MacDonald on Kaufmann

Update: Prozium and Vanishing American comment.

Kevin MacDonald reviews The Rise and Fall of Anglo-America at VDARE (longer version):
Kaufmann charts the decline of Anglo-Saxons and the rise of the Jews in all areas of the American elite, from university departments of political science to the federal civil service. “For twenty years, the de-WASP-ing of the ruling elite in America has proceeded at a breathtaking pace.” Kaufmann cites the important study of Lerner et al. (American Elites,Webbug 1996) showing that by the1990s there were “roughly the same proportion of WASPs and Jews at the elite levels of the federal civil service, and a greater proportion of Jewish elites among corporate lawyers.” Jews outnumbered Anglo-Saxons 58–21 among elites in television, 48 to 25 among “public interest” elites, and 40 to 21 among legal elites. The same study found that, “in stark contrast to the Jews, WASPs were not overrepresented within the ranks of the national elite.”

Given that Jews constituted less than 3% of the population, these are very high overrepresentations indeed. In contrast, White Protestants became underrepresented in corporate elites by the 1980s, and there was a steady decline in their political power in Congress. [. . .]

A final lapse in Kaufmann’s argument: he never mentions coercion and the penalties that are imposed on people who dissent from the elite cosmopolitan consensus. The fact is, Whites who violate these strictures are severely censured — a phenomenon with which I have considerable personal experience.

Kaufmann presents the views of elite Whites who are cooperating in the demise of their own people as nothing more than the enlightened opinions of an intellectual and moral elite. But it is far more than that. Since the 1960s, Whites who depart from the consensus of cosmopolitanism have been penalized in a wide variety of ways — from lack of access to the mainstream media, to firing from their jobs, to social opprobrium. Conversely, those who collaborate are rewarded. This revolution is neither peaceful nor bloodless.

[. . .] although the cosmopolitan revolution took advantage of pre-existing Anglo-Saxon tendencies toward individualism, in the end the institutional structure that is being pursued after attaining power is profoundly anti-individualist. America remains somewhat of a laggard in these trends because of the First Amendment, but other Western societies, lacking such formal declarations of individual rights, have succumbed to a stifling political correctness that essentially legislates the triumph of cosmopolitanism - and Western suicide.

If a robust Darwinian intellectual elite had remained in place despite the assaults of the Boasians, the Frankfurt School, the Marxists, and the New York Intellectuals, the cosmopolitan revolution never would have occurred.
The Anglo-Saxon movement of ethnic defense culminating in the immigration law of 1924 would have become institutionalized. A robust, sophisticated Darwinian culture would have provided a powerful argument for ethnic defense. Critically, such a defense would have emphasized creating a culture in which individualism was seen as a valuable Anglo-Saxon ethnic trait — as was the case during the 18th and 19th centuries. Immigration policy would have been carefully formulated to ensure that immigrants were similar to the founding stock and to ensure the continued dominance of peoples prone to individualism — just as American immigration policy was in fact crafted until 1965. This ethnic defense would have been energized by the sociobiological revolution of the 1970s and the firm mathematical grounding for the understanding that all peoples have ethnic genetic interests.

Instead, in cosmopolitan post-America, even the sociobiological revolution has been stripped of its most dangerous and powerful ideas. As Frank Salter has shown, the revolution in population genetics of the1970s demonstrated very clearly that people controlling a piece of land have a huge genetic interest in preserving their control--but this finding has been suppressed and misinterpreted by people at the top of the academic hierarchy.

This suppression must continue--because cosmopolitanism has a hopelessly shaky intellectual basis. Built on theories that were motivated far more by ethnic interests of the rising elite of Jewish intellectuals than by a respect for scientific truth, cosmopolitanism has no choice but to secure its future by coercion.

And for the Anglo-Saxon Americans--indeed all Christian-stock Americans--this substitution of cultures is a disaster of cataclysmic proportions.


Pseudothyrum said...

WASPs (in both the USA and the UK) are just too goddamned NICE to interlopers like Jews and other parasites. We WASPs have got to start being meaner to the people who are wrecking our nations.

DH Lawrence acerbically summed it up well with his poem "The English Are So Nice":

The English are so nice
so awfully nice
they're the nicest people in the world.

And what's more, they're nice about being nice
about your being nice as well!
If you're not nice, they soon make you feel it.

Americans and French and Germans and so on
they're all very well
but they're not really nice, you know.
They're not nice in our sense of the word, are they now?

That's why one doesn't have to take them seriously,
We must be nice to them, of course,
of course, naturally.
But it doesn't really matter what you say to them,
they don't really understand -
you can say anything to them:
be nice, you know, just nice -
but you must never take them seriously, they wouldn't understand,
just be nice, you know! Oh, fairly nice,
not too nice of course, they take advantage -
but nice enough, just nice enough
to let them feel they're not quite as nice as they might be.


Vercingétorix said...

"WASPs (in both the USA and the UK) are just too goddamned NICE to interlopers like Jews and other parasites."

Please, don't flatter them too much, for it is not deserved.

Yeah, "WASP's" are so 'nice' to those they FEAR, not so much as an altruistic trait in-and-of-itself!

Check out this English sadist, what he did to kindred Europeans -- but notice how this little dweeb comported himself in A REAL BATTLE -- being responsible for the LARGEST SURRENDER of British military forces in history!

