Warren Wagar wrote the following (& I looked right past it the
first time I read it)
> I, for one, have no difficulty
asserting the conviction that
> in late modern times, since the second
half of the 19th Century, persons
> of Jewish heritage--albeit seldom
observant Jews--have provided close to
> one-half the artistic,
intellectual, corporate, and scientific leadership
> of Western
civilization, a percentage absurdly out of proportion to their
> numbers,
and explicable only as the result of the cultural history of the
> Jewish
people and, yes, perhaps also of the Darwinian effects of pogroms
> and
holocausts, which may have thinned the ranks of the least wary and
>
resourceful.
==============================================================================
As someone who has admired both Warren's commitment to a more humane world
and respect for the insistence of evidence and use of critical thinking to
evaluate that evidence, I am absolutely stunned by the shallow, ridiculous,
politically biased pseudo-science that Warren employs in the above
statement.
No doubt some will soon accuse me of "political correctness" -- a way
of saying that I don't want to accept the truth because it violates my political
assumptions about the world or harms those I am politically connected to.
But look at the political bias and racist, "blame-the-victim" shallow
reasoning in the above quote! Can his argument be extended to saying that "yes,
perhaps" the children of rape victims are going to be less intelligent
because their mothers were not resourceful enough to escape from rapists! Or
maybe more intelligent because the rapists were skillful enough to effective
stalk and subdue women? Or maybe less intelligent because the rapists were
incapable of developing non-exploitative relationships with women? Or maybe more
intelligent because children that can survive such psychological burdens must be
stronger and smarter and will pass that on to their children? My, my...we can
use this logic to assert just about anything......no matter how shallow or
abusive.
We are not talking about the tentative "anything
is possible" language of a liberal social scientist who is afraid
that he/she might be accused of dogmatism and therefore hedges everything
written or said. This starts out, boldly and
confidently, with:
"I, for one, have no difficulty asserting the conviction
that........and, yes, perhaps also of the Darwinian effects of pogroms and
holocausts, which may have thinned the ranks of the least wary and
resourceful"
Putting aside the reprehensive social implications of what Warren has
suggested, (since I might be accused of suppressing the truth in favor of
political-social acceptability) let me just focus on two
methodological/empirical problems with his statement.
First, there is NO EVIDENCE for his statement that less
"resourceful" (less genetically intelligent???) are the ones who were
exterminated by the Nazis (shall we extend that to Africa, where so many black
people are just not resourceful enough to resist imperialism.....or to those who
were murdered by the Pinochet regime in Chile-----too bad they were not
resourceful enough to ally with and aid the murderers!).
It is the kind of folklore speculation that is not based on any data, but
rather just a dangerously shallow, half-assed "interpretation" using a
"cause-and-effect" reason that is one-dimensional, ignoring the incredibly
complex set of interacting factors that result in some people being victims and
others being survivors. And to assume that this one-dimensional factor could
then manifest itself "genetically" in such a short period of time betrays an
extraordinary ignorance of the most simple, basic notions of how biological
evolutionary changes develop.
This kind of anti-scientific, data-less speculation can be used to prove
anything--a book by the noted, racially biased British psychologist, Hans
Eysenck, once asserted on the same few pages that "blacks in Africa were more
intelligent than blacks in the U.S., because those in Africa were resourceful
enough to escape capture, and passed their resourcefulness onto their children"
and then wrote, using something like that clever rhetorical trick word
"curiously" that "curiously (or something like that)", the opposite seems
to have been at work among the Irish, where the more intelligent Irish had
the intelligence to migrate to the USA, while the less intelligent remained
behind in Ireland to reproduce their less intelligent genes. No data, just a
rhetorical sleight-of-hand ("curiously" or "interestingly") to make vanish those
contradictions that expose the fallacies. One could just have easily written
that the more resourceful Irish were able to stay and make a life for themselves
rather than fleeing, but it politically served Eysenck to slander both the black
people of the USA and the Irish of Ireland. Warren does not make these
assertions about Africans and the Irish, but his logic and conclusions are just
as insipid.
