute: for example, Edward Harris (may not be his real name) makes useful personal contributions, but they remain isolated comments. Carolyn Yeager is good on criticism of weak commenters, but is never given an article.
Time to face the fact that people come to a stopping point, and never progress beyond it.
1 June 2021 MacDonald's best-known trio of books were published near the end of the 20th century. (1995, 1998, 1998). MacDonald's book on
Individualism therefore had a gestation period of at least 20 years. A not-very-well-known phrase refers to a mountain, labouring to produce a mouse. This is an infinitely disappointing book (MacDonald has taken to publishing
Chapter 8 of my 2019 book Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition...
, in five parts. This is the longest chapter in a long book and is basic to the entire project.
Unfortunately, MacDonald has censored some of my comments on trivial issues like nuclear war, war crimes, and Jewish use of money as a control mechanism. So I'm now taking the view that his work is no longer important. I'll explain why.
MacDonald appears to belong to the Roman Catholic tradition, but of a naive type. He thinks Christianity did well enough, ignoring evidence that it was itself a Jewish product and was in symbiosis with Judaism, forcing the 'goyim' to borrow money from Jews. I can see no evidence he's ever tried any sort of analysis of the benefits and drawbacks of the Church. He appears to be a child of his times, brought up after the Second World War; he seems to take seriously all the sanctimonious stuff on the USA being uniquely moral and generally superlatively honest. He thinks [online talk with F Midjord] that 100 years ago—1920?—whites ran most parts of the world! This naivete shows at many points, notably the hard edges of power. He says nothing on the huge fraud of the 'Holocaust', which must represent one of the most outrageous examples of the use of Jewish propaganda power. He says nothing of any purpose about the 'Federal Reserve'. He is unaware of Jewish science frauds—dangerous in this time of the 'COVID' fraud. He says nothing on the Second World War; presumably he accepts all the numerous lies which buoyed up all the commonly-accepted Jew propaganda.
What's sad is his use of very long-term evolutionary material, all, of course, highly dependent on few observations and a mass of speculation. He says there's a cline in Denmark, to do with hunter-gatherers (about whom very little is seriously known). And this is related to Sweden accepting many alien immigrants. He's aware that Swedes are discriminated against in housing, but, as a securely-housed academic, barely mentions that. He's like a safari park owner, contemplating Africans killing rhinos, saying there was a cline in the area thousands of years old of subtribes of rhinos, while ignoring the impending extinction of those animals. He's like a student in an exam, answering the wrong question because he thinks he knows it. Since the cline presumably existed a few thousand years ago, it seems to follow from MacDonald that Danes then must have used their assets to lure alien black immigrants in, and house and feed them—surely nonsense. Netflix might make a film based on that idea.
Worth noticing perhaps is that his earlier books Separation and its Discontents and A People that Shall Dwell Alone are subtly mistitled. Critics of Jews would be delighted if Jews lived alone somewhere else.
Another common idea of Jew-approved sociobiological types is the Moral Community. This is the idea that whites, uniquely, turn against their own for reasons of morality.
‘Moral Community’ note Kevin MacDonald thinks Christian religious groups are communities who believe in a strict code. MacDonald thinks they are unique to whites. In my view, he understates the part played by money. In practice, the nominal leaders have to be funded. If they don't control their funding, such groups may be corrupted, or fade away. Groups who control money can use it to manufacture and feed beliefs in 'moral communities'.
Since 1945, progress in understanding Jews in China has been pitifully slow. The claimed huge numbers of deaths has not been used by MacDonald to claim that Chinese people are uniquely given to wars over 'moral communities'.
An extreme case is Jews themselves, who view themselves as a 'moral community' and exert huge pressures on young 'Jews' to force them into their 'community'. Another example is military groups, some of which are viciously violent, but are held together by money and some primitive belief system.
MacDonald is generally very careful to avoid historical material (unbelievably, he says nothing on the Holohoax, or 9/11, or the Federal Reserve; he takes the conventional view of Hitler) but in the USA 'Civil War' he suddenly understands it completely. The brute facts about this war are of course largely suppressed or forgotten, as in the two World Wars in the following century. I commented on this (Occidental Observer, King of Kings film 1927):
[3] I referred to KMac as ‘naive’ because he is.
... He thinks the US ‘civil war’ was proof of amazing altruism; he really believes that the vast destruction in Georgia, USA etc is proof they wanted to abolish slavery. I simply won’t bother to go into that; life is short.
... His views on individualism as the foundation of the USA, ignoring the use by Jews of its money-making potential, his use of ‘puritanism’, his belief that on balance Christianity worked, show he’s fallen for Jewish control, notably after 1945, of the US educational/ media/ entertainment saturating propaganda, is ‘naive’. It’s worrying to see him in conversations putting out bits and pieces (including definite stuff on the remote past) on things like ‘farmer genes’ and ‘hunter gatherers’ omitting chunks of the human experiences.
KMac replied:
Saying that I claim that “the vast destruction in Georgia etc is proof they wanted to abolish slavery” is ridiculous.
But it's not ridiculous. There were vast issues including the US Constitution, the economic balance between cotton and iron, and the desire for some for closer control of the USA, and, in the wings, the Rothschild and British. Pretending the issue was slavery was slowly adopted as a spurious rationale.
