|
March 1st, 2009 | #21 | ||||||
Not A Race Traitor
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 305
|
(I hope I don't earn any scorn for bumping an old thread – I felt compelled to respond to the lies here)
Jobling's arguments tend to be rather sophomoric (I am familiar with him and his websites, BTW) - he wants to point out how Jews are not all on the same page (which is true, but Kevin MacDonald acknowledges this profusely just for people like Jobling) and then create these straw men regarding MacDonald's works. He attributes claims to MacDonald that MacDonald doesn't make, which is extremely irritating and reflects badly on someone like Jobling who has such a scholarly pretense. I don't know if Jobling actually believes the things he is saying (because they fall so short of the facts) or if he believes that getting Jews on "our side" is more important than bashing them. Both positions are fallacious, if not dangerous, as far as I am concerned. Lets take a look: Quote:
While there are definitely vocal and outspoken Jews who are opposed to Zionism, it is a basic fact that most Jews, even the liberal-leaning ones, support Israel: http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/200...tion-cast.html This strongly supports MacDonald's basic thesis. Quote:
MacDonald does in fact talk about this topic at great length and Jobling should actually read his books rather than create these hideous straw men that do not reflect MacDonald’s actual writings. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But either case does not destroy Sailer’s or MacDonald’s argument. For the other comments here: Yes, there are real differences of opinions between Jews, but it is incredibly fallacious to use the examples cited here as some sort of argument that Jews are not an ethnocentric people. While I will grant that Jews may be losing their ethnic cohesion over time and as compared to historical memory, it is still very strong among them. The morality of Jews is either directed towards explicit Jewish interests or is directed towards implicit Jewish interests and I do not think you can make the case against either very well. While a majority of Jews may have been opposed to the Iraq war, it still was a Jewish elite who created, planned, and intensely lobbied for it, so the claim of Jewish involvement is still valid and the method of analysis of Jewish intellectual movements used by MacDonald fits in perfectly here. The Jews who supported the Iraq war had Israel's interest in mind, while the Jews who opposed the Iraq war had memory of the holocaust and WWII in mind. Both groups are motivated by Jewish interests, even if their actual opinions are divergent. |
||||||
March 2nd, 2009 | #22 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
|
Excellent analysis, Tom.
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
March 22nd, 2009 | #23 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 169
|
Neocons are not interested in preserving White America. Jobling is.
__________________
National Futurism |
March 23rd, 2009 | #24 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
|
Quote:
BTW a quintessential neocon tactic that Jobling uses is to impugn the patriotism of those, like Pat Buchanan, who oppose a rabidly pro-Zionist US foreign policy. That is how the neocons have marginalized the paleocons, and spreads the neocon dogma that there is simply no difference between US interests and Israeli interests. Last edited by Mike Parker; March 23rd, 2009 at 06:18 AM. |
|
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|