While I have had various debates with others on this list about the
qualitative impact and magnitude of biological factors on human social
behavior, I would hope that even most who have some fondness for sociobiology
would agree that Warren's argument, stated above, is an embarrassment to
science. Simply put: "Where's the evidence?....other than just the kind of
speculation that ignores vast amounts of evidence.
Second, this
comment:
"since the second half of the 19th
Century, persons of Jewish heritage--albeit seldom observant Jews--have provided
close to one-half the artistic, intellectual, corporate, and scientific
leadership of Western civilization,"
displays/betrays? an extraordinary class and ethnocentric bias as to what
constitutes "intelligence" (which, after all, Warren does link to "genetics"
further along in the message.) Is Kissinger "smarter" than a young
Salvadoran guerrilla fighter, tortured to death by CIA-trained assassins? He did
live longer!!! Is "success" the indicator of great intelligence? By that
logic, George W. Bush is the smartest President in recent times (with Reagan as
second), because of his recent, stunning, (temporary) triumphs. What is "good
art"? What is "good intellectual leadership"? What is good "scientific
leadership"? And especially, what is "good corporate leadership"? How is that
measured quantitatively, without bias? How much intelligence does it take to
raise children, in all their complexity? How much does it take to hire an
industrial spy to steal secrets from another company? And especially, how is all
that measured qualitatively--in terms of what positive impact it had on the
greatest number of people? Warren reduces all this complexity to the simplicity
of a class-biased, ethno-centric history book from the 1950's, ("Lindbergh was a
great man and even the black race had one guy who invented peanuts.") with no
self-awareness (at least in this post) of the enormous bias which he is simply
accepting as "fact".
Warren does not make any racist assertions
directly, but the notion that other groups are genetically less fit/ less
intelligent is easily derivable from what he tries to pass for data and the
analysis he uses to explain that "data".
To recap, please note that I did not fill this post with righteous
indignation at the class, race, and ethnic slander in Warren's post. I could
have, but chose to not get mired into yet another debate about so-called
"political correctness". Rather this posting should be seen as an attempt to
expose the pathetic non-data, lousy folkloric methodology, and political
bias (the "political correctness" of the dominant groups, after all...) in
Warren's message.
Some may also reject this posting as a "flame", a
personal attack on Warren. No such intent was implied and that is
not an accurate characterization of this message. I only hope that if I post
something as devoid of evidence, based on ridiculous methodology, and filled
with such dangerous anti-social conclusions, that my friends and colleagues will
see fit to correct me in the strongest, clearest, sharpest terms.
Respectfully,
Alan Spector
==================================================
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 5:29 PM
Subject: Re: Zionism, supremacist doctrines and
PNAC
>
> Dear WSN,
>
> I cannot believe that the WSN community, after the passage of
four
> days, has not responded to this important post by Dr.
Prugovecki. As
> analysts of the modern world-system, we cannot
possibly ignore the fact
> that the current thrust toward empire on the
part of the United States
> involves an intimate alliance with the state
of Israel, bankrolled for
> decades by billions of U.S. dollars. We
also cannot possibly ignore the
> fact that Israel has deliberately
colonized Arab lands with hundreds of
> thousands of Jewish settlers,
rendering the creation of a sovereign
> state on formerly Palestinian soil
almost impossible, even if a
> Palestinian authority should relinquish the
right of Arabs to return to
> ancestral lands seized by Israeli invaders
during the 1940s in what is
> now Israel.
>
> It is also
indisputable that many Israeli Jews regard Arabs as
> indolent vermin who
have no right to the sacred soil of the Holy Lands,
> and should seek the
hospitality of adjacent deserts.
>
> The triumphalism and claims to
racial superiority of many Jews,
> worldwide, are also well documented, as
Dr. Prugovecki notes. There is
> absolutely no moral difference
between such claims and the hideous
> rhetoric of Nazi apologists.
>
> Of course one must distinguish between the "moral" and the
>
"factual." I, for one, have no difficulty asserting the conviction
that
> in late modern times, since the second half of the 19th Century,
persons
> of Jewish heritage--albeit seldom observant Jews--have provided
close to
> one-half the artistic, intellectual, corporate, and scientific
leadership
> of Western civilization, a percentage absurdly out of
proportion to their
> numbers, and explicable only as the result of the
cultural history of the
> Jewish people and, yes, perhaps also of the
Darwinian effects of pogroms
> and holocausts, which may have thinned the
ranks of the least wary and
> resourceful.
