← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Bardamu
Thread ID: 11733 | Posts: 5 | Started: 2004-01-04
2004-01-04 04:14 | User Profile
[I]I finished reading Charles Murray's new book Human Accomplishment and I thought OD might enjoy reading some honest to goodness Neo-Con suckpoopery:[/I]
"This sparse representation in European arts and sciences through the beginning of 19C reflects Jews' near-total exclusion from the arts and sciences. Jews were not merely discouraged from entering universities and the professions, they were often forbidden by law from doing so. Socially, they were despised. "Underlying everything," writes historian David Vital, "was the central fact that under the old regime no Jew was, or could be, a member of civil society. No matter how learned or wealthy or contingently influential he might be within or without Jewry itself, a Jew was held to belong to a moral and, of course, theological category inferior to that of the meanest peasant." I will not try to establish a hierarchy of victim hood among Jews, women, and other minorities, but an uncomplicated point needs emphasis: Until the end of 18C throughout Europe, and well into 19C in most parts of Europe, Jews lived under a regime of legally restricted rights and socially sanctioned discrimination as sever as that borne by any population not held in chattel slavery."
[I]Murray considers the Jews more victims of oppression than the serfs. Whenever Murray mentions Jews in the book, which is regularly, he is shamelessly fawning and obsequious. I wonder why? As someone once said about George Will, you just can't buy this kind of servility with money. What do you suppose the deal is with this guy? [/I]
2004-01-04 06:21 | User Profile
All my life I've known people with just as much grey matter as any random Mensoid yet they buy the Party Line without ever knowing you're supposed to ask questions now and then.
Murray has got to know that Europeans oppressed each other far more than they oppressed any outsider, but consider his world. College, publishing, media... each with pretty much the same party line and very little wiggle room for heresy.
He probably considers himself a solid scholar with a generous point of view. Reminds me a bit of old Malcolm Muggeridge's famous crack that Joe Stalin was peanuts compared to Eleanor Roosevelt in the scheme of things. Muggs figured it was the generous souls who give the store away as the real problem, not the monsters.
Charles just fits in his comfort zone unusually well.
2004-01-09 21:53 | User Profile
Charles Murray is a little bitch. Philosemitic scum like him are no closer to helping our people than Ted Kennedy is.
And we didn't need a book to tell us that negroes are dumb.
2004-01-09 22:21 | User Profile
I read little of this book. What I did read astonished me. He ranked Fermat as a more significant mathematician than Gauss. Only number crazed morons could write and believe that.
2004-01-09 23:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE] I wonder why? As someone once said about George Will, you just can't buy this kind of servility with money. What do you suppose the deal is with this guy? [/QUOTE]
With some people, and a think Will is a good example, the persecution and finanical and political resurection of the Jews take the place of the Passion and Resurection of Christ.
Thus, they have a tendancy to exaggerate the severity of the Jew's sufferings, as it is in some twisted form a way to look superiour than the people who carried it out.