KMac continued: It’s critical to understand the moral idealism of the West, and to make an argument you would have to somehow claim that the nineteenth-century intellectuals and politicians I deal with didn’t really believe what they wrote and said. This moral idealism is killing us now.
This reads like something from the Reader's Digest during the Cold War. Even 'nineteenth-century intellectuals and politicians' were aware of the power of oratory and propaganda and funding by backers. MacDonald once said that Jews utter their deceptive lies “with a completely straight face” but is unable to believe that (say) Lincoln might do the same.
Genetics is a science not well understood—largely because of Jewish dishonesty and interference. Consider the treatment of 'eugenics' for example, and the failure to examine the arithmetic of genetic changes. MacDonald talks of genetics in a naive sense, with actual fathers and mothers and their children. But the permutations of viable offspring are vast in number. A parent with one dominant harmful gene will presumably be lucky if he doesn't pass it on, and unlucky if he does. There may be good reasons for offspring and parents to be in conflict. This sort of thing is outside MacDonald's range.
What is perhaps the weakest feature of MacDonald's work is the absence of any long-term predictions. The world may change into a collection of impulsively-driven Jewish types, groomed and promoted into positions they are unable to fill, plus a mass of intellectually-stunted simpletons. How might that work? At present, Jewish media unite in promoting material which MacDonald interprets as convincing; can anything intellectual survive this regime?
What of MacDonald's early books? I'm led now to take a harsher view of them. As with Henry Ford's apparently Jew-exposing publications, reconsideration is essential. Culture of Critique looks at political movements, so far as they are represented in Jewish-funded Anglosphere Universities. But what about Jews in wars, violence, intellectual frauds generally, business monopolies, and the use of law to their own advantage? A few examples, which as far as I recall are not in MacDonald. He doesn't disentangle the Rothschilds or any of the other Jewish dynasties. He lists many Jews, which of course is useful for people not familiar with the USA. But what of half-Jews, quarter-Jews, and for that matter DNA?
I reviewed his other books (I think) trying to be positive, though I fear his ideas of 'scholarship' lean him towards long, rather dull passages and a refusal to use diagrams, timelines, any sort of summary, and decent indexes. Meanwhile, The Occidental Observer will remain a publication for small coteries of unintelligent Roman Catholics, Hitler-worshippers, disgruntled victims of Jews who can't find practical activity, probable ex-Soviet agents, people trying to sell books, plus people with genuine concerns, to whom I wish every good luck.
Note: 7 Aug - 31 Aug 2021: MacDonald's site TheOccidentalObserver sadly has quite a censorship policy. I give some examples of my own, directly below. Apologies for the repetitiveness:
Rae West says: August 7, 2021 at 4:04 am How closely do you think Freemasons/ Common Purpose etc types correspond to the large numbers of collaborators with Jews in Russia and Eastern Europe? Serious question.
Mikhail Vasilievich says: August 9, 2021 at 1:56 pm Well, there may be some correlation. But "collaborators" is not the right word, I suppose. "Servants" is more precise. At least in Russia and Ukraine. The political regime has not been overthrown when the USSR fell...
[In] the XIX – XX century, there are connections, of course. ... it is a complicated question. For example, some of the February (of 1917) "revolutionaries" were connected to Freemasons, ... These revolutionaries also received money from the foreign intelligence services, for example. Did I answer your question?
*DISALLOWED* Rae West says: August 11, 2021 at 5:39 pm @ Mikhail Vasilievich Not really, no. As far as I know, Jews exist around the world in local clumps, usually brought up in local countries so they can speak the language and mimic the locals quite accurately. Thus in Netherlands, urban Russia, Italy, Britain, France etc etc there are Jews who intercommunicate; ... probably now more easily than ever before. But in each of these clumps they collaborate or are served by some local people, who are favoured, and who behave secretly. They may be police and judges, and have secret control over important decisions. And in the extreme cases very secret and very many; East Germany had (something like) hundreds of thousands of collaborators, or so the story claims. All I wonder is: is there some typical distribution in these power structures?
MacDonald's rather naive piece enthusing about Tucker Carlson (2021-08-07) included this comment:
Oscar Wilson says: August 10, 2021 at 12:05 pm
Marx was an “antisemitic” Jew just as Trump is a “philosemitic” Gentile. Marx’s close collaborator Engels was not Jewish any more than Trotsky was a Zionist. A little knowledge is worse than none sometimes; life is often quite complicated; and reading round, and double-checking, often help. [Seems to be a reply to 'Bobby'.]
*DISALLOWED* Rae West says: August 11, 2021 at 5:59 am
More than five years ago,
http://mileswmathis.com/engels.pdf
*DISALLOWED* Rae West @Jack McArthur
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2021/08/26/169100/
Please do yourself a favour and examine the case that Jews and the traditional Church were NOT at loggerheads, but in fact co-operated, though without making this obvious. 'Usury' was not banned, but it was banned for Christian believers. If they needed money, they had no legal option but go to Jews, despite being aware they would be treated badly, up to losing everything if they failed to repay according to the terms of the contract.
Please do your best to check this. Consider the Bible is mostly Jewish pseudo-history. The Talmud is very secret; even such critics as Belloc don't discuss it or know it. Consider the Medici and others in the light of the work of Miles Mathis. Consider the Jesuits. Consider the 19th century taking-over of Papal moneys by Jews. For that matter examine Islam and note the similar Jewish basis of it.