>
> But by the
same token, one might also build a case for the
> superiority of the
Germans in the 19th and early 20th Centuries. I doubt
> that an
objective survey of the music, literature, philosophy, science,
>
technology, and military arts of that period--excluding every Jew--would
>
disclose any people in the world with a record equal to the German.
And
> before that came the Chinese and the Arabs and the Romans and the
Greeks,
> and so forth and so on. So what? Various peoples
have their times in the
> sun, regardless of genes or skin color.
Such things happen, but they give
> no license to imperial rampages or
doctrines of righteous domination. The
> record, so far, of imperial
Israel is a disgrace to Judaism, and for the
> most part we can credit
liberal, progressive, and enlightened Jews for
> documenting and indicting
it. Bless them all.
>
> So this is not a taboo subject.
The collusion of reactionary
> American Jews, Protestants, and others with
Israeli imperialism is a dark
> stain on the American conscience and a
pressing concern for men and women
> of good will everywhere.
>
> In the name of humankind,
>
> Warren
>
>
> On Sun, 4 May 2003, E. Prugovecki wrote:
>
> > In his
May 2, 2003 post with the title "Re: A SECRET blueprint for US
> >
global domination - four issues to discuss seriously about the
>
> historiography of world systems theorizations," Mark Douglas
Whitaker
> > <mrkdwhit@wallet.com> raises "the issue of
religion, particularly in
> > world systems" and "the Israel/Zionist
question: unquestioning acceptance
> > of 'whatever Israel does'
because of the anti-Semite card being thrown.
> > Academic fear guiding
speaking up more than anything, or out of concern
> > of fanning the
flames of the world's very real anti-Semitism or fear of
> > being
associated with it by accident."
> >
> > Mark Douglas Whitaker
ends his May 2, 2003 post by inviting comments.
> >
> > Here
are mine on the "Israel/Zionist question" (NOTE: all the cited
> >
references can be easily traced on Amazon.com, or other online
> >
booksellers):
> >
> > I am one of those academics who had
suffered covert, and sometimes even
> > overt, persecution after
attending in the 1970s the meetings of a society
> > of
Jewish-Palestinian friendship, consisting of progressive Jews and
> >
Palestinians who were trying to help resolve the Israeli-Palestinian
>
> issue in a peaceful and just way. When I approached, soon after
attending
> > some of those meetings, my Jewish friends and colleagues
at the
> > University of Toronto, and tried to convince them to join
the society, or
> > at least publicly express their disapproval of the
unjust Israeli
> > policies, I was either ignored, or, the issue of
"anti-Semitism" was
> > invoked
>
> This issue has become since
World War II an emotionally highly
> > charged one, due to incessant
Zionist propaganda, largely based on the
> > exploitation of the
memories of the holocaust of European Jews during
> > World War II. The
anti-Jewish attitude incorrectly labeled
> > "anti-Semitism" (since he
Arabs are as Semitic as the Jews) has become
> > unlike any other
social attitude directed against a political, religious,
> > racial,
national or sexual group - such as it is the case with
> >
"anti-communism," "anti-capitalism," "anti-Americanism,"
> >
"anti-Catholicism," "anti-lesbianism," etc. In a recent Amazon.com
review
> > of the book Zionist Connection: What Price Peace by the
anti-Zionist
> > Jewish writer Alfred M. Lilienthal it is pointed out
that "[t]he fear of
> > being labeled 'anti-Semite' is the main weapon
used by Zionists to
> > silence their critics." This carefully nurtured
emotional connotation of
> > the term "anti-Semitism" distinguishes it
from terms describing the many
> > socially harmful attitudes directed
in North America against Hispanics
> > (known also as "Latinos"),
against African Americans (once addressed as
> > "Negroes"), and
against Native Americans (still called "Indians"). All
> > this despite
that fact these three last racist attitudes have resulted in
> > great
suffering for members of those "minorities," and in the almost
> >
complete extermination of the last "minority" (which once inhabited the
>
> entire North American continent), constituting in both numbers of
>
> murdered people as well as the number of destroyed cultural heritages
the
> > greatest of all holocausts in the history of humankind (cf.