"--Percival's surrender to the invading Imperial Japanese Army force was and remains the largest capitulation in British military history, and it permanently undermined Britain's prestige as an imperial power in the Far East.--"

"--Of Percival, his 'keenest adversary', Barry claimed: 'This officer was easily the most viciously anti-Irish of serving British officers. He was tireless in his attempts to destroy the spirit of the people.'

"A biographer of Michael Collins relates an allegation in a similar vein that Percival 'had a habit of driving about the countryside in the mornings in an open touring car so that he could 'have cock shots at farmers working in the fields'.'--"

Here is another example of a 'nice' "WASPy" Englishboy:

...who was responsible for:

*The WWII Dresden Holocaust - 'A Single Column Of Flame'*

n/a said...

Whether or not "WASPs" are innately "nicer", I do think an overemphasis on civility harmed the American majority's ability to defend it's interests. Out of a sense of duty, certain myths were maintained in public (despite private misgivings) in order to keep society functioning smoothly (in the short term -- little serious thought being given to the long term).

Additionally, majority elites, being socially and economically ascendant (and, again, members of the majority) may have found it difficult to conceive of any serious threat to their position.

David Smith said...

The main point of disagreement between MacDonald and Kaufmann is that Kaufmann believes that WASPs committed suicide because of their attachment to individualism, liberty and moral universalism. Also, he rejects the notion that Jews had a major role in WASP decline. In contrast, MacDonald believes that although WASP individualism played a significant role in their decline, Jewish influence was the decisive factor.

I definitely find much of Kevin MacDonald’s arguments very powerful. That being said, I’m not sure that it’s 100 percent proven that Jews were as decisive as MacDonald proposes or that we wouldn’t have fallen even without any Jewish influence. As both MacDonald and Kaufmann demonstrate there were always some very strong suicidal strains among the liberal Northeastern intellectual elite.

In determining whether or not it was suicide or murder (or something in between) it seems to me that the most important time period was the period of ethnic defense during the late 19th century and early 20th century. MacDonald proposes that during this period of time Darwinism had won the day and that liberal views on race and immigration were reduced to a relatively few intellectuals who were politically powerless. Furthermore, he proposes that this situation would have continued had it not been for the Jews. If this is all true then it discredits the idea that the fall of the WASPs was suicide. However, it all depends on exactly how weak the liberals were during this era. It’s possible that MacDonald is exaggerating their weakness and that any weakness that they had was only temporary regardless of Jews.

Anonymous said...

Despite the title, The retreat of scientific racism By Elazar Barkan, there seems little in the book to demonstrate that before WWII SR was in retreat. Barkan features Huxley's book, We Europeans as a turning point in the battle against racism, however, fails to show more than a meager impact, especially in the US, uponentrenched SR. Huxley was influenced, through contribution to the book, by two English Jews, Singer and Seligman, who were fully aware of Boas' position. It also serves to bolster the position that "white nationalism" was/is a Jewish construct. The liberal Huxley, at least in 1924, was a full proponent of racial segregation in the American South and a supporter of immigrant restriction. And yet, Jews allied with him to produce a book that attempted to undermine Nordicism and the concept of the races of Europe.

It was WWII that finally ended SR, opened the door for the attack on Jim Crow and discredited Nordicsim. And, ironically, in the US, it was the Old South that was the greatest proponent of war with Germany.


Uncle Saul said...

"And, ironically, in the US, it was the Old South that was the greatest proponent of war with Germany."

Good observation.

For whatever strange reason, the South has long been the 'Land of the Orcs' when it comes to war ...ANY war!

We certainly witnessed this embarrassing spectacle that many Southerners made of themselves over much of this decade, with the mindless Patriotardism supporting faux-Texan 'Dubya' and 'his' (Israel's) 'wars *of* terror' for support of (in submission to) 'Eretz Yisroel'.

sg said...

My question in all this is whether the influence of the liberal Jews who have low birthrates may be rather self limiting. The ultra orthodox seem more family oriented and less politically liberal. I guess I wonder how much influence liberals, Jewish or otherwise will have long term when they have so few children. It seems Mormons will outpace them shortly, as well as other groups that choose larger families and eschew outside influences. Those are not low IQ types. They are disciplined and hardworking and do not seek integration, rather seek to increase and preserve their families and legacies. Feminists with no kids can't influence things long term. Won't they just die out. Aren't they just a blip in a trend, like the Shakers?

Silver said...

"certain myths were maintained in public (despite private misgivings) in order to keep society functioning smoothly (in the short term -- little serious thought being given to the long term)."

In other words, racial feelings aren't necessarily evidence of "competent racialism" (racial thinking/logic). The anglo big thinkers in K-Mac's review certainly had racial feelings but their racial logic was deplorable. Of course, they get off lightly compared to the scalding reserved for Jewish big thinkers, though, based on the aforementioned phenomenon (racial feeling vs logic) there's little reason to suppose Jewish big thinkers were intent on destroying whites, despite destruction being the ineluctable outcome in the long-term.

Silver said...

"Additionally, majority elites, being socially and economically ascendant (and, again, members of the majority) may have found it difficult to conceive of any serious threat to their position."

I think we can infer their reasoning: my position is secure; also that of my children; and of their children and perhaps their children's children; beyond that, their problems are their own; given that, what is there to worry about?

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know (or care to translate) what 'Silver' is talking about??