Culture of Critique

Ok boys I just read this book and I need to know if it's legit or not. Some of the claims are hard to accept but it seems to be backed up with a decent amount of evidence. What do you guys think? Bullshit or legit?

Not just good scholarship but obligatory reading .

All of the people who claim MacDonald is a fraud resort to ad hominem, so I'd say he's spot on. It really takes all three books to get a proper picture on the Jewish psyche and how it developed, though. CoC is the culmination.

>All of the people who claim MacDonald is a fraud resort to ad hominem,

Indeed. I never saw a refutation of his arguments.

>Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center has said of MacDonald that "he put the anti-Semitism under the guise of scholarly work... Kevin MacDonald’s work is nothing but gussied-up anti-Semitism. At base it says that Jews are out to get us through their agenda... His work is bandied about by just about every neo-Nazi group in America."

>The Anti-Defamation League has included MacDonald in its list of American extremists, Extremism in America, and has written a report[19] on MacDonald's views and ties. According to the ADL, MacDonald's views on Jews mimic those of anti-Semites from the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

S E E T H I N G

It's complete nonsense. MacDonald claims that Judaism is a group evolutionary strategy that is aimed at promoting some sort of insularity and continuity of bloodline. He falls flat on his face if he bothered to look at what intermarriage rates are in every country that doesn't impose restrictions (from the outside) on such things. It's been going on since at least the time of the Roman Republic, if the Jewish catacombs underneath Rome, with all their syncretic religious imagery, and the mix of Greek, Roman, and traditionally Jewish names are anything to go by.

He further asserts that policies that Jews tend to back are demonstrative proofs of a Jewish group survival strategy, based on evolutionary psychology. He never seems to deal with the problem that Jews are a rather widespread group these days from an evolutionary perspective, with different diasporic communities having more genetic sharing with their host countries than each other. And that relatively small ethnic groups akin to the Jews have no shortage of times when they've torn themselves to little pieces. See any given Chinese civil war, Russian-Ukranian ethnic hatred, the 30 years war, Anglican religious conflicts, or what the Mexicans did to each other before the Spanish showed up to stop the fun.

>le nordics are cucks because biology meme
Bullshit. Why is it throughout Nordic history they never had a problem terrorizing Latins, terrorizing Catholics. terrorizing Polish people and Russians to an extent barbarous even by the standards of the era as well as being among the most hostile to foreigners in general ?Lets face it. Nordics are cucks because they are barbarians. Any time, any place, they'll find the most barbaric position and stick to it.

Wat

A critique of jareds opinion on why nordics are internationalist cuckolds today. He thinks it's innate biology, I disagree. Nordics are just as racially collectivist of Jews throughout history, and facts vindicate this. only recently do nordics take this internationalist stance and that's only because they are barbarians who seek to destroy European ( Greco-Roman) civilization at every turn.

The SPLC and ADL are terrorist organizations.

>with different diasporic communities having more genetic sharing with their host countries than each other.

This isn't true. Jews from Europe and North Africa are all much more similar genetically, and the Eastern Jews similarly are close to one another despite being spread across different lands and cultures.

You're thinking of the beta israel and the indian jews. Who were unknown about, and their histories are shrouded in even more mystery - and the possibility they are judaized groups.

I don't think I agree with Kevin MacDonald because I don't think northern europeans, historically were as individualistic as he claims. But I can't comment on his books because I haven't read them all.

>This isn't true. Jews from Europe and North Africa are all much more similar genetically, and the Eastern Jews similarly are close to one another despite being spread across different lands and cultures.
They're more similar to each other than random population segments, but say, Jews from Germany are more similar to Germans than they are to Jews from Yemen.

If you said Southern Europeans I'd agree, but the main Jewish diasporas are very similar. and they do all have narrow founder effects on the maternal line, and they all show population genetic characteristics of endogamous population isolates.

So wouldn't that lend some credibility to MacDonald's claims?

>I don't think I agree with Kevin MacDonald because I don't think northern europeans, historically were as individualistic as he claims.
They really aren't. Even today, their "individuality" is somewhat questionable. They are certainly conformist. Nordic/Germanic culture is anti-family and overall degenerate, but it's a collectivist sort of anti-family and overall degeneracy .

>Jews from Germany are more similar to Germans than they are to Jews from Yemen.
But genetically they are still Southern Levantines who are the transition ethnicity between Southern Europe and West Asia.

Wrong map

Meant for

...

>All of the people who claim MacDonald is a fraud resort to ad hominem, so I'd say he's spot on.

QED

>Nordics
>terrorizing Russians
When? How? Poltava was hardly terrorizing Russians, more like Sweden getting its shit pushed in.

>different diasporic communities having more genetic sharing with their host countries than each other
This is nonsense.

>4242932
This thread again

I think everywhere is turning toward individualism, to a certain extent, because of globalization. Previously most peoples were very collectivist and endogamous.

Individualism is just more prominent in Northern Europe because of the enlightenment and industrialization.

Hi Shlomo.

>4243436
Hi mutt

It seems to me like the book is one giant ad hominem argument like most neo-nazi propaganda. By basing it on biology rather than on social-formations that account for mutations and branches. Like wtf, is the nuclear family an aryan evolutionary strategy? If so then why does half of europe does not have it? (see hajnal line). Second there are things like Christian ethics and doctrine that rarely were the jews involved after it became instutionalised. Liberalism and liberal revolutions also did not involve jews and that is a thing by itself. Is that also an evolutionary strategy? Taking social events with the method of biology like humans are little different from cows or birds, is misleading and reductionist.

Read the book before criticizing.

The liberal creationist meme is true.

...