American
> > Holocaust by D.E. Stannard).
>
> In North America any
explanation of the special status enjoyed by
> > the term
"anti-Semitism" that is provided by a Gentile scholar is bound
> > to
be dismissed by many Jews as being itself "anti-Semitic." It is
> >
therefore advisable to turn to reputable Jewish scholars who have had
the
> > courage to confront the basic facts, and state them
publicly.
> > As a son
of Holocaust survivors and a noted academic, Norman
> > Finkelstein
carries all the necessary credentials, although his
> > courageous
stand - which he shares with some other exceptional Jewish
> >
scholars, such as Noam Chomsky, Israel Shahak, Israel Shamir, Alfred
>
> Lilienthal, etc.- has apparently earned him in Zionist and elitist
Jewish
> > circles the title of a "self-hating Jew." Of course, if this
peculiarly
> > Zionist attitude were carried to its logical conclusion
by other nations
> > and religious groups, any German critic of the
"master race" aspirations
> > advocated by the Nazis would have to be
labeled a "self-hating German,"
> > any Catholic critic of the
anti-abortion ideology of the Vatican would be
> > declared a
"self-hating Catholic," and so on, and so on.
>
> One of the things that
Finkelstein has done in his recent
> > writings was to dispel the myth
of the Jews being perpetual "victims." In
> > particular, he states the
following: "As the anti-Semitic barriers
> > quickly fell after World
War II, Jews rose to prominence in the United
> > States. According to
Lipset and Raab, per capita Jewish income is almost
> > double that of
non-Jews; sixteen of the forty wealthiest Americans are
> > Jews; 40
percent of American Nobel Prize winners in science and economics
> >
are Jewish, as are 20 percent of professors at major universities; and
40
> > percent of partners in leading law forms in New York and
Washington. The
> > list goes on [in the book Jews by Lipset and Raab].
Far from constituting
> > an obstacle, Jewish identity has become a
crown to that success."
> > (Finkelstein, The Holocaust Industry, pp.
32-33)
> > The above
statistics appear even more remarkable once it is
> > realized that the
Jews constitute only a bit more than 2% of the American
> > population,
so that, for example, Jews are represented amongst
> > "professors at
major universities" in a proportion that is ten times
> > greater then
their proportion in the general American population.
>
> The reasons for this
unparalleled "success story" provided by
> > some Jewish writers echoes
the "master race" attitudes of their arch
> > enemies, namely the
Nazis. For example, Finkelstein points out the
> > following disturbing
attitude among some Jews: "Who could any longer
> > dispute that Jews
are the 'chosen' people? In A Certain People: American
> > Jews and
Their Lives Today, Charles Silberman - himself a born-again Jew
> > -
typically gushes: 'Jews would have been less human had they eschewed
>
> any notion of superiority altogether,' and 'it is extraordinarily
>
> difficult for American Jews to expunge the sense of superiority
>
> altogether, however much they may try to suppress it.' What an
American
> > Jewish child inherits, according to novelist Philip Roth,
is 'no body of
> > law, no body of learning and no language, and
finally, no Lord ... but a
> > kind of psychology; and the psychology
can be translated in three words:
> > 'Jews are better.'" (ibid., p.
33)
> > After having my
own career as a scientist and academic severely
> > affected by the
tactics of this type of supremacist Jews, I eventually
> > became
curious about how widespread this self-aggrandizing phenomenon is
> >
amongst North American Jews. Hence, I searched the Internet under the
>
> topic "anti-Semitism" and its polar opposite "anti-Gentilism."
>
> To my surprise, I found an
enormous amount of evidence which,
> > most regrettably, identifies a
Jewish racism and anti-Gentilism reflected
> > in supremacist attitudes
as being a rather wide-spread phenomenon: in one
> > publication after
another certain Jewish American authors overtly claim
> > that the Jews
are "unique," "distinct" and "superior," and that
> > anti-Semitism is
not at all a natural reaction to such an incredibly
> > racist and
arrogant attitude, but that it is rather due exclusively (cf.