You say (I'm too polite to write "like a parrot") 'The Catholic Church considered the Jews pestilent for fifteen hundred years'. It's a good story, repeated by both Jews and the parasitical Churchmen, who tapped Jews for money, while pretending to oppose them.
Note 29 Aug 2021: comment on MacDonald on ‘Individualism’
I can't take the idea of 'individualism' very seriously. It looks to me like another Jewish trick; call it the 'Culture of Compliment', which slips by because people like it, are flattered by it, and don't in general examine it.
Since 1945, whites have been flattered by Jews for much of the time: Of course Americans are individualistic! They may all eat the same stuff, use the same language, have identical simpletons' ideas, watch the same junk TV, but they sure are individualistic! They fought in 'the good war' even if they killed and raped on a large scale. But it was a 'good war'! Their republic was founded by wonderful honest people - not Freemasons, not Jew money handlers, not on fake democratic principles! The education was real good, in real good institutions dedicated to truth! When they die, they really go to heaven and live for ever; nothing to do with paying groups of liars, funded out of general productivity! Whites were responsible for most inventions, though we won't mention devices to kill and enslave. Whites are the most generous people. Really? Whites have developed sophisticated political systems, all by themselves. Really?
I fear, Kevin, you have neglected this aspect of Jewish propaganda power, and this has weakened your writings for the last 25 years. The fact that you are one of the few leaders attempting your style of analysis, just underlines the fact that most whites do what they're told, don't display individualism, and in fact are scared to think for themselves about anything. My belief is that whites are the best available, but it's essential to face facts and not be deluded by Jewish fairy tales, either apparently con or apparently pro.
*DISALLOWED* Rae West says: https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2021/08/26/169100/
August 31, 2021 at 5:26 am @Kevin MacDonald August 30, 2021 at 6:36 pm
It's true I haven't read your recent book. However, I watched your video (Oslo, 2019) and wrote it up here:
https://big-lies.org/reviews\macdonald-kevin-individualism.html
I honestly think you’re treading water. The effects of Jews are deeper in my view than you realise; if people find it impossible to fight back, vague genetic impulses are as ineffective as the strength of elephants against spear-throwers.
*DISALLOWED* Rae West says: August 31, 2021 at 12:44 pm
@A Mayer–-
Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem 'The Mother Lodge' . Kipling appears to have been a freemason.
-- 'George Orwell' [Eric Blair] was surrounded by Jews:
https://www.big-lies.org/nuke-lies/www.nukelies.com/forum/orwell-useful-idiot-ignorant-nukes-spain-jews.html
*ALLOWED!* August 31, 2021 at 4:46 am
Rae West says: Iran has very long-term links with Jews. The best writer on this subject known to me is Miles Mathis; see this pdf page http://mileswmathis.com/iran.pdf (hosted by M Mathis, but I think anonymous). As with Cuba, run by Marrano Jews, the stuff on Iran is all BS. So of course is the fake nuke issue: see my https://nuke-lies.org though you need elementary science.
*DISALLOWED* Sept 9th
Oscar Wilson says: Lise Meitner could be mentioned as an able physicist of Jewish ancestry but would not have participated in building an atomic bomb for Germany even if recalled "under the protection of the Fuhrer". The racial purge of scientists contributed to the manufacture of this terrible weapon in the USA by Jews for use against the Axis powers.
Rae West says:
I doubt if this comment will get past the censoriat. Nuclear weapons were/are another Jewish fraud.
*DISALLOWED* Oct. In an article supposedly on French politics and Marine Penn, I commented that someone who wrote for Unz ought not to be in the Occidental Observer. I don't have the exact wording, but I included https://big-lies.org/how-master-race-won-ww2/unz-ww2-sep-2019.html - MacDonald will not investigate WW2, WW1, the 'Fed', 9-11 ...
*DISALLOWED** Oct 19 2021. In an article bemoaning the lack of Latinity in present politicians, by an author who took the supposed 19th century Classics seriously. In fact I didn't even bother to post the URL of Miles Mathis on Rome and the pre-Roman Mediterranean. Here it is: https://big-lies.org/mileswmathis/caesar.pdf
*DISALLOWED* Oct 2021. MacDonald takes the BS about Lindbergh seriously. I commented on Miles Mathis, who has several related items n Lindbergh, though less so on the supposed Jew awareness.
*ALLOWED!* 17 Mar Occidental Observer. One of several parts purporting to explain the supposed Russia and Ukraine war.
May I make a simple comment on the idea that Jews can only be opposed by 'nationalism'. (I've often seen posts to the effect that: 'What else is there than nationalism?' and 'We have to join nationalists' etc etc).
Jews seem to have promoted nationalism (e.g. unification of Italy, unification of Germany, something similar in Japan) so that Jews would have a single figurehead to deal with. This worked very well for them, unfortunately.
But Jews operate internationally, clubbing together in secret to pick off countries one by one. Study the history of Christianity to see this; it took Jews about 1,000 years to end up 'converting' Lithuania. This I think is why they are keen to promote single nations. It has worked well for them, unfortunately.
