Posted by Old Raven on Wed, 22 Aug 2007 22:19 | #

James—Great idea!  Will you eventually tie all parts of the intro together?  That would be useful. 

Having read this book several times, and understanding the “subtlety” of KMac’s comments in the intro, I feel a S L O W E R reading would aid in making this accessible to the uninitiated!

That IS the point, isn’t it?

Posted by 2R on Thu, 23 Aug 2007 00:14 | #

Many Jews have tried refuting Macdonalds books saying that Jews are highly represented in everything, because of their “high intelligence.”  So, this explains why they are so over represented in movements such as communism, psychotherapy, and the anti-White social sciences.  But by looking at what their not highly represented in, we get an even better picture of what their agenda is.

If we look at anti-immigration activists, we don’t see Jews represented in any large numbers.  If we look at those who defend “traditional values” (abortion, school prayer, defense of the traditional family), Jews are not there either.  If we look at the Nationalist movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, we don’t find them there as well.  And it should be pointed out that many of these Nationalist movements were really not “anti-Semitic,” and if they were, it wasn’t until after WWI.  Jews were definitely not represented on the side of segregation.  In fact, I’ve read they made up about 50% of the “freedom riders” of the 60’s. We also don’t see Jews in any large numbers in the Armed Forces. 

I’m sure you all can think of others but my point is this.  Jews cannot make the claim that they are highly represented in all social movements because this isn’t true.  They’re only highly represented in movements that are harmful to White interests and are involved in NONE of the movements that defend White interests. 

Macdonald didn’t point this out in his book but I think its a valid point.  In fact, it should be discussed here as well.

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 23 Aug 2007 00:57 | #

I feel a S L O W E R reading would aid in making this accessible to the uninitiated!

That IS the point, isn’t it?

Absolutely, and I felt similarly upon listening to the reading repeatedly.  Part of the problem is my amateurish reading skills but the speed is also critical.

Moreover, the prose is so rich with meaning, I am concerned that even a slower reading will not be adequate for the desired communication fidelity.  I’ve thought of punctuating the reading with segments of operatic arias sung by my wife so people can relax letting the meaning sink in a bit before setting their left brain back to verbal task of listening carefully.  Picking the right aria segments would be very important to maintaining the momentum.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 23 Aug 2007 02:27 | #

2R’s comment is right.

Posted by Amalek on Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:07 | #

The Culture of Critique, like corrosion, never sleeps.

Here’s a ripe instance from the new issue of the Forward—in which a Jewish prof. at a jerkwater college looks back fondly to his experience of forced school integration of whites, Jews and negroids, and laments—oy, yoy!—that the recent SCOTUS decision may prevent today’s young white people from sharing the full glory of growing up Diverse in the classroom:

http://www.forward.com/articles/11459/

A dissentient Supreme in the Parents v. Seattle case was Stephen Breyer, a Jewish liberal from San Francisco who “cites abundant research demonstrating various salutary outcomes for white students attending integrated schools”. Like intimate knowledge of hip-hop, handguns and promiscuity?

Posted by JB on Sat, 25 Aug 2007 03:59 | #

very good idea. But there should be an introduction: name yourself, name the blog, give the URL, give a brief explanation why this book is important, give some biographical info on the author. We already know the content of CofC, if your target audience is those who don’t know anything about the jewish problem make sure they get a proper introduction.

I agree with the others, the reading should be a bit slower. And try adding bass or try using those small microphones for TV interviews, those they stick on the clothes. You might sound better with a mic near your throat

Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 25 Aug 2007 04:43 | #

The reason I chose the preface to the second edition is that the most common critiques of “The Culture of Critique” are premiere examples of “the Jewish problem” documented by “The Culture of Critique” itself—and Prof. MacDonald’s rebuttals are so sane and steadfast that they provide the kind of authoritative voice for honest and relevant scholarship that is so absent from our current culture.

The Preface itself describes the importance of the subject during the opening paragraph:

The thesis of the book is a difficult one indeed, not only because it is difficult to establish, but also because it challenges many fundamental assumptions about our contemporary intellectual and political existence.

Posted by JB on Mon, 27 Aug 2007 05:04 | #

The Preface itself describes the importance of the subject during the opening paragraph:

James, the point of your introduction would be to grab the attention of the potential listener. Use a good short sales pitch at the beginning and chances are he’ll keep on listening to the whole file or will read the book. If eventually your audio of CofC will be posted permanently on the front page it will not be for us, we already know what’s in the book and why it’s important, it will be for the newbies.