> >
Finkelstein's book, pp. 47-55) to the vile nature of Gentiles. "It's
>
> always the Gentiles' fault," states Finkelstein at one point (ibid.,
p.
> > 61 - italics as in the original) as if wondering at the chutzpah
of the
> > "Jewish elites" that he criticizes.
>
> The extremes to which this
Jewish presumption that "Jews are
> > unique and distinct," and
therefore entitled to special privileges,
> > unwittingly emerges from
the following passage in the memoirs of the
> > famous Russian
physicist and dissenter Andrei Sakharov, which deals with
> > his
Jewish wife's experiences during their 1988 visit to Canada.
>
> Academician Sakharov writes
that in answering a question about
> > Jewish émigrés from the USSR,
Mrs. Sakharov (known to the public as Elena
> > "Lusia" Bonner) stated
the following: "There's a tendency to regard all
> > Jews leaving the
USSR as political refugees. That isn't right or fair.
> > ... People
can have other, fully legitimate reasons to leave the USSR - a
> >
desire to live well, to realize their potential. But why do such
[Jewish]
> > people have a better right to call themselves political
refugees and to
> > get special privileges than refugees from Vietnam,
Cambodia, or Armenia?"
> > (Sakharov, Moskow and Beyond: 1986 to 1989,
p. 104)
> > Sakharov
then describes how, as a result of this statement, which
> > dared to
set Jewish émigrés on par with émigrés belonging to other ethnic
> >
groups, his Jewish wife "was accused of anti-Semitism and other mortal
>
> sins ... [and] warned that outraged Jews would picket [her and his]
>
> appearances in Winnipeg." (Ibid., p. 104)
>
> In the face of such
incredible chauvinistic Jewish arrogance, is
> > it any wonder that
many non-Jews react with disapproval? That most
> > natural reaction is
then self-servingly labeled by ethnocentric and
> > supremacist Jews as
"anti-Semitism"!
> >
But what is the evidence presented by representatives of the
> >
"Jewish elites" in favor of the alleged Jewish "uniqueness" and
> >
"superiority"?
> >
Norman F. Cantor, described by his publisher as an "eminent
> > Jewish
scholar, professor, and writer," has the following to say in his
> >
1995 book The Sacred Chain: A History of the Jews: "The Jews, once
> >
emancipated and given opportunity for mobility, were genetically so
> >
superior that market capitalism could not accommodate some of this
> >
superior species." (The Sacred Chain, p. 277). Thus, according to
> >
Professor Cantor, the evidence of Jewish "uniqueness" and "superiority"
>
> is genetic: "The Jews are a superior people intellectually and as long
as
> > Jewish genes exist, the extraordinary impact Jews have had in
the
> > twentieth century will continue indefinitely." (Ibid., p.
423)
> > Does that
sound familiar? I am sure that Hitler would have
> > completely agreed
with Cantor if the term "Jew" were replaced in the
> > above quotations
with the term "Arian."
>
> However, the Jewish
reviewers of Cantor's book find this
> > supremacist Jewish claims
totally reasonable and acceptable. One of them
> > even states on its
Amazon.com website the following: "Th[is] book [by
> > Cantor] is
proudly Zionist, having many passages that make you feel very
> > proud
of being a Jew and of our value and achievement. ... Instead of
> >
seeing us as a holy race set apart, Cantor has to ground his Zionism in
>
> the superiority of the Jewish race, using the fact of the superior
Jewish
> > Intelligence. This is clearly liberal Zionism and not
orthodox."
> > (Emphasis added.)
>
> Thus, the only criticism
raised against Cantor's "powerful and
> > deeply learned voice" is that
it is not sufficiently "orthodox," since
> > Cantor regards the Jews
"merely" as being "genetically superior" to all
> > non-Jews, but not
as being also a "holy race."
>
> Well, not even Hitler had
gone as far as to assert that the
> > Arians were a "holy race." But
only one Jewish reviewer finds the
> > advocated thesis of Jewish
supremacy at all objectionable, as he states:
> > "The only criticism I
have of this important work is when [Cantor] uses
> > the phrase
'genetic intellectual superiority' (p. 424) which I found
> >
disturbing in a work that includes a discussion of the holocaust."