What's presumably needed is for victims of Jews to club together. Suppose Europe was genuinely united, or for that matter states in the 'USA' united but not under a phoney head of the Biden type. Then for example if Utah or California or Missouri were attacked by Jews, some joint counter might be arranged. Similarly with Europe: if Britain, Germany, France, Russia, and Hungary for example had a joint policy, probably the entire world war series from 1914 might have been averted.
That's why I think 'nationalism' gets pushed as a supposed antidote. In fact it's a spurious, a specious solution, contrived to fail. [I was saying isolated nations are vulnerable to Jews, since they can draw on the resources of many other nations.]
I posted twice more here, and neither post was disallowed, to my surprise. So I'll say no more!
About individualism. It's about us. Why we Europeans are so open to this intellectual takeover so to speak.
MacDonald never defines individualism, and seems to assume that, whatever it is, it always acts in a way helpful to a 'community'. In fact of course thieves, swindlers, murderers, and wreckers are arguably just as 'individualist' as artists, scientists, farmers, builders. MacDonald assumes whites are very individualistic; no doubt he read some Jewish book that said so, and never investigated. He might have noticed that in CSULB with about 35,000 students, where he's been for years, not one single individualist has helped him out. And of course there is a lot of evidence that whites are largely not individualistic; Scandinavians are notoriously conventional, for example. So are whites in the USA: Mrs A N Whitehead said: "Their [Bostonian rich] women are timid," said Mrs. Whitehead. "It shows in their houses. Every house is furnished alike. No one dares be different. The monotony is so deadly that every time I go into one more such, I could scream." Maybe 'individualism' is an encouraging myth promoted by Jews; whites have often been required to fight in wars they don't understand, to spend their lives travelling by sea moving cargoes around, to work in inhospitable areas, clearing land, or to build difficult structures. The fact that old records show many family names staying in the same place for generations suggests 'individualism' is something of a myth.
My own guess is that militarism and the praise of 'battle' is a Jew-promoted idea, to get whites to break forests, build infrastructure, and do other tasks (such as mass murder) which Jews usually leave to others.
Joseph McCabe in 1949 wrote that the USA had 20 million adults in secret societies. Of 149 million, taking males only, this means about 1 in 4 males. Individualists?
We expect wealthy powerful males to control many women.
It's amusing to see MacDonald's omission of all the relevant factors here. A 'wealthy powerful male' must have backup in the form of money structures, laws, police or what have you. MacDonald talks as though a man is 'powerful' in the way he might be young, or fat, or loud. Perhaps MacDonald watched The King and I aged 12.
Hunter-gatherers - 8500 years ago farmers from the middle east gradually going north - 3000 years held off agriculture from [Scandinavia] - 3rd group Indo Europeans very influential approx 2500 BC - down into India, across to Iran
Necessary note here on the Mediterranean. This is, by far, the biggest calm inland sea in the world, with islands and outlying countries—Sicily, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Rome. And the Mediterranean has defensive areas—mountain ranges, water barriers, ports. And a huge range of animal, bird, and vegetable life. It was nearly ideal ideal for shipping, building, books. No other part of the world is as blessed.
MacDonald makes a lot of north-south clines, but this is just what would be expected—too far south is hot desert; further north is good for olives and grapes and plant crops, if there's water; further north is colder, and can support grazing animals and fish, but not much in the way of crops...
Farmer-derived genes south - hunter gatherers north - adapted to the cold, harsh winters - still genetic North-South gradient -
Comment on the hyper-simple categories of 'hunter gatherer' and 'farmer'. People need food, water, salt, shelter, and child-rearing, as something like a minimum, with some forms of legalism, science, food preparation, transmission of beliefs, and so on. Without going into endless possible detail, the simple categories are ludicrously unfit for purpose, like describing the Earth as 'mostly harmless'.
5:40 Indo Europeans - Ricardo DuChesne - domesticated horses, wagons, steppes, cattle, secondary dairy products - entirely militarized - males would compete to get followings, be best soldiers, militaristic success, followers free to defect - not despotic - kinship less important than in the middle east - military groups at top of the culture - what they call a free market culture -
MacDonald says nothing about money, which must have had enormous side-effects, along with other aspects of the world which aren't obvious to plain eyesight. Language of course is another. So are attitudes to land, from simple acceptance to elaborate systems of deeds and gifts.
MacDonald on 'entirely militarized' societies seems almost childish; in fact, supplies and weapons and training and spies are needed. Standing armies must have been expensive in their own terms. MacDonald assumes the simple word 'war' applies even in entirely different situations.
MacDonald assumes that kinship was more or less important, and yet how can he be sure, over many thousands of years?
In the middle east status all based on kinship groups - example ancient Greece, Germanic tribes after fall of Roman Empire
MacDonald barely considers Greece, and yet it was widely regarded as the best civilization in ancient times. Note that Greece and Rome were both almost free of religion; maybe MacDonald, in common with many people taken in by the 'Jewish' nonsense of 'Jesus', likes Catholicism, knowing that it had money, but having no idea of its viciousness and stupidity.
10 min conquering groups, not exterminators - middle ages feudal system - services of various kinds - exploitation - men could rise, upward mobility
MacDonald believes in the free market, or at least thinks he does. He may believe the USA has a free market system, in both things and ideas, when in fact most aspects are Jew controlled.
after ww2 we couldn't talk about Indo Europeans - data makes it clear they were a real group - inventiveness - free market in ideas
MacDonald doesn't mention Jews here, despite knowing that Boas and others, backed by Jew-controlled paper money, were able to push the whole propaganda system their way. The most important example probably was the series of 'Great' wars, and the putsch against Russia, which MacDonald doesn't even mention.
Long appendix on Roman culture - military success - families - republican period very successful - every year there would be war
MacDonald presumably refers to the debates of Romans, discussing the loss of their founding families. Exasperatingly, he says nothing about the incursions of Jews and money-lenders, despite the clear parallels with the present day.
Western culture has always been open to other influences - it was not a closed society - only in times of extreme emergency would they have a dictator - Rome was very open - continent of Europe - Middle East ... original Roman population was more or less submerged - decadence during the Empire - a sort of failed group structure -
MacDonald accepts a tradition of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. But adds no new understanding.
hunter gather much more egalitarian - harsh environment - couldn't have large groups - whereas middle east selection for group cohesion - primeval Scandinavia - hunter-gather - areas on the seashore could support many people for part of the year - consensus decisions - social complexity for part of the year - exogamy was the norm - maritime areas - mix with other families-
MacDonald doesn't seem to add anything—bleaker areas don't allow exceptional people to flourish. So why aren't they cohesive? Well, they also have great complexity...
20 mins middle east first cousin marriages. Marriage tends to be determined by parents. In Europe kinship less important, love more important - high investment in children - father involvement
Well, it's often stated. And MacDonald doesn't mention oppression of women. Or sickle-cell anaemia, which may be the reason multiple wives are allowed.
21 mins. WEIRD people - western educated industrialized etc - differences in moral reasoning, developmental psychology - ask questions eg on train ticket - should he steal it
MacDonald doesn't discuss the meaning of "steal", but assumes "stealing" is wrong. Very feeble philosophically. In a kinship society, they say steal the ticket. But in some Islamic areas, they'd lose their hand.
In the west we have complicated abstract rules of what is right and wrong - altruistic punishments - other people will punish them even at a cost to themselves if they get away from a group norm.. a part of a moral community - what we call moral communities... people very concerned to be part of a moral community - now moral community created by the 'Left' .. you'll feel ostracised, guilty, not a good person - the worst kind of punishment
Can I trust you? Are you an honest person? If you're trustworthy, you can be in the group. Now we have academics [MacDonald means Jews and their collaborators] imposing a hostile morl community... seen as a bad person..
25 mins Family structure... in south Europe, families are much more collectivist - brothers under same roof - family owns the land - father - families trade women - families in south Europe married young - north relatively late - N Europe families had servants circulating among households - women much more partners -
MacDonald attributes 'family structures' to economics, but simultaneously to 'farmer genes'. Very unconvincing. The practice of farming out family members as servants is "interesting", says MacDonald. And self-control was important, especially for women.
30 mins Sweden - extreme individualism - family ties weakest - Swedish state encourages extreme individualism - freeing the individual from obligations - differences of family structure reflects genetics..
Again, the 'extreme individualism' of Sweden sounds unconvincing. The 'family ties are weakest'. It's true the Jew-controlled Swedish State has Jewish motivations, but MacDonald says nothing on this.
31:40 Church so important - really struck me how the Catholic church was regulating sex behaviour of aristocrats, one wife, cannot get divorced, Pope refused to let Philip of France a divorce - no marriage depending on kinship - catholic church - real deep faith that people had in those days - corrupt in early years - simony - high middle ages - church under the control of monastic orders - purged all this - buying and selling of church offices - intense Christian fervour - beautiful Gothic churches -
MacDonald seems ludicrously naive about the Church, which took 1000 years to colonise Europe, one area at a time, using extreme violence in the process. It did this in collusion with Jews, and the Sicut Jedaeis doctrine, the Church telling people they MUST put up with some colony of Jews. The result was collections of parishes, each with their officials, combining written records and preaching, and births, marriages, and deaths, and punishments, and land ownership, and spreading propaganda and state policies, and various customs and superstitions. Very complex and difficult to assess, if you're serious.
35 mins people faithful to the church - control over secular elites, tried to break up kinship groups - facilitated individualism - moral universalism - all people have a soul - more egalitarian - church law more egalitarian - canon law - theological view that sincere belief itself couldn't really be punished - a lot of dissent - heresies etc - Protestant Reformation - Renaissance Popes philandering around and so on..
MacDonald, now halfway through, still hasn't mentioned 'Jews'! Even the 'Jewish' basis of the books of the Bible, and the prohibition by Churches of wealthy local non-Jews investing money, are ignored by MacDonald. He has a naive view of celibate monks—not shared by investigative historians. MacDonald regards 'kinship structures' as the opposite of 'individualism', perhaps based on low-grade analysis in the modern US, assuming 'socialism' means 'communism', a Jewish attitude. 'Moral universalism' is assumed by MacDonald to mean something serious, not just the bit of lip-service which it was.