>
> So, there we have it: Jews
are "genetically superior," and
> > therefore, by implication, deserve
special consideration. Of course, this
> > attitude lies at the bottom
of not only how the Palestinians are being
> > treated in the
territories occupied by Israel, but also of how Gentiles
> > like
myself are treated in North America by supremacist Jews when they
> >
point out the injustices suffered by the Palestinians. And, of course,
it
> > surfaces very clearly when Jews and Gentiles compete in the
academic job
> > market.
>
> I find the claims of
genetic Jewish intellectual superiority as
> > morally objectionable as
I do find similar claims by Nazi scholars in
> > favor of Arian
intellectual superiority, or those of white supremacists
> > in USA,
who assert the superiority of Caucasians over other races.
>
> In fact, the parallels
between such claims were unwittingly
> > underlined by Jewish scholar
Raphael Patai, who, according to the Book
> > News review of his 1996
book The Jewish Mind, "[e]xamines the Jewish mind
> > and personality
through three millennia, looking at the ways six
> > historical
encounters between the Jews and other cultures have left their
> > mark
on Jewish consciousness. Explores Jewish intelligence and the
> >
phenomenology of special Jewish talents ..." In the course of this
> >
"exploration of Jewish intelligence" Patai tries to substantiate on
> >
genetic grounds his thesis of Jewish intellectual superiority over all
>
> non-Jews by quoting the race theory of a Nazi named Hans Gunther.
Thus,
> > in the "survival of the fittest" scenario postulated by him
natural
> > selection has favored over many centuries only the smartest
Jews (ibid.,
> > pp. 304-305), and the allegedly self-evident Jewish
superiority is a
> > natural consequence of this "fact."
>
> It is interesting to point
out that the conviction of the Puritan
> > colonists of North America
that they were "God's Chosen People" and
> > "superior" to the many
native North American nations (J. Wilson, The
> > Earth Shall
Weep: A History of Native America , p. 92) has led during the
> >
nineteenth century to a policy of virtual extermination of the latter.
>
> For example, Stannard states on p. 120 of his American Holocaust:
>
> "[Thomas] Jefferson's writings on Indians are filled with the
> >
straightforward assertion that the natives are to be given a simple
> >
choice - to be 'extirpate[d] from the earth' or to remove themselves out
>
> of the American way. Had the same words been enunciated by a German
>
> leader in 1939, and directed at European Jews, they would be engraved
in
> > modern history."
>
> I have already written
about the nineteenth century genocide of
> > the Native North Americans
by white Americans in my WSN post of April 15,
> > 2002, and I do not
wish to repeat myself. I would, however, like to point
> > out that the
present-day principles of PNAC have their roots in
> > supremacist
American and supremacist Jewish attitudes, which represent a
> > great
threat to the rest of humankind. I believe that it is no accident
> >
that supremacist Protestant Americans and supremacist Jewish Americans
>
> are predominant in PNAC. As Mark Douglas Whitaker implies, certain
types
> > of religious attitudes condition political behavior - and, as
it is
> > well-known, Bush Jr. provides a prime example of that. The
sorry present
> > state of many Native North Americans and many
Palestinians should be a
> > warning to us all. And, of course, the
invasion of Iraq provides the
> > prototype of how the PNAC blueprint
for a US world domination is going to
> > be implemented in
practice.
> > The
website "Project for the First People's Century"
> >
>
>
http://www.rrojasdatabank.org/pfpc0000.htm
> >
> > set up on May 1, 2003 by Dr. Robinson Rojas,
contains links to PNAC
> > online publications, and also provides a
number of articles dealing with
> > various aspects of PNAC. I believe
that they are all worth reading before
> > CIA, Mossad, or some other
similar organizations begin enacting the part
> > of the PNAC plan
which "calls for the total control of cyberspace to
> > prevent
'enemies' using the Internet against the US" - which, in plain
> >
language, means against the neo-cons in power in US, and their close
>
> allies, the Zionists in power in Israel.
> >
> > Eduard
Prugovecki
> > Professor Emeritus
> > University of
Toronto
> > http://individual.utoronto.ca/prugovecki/
>
>
> >