39 mins France is sorta divided north and south-- 17th century - Puritans - beginning with the English Civil War - Puritans beheaded the king - Calvin group strategy - very collectivist - spy on other people - everybody on the same page - Puritans landed at Massachusetts about the 1730s - started Harvard - a lot of talent - very well educated - East Anglia highest IQs - from Scandinavia - culture submerged until 17th C then developed this revolution against the king - selected by the congregation - much more egalitarian
MacDonald has no interest in the Amsterdam Jews funding Cromwell to head the invasion of England in a very bloody war. Or the Thirty Years' War, and Sweden under Gustavus Adolphus. Or the use of Puritanism to encourage acceptance of impoverishment by the Bank of England. He has no idea that America was settled on a money basis; as perhaps it had to be. He has a rather infantile view of Harvard and education and talented groups; most of their beliefs were rubbish from the Bible, and their unintellectual stuff has harmed the USA to this day. Note that Calvin believed in 'the elect', people from birth selected by 'God'; a Jewish idea.
The IQ issue is another problem. And the problem is that nobody knows how the brain works. Genetics, breeding, eugenics rely in their positive forms on improvement. But it's hard to see if many structures can be improved: bone structure, lungs, hearts can be bred in different ways, but they are similar to what they were. And with brains it's not clear whether than can be improved, since they aren't understood. Possibly the way forward is to understand leaning, for example the sequences in which people naturally learn best, easier then more difficult, for example.
42 mins very strong group boundaries - very good at capitalism - vibrant economy - English crown prohibited boundaries - very successful group - like 9 children per woman - Massachusetts straight line to Oregon - prolific talented group - intellectual elites - utopianism - utopian communities - blueprint of how people should behave - ideal society - world structured as fight between good and evil - cement is morl community - in battle with ultimate evil - south of USA seen as evil because of slavery - abolition movement - puritan descended intellectual - war resulted in 700,000 [sic] men dying with many many more injured, and maimed - if you have a battle between good and evil no sacrifice is too great - willing to punish people like themselves - this sort of set up the Civil War.
[Before the US 'Civil War', Britain had the
Slavery Abolition Act. What is usually omitted is the 1837
Slave Compensation Act, which seems to have been a slaveowners' compensation act. The British Government took out a £15 million loan (worth £1.43 billion in 2020) with interest from Nathan Mayer Rothschild and Moses Montefiore ... paid off by the British taxpayers up to 2015. KMac accepts the propagandist view].
MacDonald does not define capitalism. Already Jewish money dominated, which MacDonald does not mention. He does mention utopian communities—all of which failed. He mentions the North-South War between the States, which he attributes to the dispute over slavery. MacDonald seems to know nothing of more realistic interpretations of the Civil War. For example, some must have known that Jews ran the slave trade; if they were serious about abolition, they presumably would have attacked Jews. Another example is the funding of news sources by other groups who wanted war, such as investor Jews to supply cannon etc, and Freemasons aiming for their own interests. MacDonald never mentions that Jews profited from whites killing each other—surely of great interest to any serious evolutionist.
46min I spent a lot of time on these intellectuals, like Ralph Waldo Emerson - sort of social justice warriors - very much a culture of the left - "helping the poor, and immigrants, and hating slavery" - "and so it was a very moralistic culture" - other movements revolving around religion - utopian optimism - wealthier, inventions, new things - progress was obvious - Charles Darwin became much more influential - many concerned with race - pessimistic - idea that people would become just like them - blacks from Africa - meld - Edward Ross, Prof ?Timothy Golden - concerned about Jewish immigration - most of them political, radical - socialist, anarchist - big movement against - Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, David Starr Jordan - more cynical, pessimistic - 1924 immigration law. [Note that KM, incredibly, and with almost infantile US centrality, omits WW1]
MacDonald continues to describe fashions, irrelevant to long-term strategies. But long-terms strategies were in place; consider the 'Illuminati' and Freemasons, with very long-term aims, of which MacDonald says nothing. Origin of Species published 1859. (Herbert Spencer of 'survival of the fittest' slogan was popular). David Starr Jordan published War and the Breed in 1915, on the history of wars as killers of the best men—though, if they were so good, how come they accepted deaths so easily?
51 min - 1924 Immigration Act - ethnic status quo - wasn't long before the rise of Jewish intellectuals - Boas - and esp after 1950 - now [2019] see high percentages of Jews - was a period of ethnic defence - defeated by Jewish elites
MacDonald doesn't note the Federal Reserve and other moves of corrupt Jews; he genuinely and with ridiculous naivety seems to believe in Jewish 'intellectual elites', given professorships and teaching and news positions and so on, rather than be mutually put in place by Jewish networking. MacDonald doesn't even notice the Second World War, incredibly; his world is the narrow blindered simpleness of Jew control and US censorship.
53 min- British anti-Slavery groups - Quakers in England - white people most empathetic in the world - real shift in the culture [caused in effect by Jew media] - New Zealand, treated them well - MacDonald says nothing on Jews and Boers, or Jews and China and opium
MacDonald on Richard Lynn on whites the most empathetic in the world. MacDonald isn't aware of the idea that Quakers were set up by Jews. He seems to confuse Jewish propaganda with genuine social movements. Whether ordinary people knew or cared anything about slaves, without being told what to think, seems unlikely to me. I'd suggest also that the rise of steam engines, offering hope of alleviation from manual work, was related to getting rid of slaves, who generally had been regarded as more-or-less necessary.
MacDonald mentions New Zealand; but not South Africa. He says nothing on the huge white experiments of Spain and Portugal for many centuries. Surely there must be lessons there?
As for whites being 'the most empathetic people in the world', the 20th century saw mass industrial murder by whites against whites over the entire Eurasian land mass. All coinciding with supposed Jewish interests. And by whites against non-whites. There was no empathy, or at least no effective empathy. MacDonald sounds like some ignorant hick.
56 min psychology of moral community - we're the good guys [not the same thing] - social identity, based on morl reputation - a morl community established by people hostle to whites - Jews tend to think of history as one long period of persecution - now a new elite
MacDonald mentions 'social identity theory', probably just another bit of Jew absurdity. If a Jew says God chose him, and they have a race, which is only propagated by females, and everyone else is a Goy, this is clearly ridiculous—but they say it, so it's 'Social Identity'. MacDonald has no idea about covert support of the Church for Jews, though it's obvious enough. No doubt his Catholic upbringing failed to mention it. At least he knows about 'virtue signalling' and Jewish hostility to whites.
58.30 min Culminating in the 1960s - probably as important as the Reformation - white working class pathology which was not there in the 1950s - sociopathic vs empathic - latter at extreme end pathological forms of altruism - against their self-interest - sorry for them - an evil person for thinking we should not admit all these immigrants - it was not there in the 1950s when I grew up
MacDonald dismisses all the war deaths, the Americans who died in Japan and Europe, the Russians, the Germans, the Indians, the British. And the huge hidden power transfers—land ownership, assets ownership, paper money control by Jews, wars run by Jews using others as mercenaries. He says nothing about funding by people like Soros of anti-white groups. But he does believe in something—that the 1960s resemble the Reformation. Frankly, he's a stupid cunt.
1:02 sociopathic persons have no concern for others vs people at the other end are empathic - whites are less ethnocentric than any other people in the world - 'experiment' of question/answer on being told they're 'prejudiced' - media - constant repetition of these messages - be empathetic - Richard Lynn's book - white people most liable to empathy - low crime, high trust, in homogeneous societies - more cohesive - we see so many anti-white messages in prominent material like the
New York Times - remove founding father statues - white liberals hate themselves and their own group, willing to punish their own people - political cataclysm - cannot continue for ever - more polarization - America more polarized than it's ever been since the Civil War - people on opposite sides of the divide [sic] - antifa came to commit violence, to crack heads, prevent discussion - nothing's gonna happen without polarization - revolutions are bloody, devastating
MacDonald repeats—backed by Richard Lynn—that whites are empathic. Think of the wars undertaken by the USA to consider if there's any truth whatever in this. The truth seems to be closer to: Whites will do what they are told, independently of any ethnic interest. MacDonald does not discuss crypsis, where Jews disguise themselves as whites. Nor does he discuss whites who collaborate with Jews, such as Freemasons or members of Governments, or 'Antifa' types. Even his comment "revolutions are bloody" is doubtful; many 'revolutions' were planned by Jews, more or less as takeovers: the bloodshed comes later.
It's not easy to say what if anything ‘liberalism’ means.
Here's Bertrand Russell in his book Power (1938). Russell was Jew-naive. He believes that Fascist Italy, 'Nazi' Germany, and 'Communist' Russia were nationalistic but not commercial in an ordinary sense. But at least Russell's account is clear.
‘The alliance of commerce and nationalism, which began with the Lombard League in the time of Frederick Barbarossa, gradually spread over Europe, achieving its last and briefest triumph in the Russian February Revolution. Wherever it won power, it turned against hereditary power based on land, at first in alliance with the monarchy, and then in opposition to it. In the end, kings everywhere disappeared or were reduced to figure-heads. Now, at last, nationalism and commerce have parted company; In Italy, Germany, and Russia it is nationalism that has triumphed. The liberal movement, begun in Milan in the twelfth century, has run its course.’
Conclusions
Kevin MacDonald has been walking backwards for 25 years. He has not engaged with any serious work on human genetics. This of course includes at the molecular level: he has done nothing much on the spread of such things as alcohol dehydrogenase, digestion of cows' milk, digestion of grains. He has nothing to say on personal genetics and families.
He has nothing much to say on mixed races; for example it seems likely that 'African Americans' are often Jew-black mixes, since Jews owned the ships and the slaves; this may have something to do with US 'black' behaviour. Male Jews use 'social identity theory', laughably, as justification. Rape victims of Jews who are impregnated are obviously victims of the same race; but 'Social Identity Theory' is supposed to prove Jewishness—if they say they aren't Jews, then they aren't! MacDonald says nothing on inbreeding, of the intensive Jewish and Islamic types.
His real-world grasp is remarkably faint: he's spend his life supplied with food, water, warmth, comfort and seems to have no grasp of what this implies. And for example, Europe has north-south 'clines' in plants, birds, animal, insects, not just people.
His history is astoundingly feeble and underpowered. He says
nothing on such events as World Wars, the 'Holocaust' fake, science frauds, 9/11, mid-east and far-east wars, although these must have evolutionary implications.
Other problems with MacDonald include: failure to understand the immense impact of Jewish control of paper money, notably of the Federal Reserve since 1913. This control allowed Jews to get ownership (and enforce it legally) of much of industry and distribution, and to control opinions, by near-monopoly media control, and control over supposed opponents. The Occidental Observer is full of comments which miss this—people claiming it's all voluntary when people succumb because they can't get a job otherwise.
Here's an example: Carolyn Yaeger wrote 'April 30, 2022 at 1:46 pm
Forcing [of Jewish views]? I don't see any forcing going on. I see voluntary full cooperation.' She can't understand that people who unwillingly accept terms aren't fully co-operative.
Jewish-controlled violence is never addressed by MacDonald; yet endless thuggery and destruction has been carried out by Jew, even in the USA where it might be expected to be noticed. Consider Prohibition, and the arson against the early film pioneers who weren't Jewish. MacDonald is very allergic to any suggestions that Americans commit war crimes; he shies away from such ideas like a frightened horse,
Jewish spies in the international sense don't fall under MacDonald's non-eagle-eye. This is partly of course because MacDonald has no idea of the realities of Jewish-run wars; how could he understand Pollard, the supposed 'nuclear' spy, or Jews communicating with other Jews in Poland, Germany, Spain, Italy, the USSR...?
Jewish Talmudic beliefs sometimes surface in the Occidental Observer more or less by luck. There was (in May 2022) a comment on what was called fashon hara, a Talmudic ruling that anything that may harm Jews should never be talked of, and saying this is what 'political correctness' is. A good (but unsourced) paragraph.
But there is nothing particularly unusual in all this. Many modern people say they believe that the Jew-based ideas of Christianity ('Jesus', who probably never lived and in any case is credited with nothing useful; rising from death? Fathered by 'God'?) are of some value. I've never seen anyone attempt to do a serious analysis of actual Christianity; some of it good, some of it—I'd guess most—bad.
Hilaire Belloc (The Jews, 1920ish) discussed Jews, but included child-of-the-Faith material on French Roman Catholicism which biased him to 'Jews'. Revilo P Oliver was this type—willing to have his country drained of resources so Jews could massacre and rob and take over for their own purposes. Probably Kevin MacDonald is this type; certainly the Occidental Observer gets emailed comments from such people. Nesta Webster (first serious book 1919) was a similar type, shocked by Jews but unable to see their connection with Christianity. Lady Birdwood's Longest Hatred (1991) liked Christianity (and even included an anti-Darwin endnote) and went some way to revisionism on the Second World War.
A specially sad example in my view is Michael A Hoffman II, who has studied the Talmud in great depth. But he is shackled to Roman Catholicism, not realising it has umbilical links with Jewish theory and practice. It seems obvious, now, that the Church collaborated with Jews to give them a monopoly in finance, pretending to think interest of loans is a 'mortal sin'. Hoffman has not worked on historical patterns, such as Jews in Russia making a fake 'socialist' system, killing 'bourgeois' and 'profiteers' and 'Kulaks' using 'armed proletarians', compared with modern USA, with fake 'democracy' and future victims to be 'privileged whites' attacked by 'Antifa' types. Just one example; such work needs many specialists, who need complete honesty. Hoffman doesn't seem to even have worked on the manufacture of Christianity and manufacture of Islam, let alone newer systems.
Arthur Kemp is another MacDonald type, unwilling to put in the effort needed to incorporate 'Jews' into history, but instead trying to rework old material. Kemp includes opposition to Islam, without understanding that Islam itself is a Jewish product.
A.H. Lane is a similar type, but influenced by the British Empire. Just as many Americans even now presumably think wars overseas are working for Americans. Wing Commander Leonard Young (Deadlier then the H-Bomb, 1956) understood Jews, but not sufficiently to disavow his Second World War activities, or to understand the Jewish nuclear fraud. Incomplete grasp of Jewish activities is common, and I assume must amuse Jews.
Even William Luther Pierce thought that the 1900 world was run by whites. As far as I know, nobody has made an accountancy-style survey of actual ownership and wealth, but it's clear from various events that Pierce understated Jewish and Freemason control.
MacDonald ignores the intra-race parasitism of Jews; he says nothing about it. MacDonald's beneficence and white empathy theory must amuse Jews, who know what they did against people they have controlled, including blacks, Indians, and orientals as well as whites. Jews know whites have often been stirred up by Jews into white mutual massacres. They know that; but MacDonald doesn't, and is hopelessly ignorant.
I ought to add a few words on James Edwards, who comes across as a fervent evangelical-style barker imagining he's helping MacDonald. He shares MacDonald's time myopia; they described 1940s USA as 'so wholesome', when Jews already had a stranglehold on money, had caused devastating depressions, and was bombing Europe and Japan and shipping war material to Jews in Russia/'USSR' for mass murder, and allowing Jews to build up huge frauds, both social and scientific.
I think on balance MacDonald is a simple Catholic soul, believing the Jew-derived Church was OK, while not noticing its origin. Naturally he has an internal clash when trying to discuss Jews. I think this clash is the reason MacDonald came to a stop in about 1998.
His website, Occidental Observer, has frozen into ordinary journalism with occasional fairly serious pieces. It has a small number of regular commenters, like a saloon bar group of eccentrics saying much the same at each event.
Better theories must emerge for long-term white survival. Consideration of distributed groups, of which 'Jews' seem most important—distributed nations pursuing what they think are their own interests—will I hope flourish.
Rae West 4 Feb, 12 Feb, 29 May 2020, 7 Aug 2021, 29 Aug 2021, 4 Sep 2021, 8 Jan 2022, Feb 2022, 18 Mar 2022, Apr 2022, May 2022, Oct 2022, May 2023
