Wrangel contra MacDonald

In the comments of my review of The Culture of Critique, “Wrangel” objects to the materialistic framework of MacDonald’s thought:

Perhaps there is a slight misinterpretation of MacDonald in here. Under, “Gentiles” MacDonald primarily think about European-Americans a.k.a “Whites”, not Christians. As a matter of fact, he is mostly concerned about people of north-European origin, mainly Anglo-Saxons. His conceptual apparatus is mainly materialistic and tribal-based.

Many Gentiles are not Christians, while many Christians are not white, nor of European origin.
On other hand, many whites today are not Christian.
Latinos are gentiles and mostly very Christian, but I doubt that MacDonald had them in mind when he talked about preservation of Gentiles. Actually, MacDonald consider Christan Latinos and their immigration as main threat to “white-american” identity, and he claim that Jewish influence is cause of that. MacDonald explained this Gentile/White v.s Jewish dichotomy in contemporary America, and in many cases his insights are quite correct, specially about hypocrisy and non-scientific nature of “Frankfurt school”.

However there are certain problems with his theories:

1. He created elaborate sociological-tribal theories about reasons of disproportional influence of Jewish elites and Jewish culture in US. However lets see counterexample. POLAND, before WW2 had significant number of Jews, who were almost majority in some bigger Polish cities. Poles are white, European gentiles like their equivalents in US. However, although quite numerous and organized, Jews had almost zero influence on Polish state, its culture and value system. Poland was ultra-Catholic and ultra-conservative state, with strong Polish nationalism – and with very large Jewish population, many of whom were also quite self-aware as Jews. I would say that influence of radical protestantism in New World and it’s obsession with old testament opened the door for disproportionate Jewish influence in US.

2. He talked about “whites” and “gentiles” like they are some cohesive group with tribal identity. Christians, Muslims, Hindu and even Atheists are all “gentiles” according to Jewish perspective. What they have in common? That they are not Jews? If we base gentile identity simply as opposition to Jews, then we actually agree with Jewish rabbis about Jewish identity, thus playing their game in making Jews unique and superior to others. What if we base identity of “whiteness”? What does “white” mean? Perhaps in America, term “white” have some meaning but NOT IN EUROPE. Germans, French, Poles, Russians etc. are all white, but they also have different ethnic and group loyalties. MacDonald, under “white” seems that mostly means about north-Europeans of Germanic ancestry. So his appeals to “white” or “gentile” identity are quite problematic.

3. When we talk about “Jews”,what “Jews” do we mean? Most Jews in the world, and specially in the US are Ashkenazi and followers of RABBINICAL Judaism, which originate in Pharisees-one of many Jewish sects in old days. What we mostly associate with Jews, Jewish mentality, customs and culture is connected with rabbinical Judaism, to the point that for many people Judaism=Rabbinical Judaism. This is not correct.
Rabbinical Judaism sect imposed it’s will to most Jews over the centuries, but it was not the only form of Judaism around. Lots of Jews in past belonged to KARAITE Judaism, while there are some who are still Karaites. Karaites were not so much in conflict with Gentiles, as Rabbinical Jews, since they have different laws then Rabbinical ones. They don’t accept Talmud, and recognize patrilineal descent, not matrilinear like Rabbinical ones do. They don’t recognize Rabbinical authorities. These two groups are far for being friendly. Not to mention non – Jewish Israelite groups like Samaritans. Most in-group cohesion of Jews that come from rabbinical tradition is based either on their faith, or from respect to tradition and laws based on that faith. This lead us to main critique of MacDonald…

What he offered as “salvation” of “Gentiles” is actually imitation of Jews and Judaic “tribalism”. In order to Gentiles (whatever that means) preserve their identity and group cohesion, they have to become spiritual Jews, or Judaics for that matter.
Mac Donald approach is basically based on same (secularized) protestant mentality that lead to Jewish spiritual dominion in America in first place. His thought is secular, materialist and mostly atheistic.

What MacDonald don’t realize is that this secularization, materialism and atheization lead to destruction of faith in western man, and de-sacralized him. Such spiritually crippled man is vulnerable and inferior to more self-confident religious-cultural communities, like Jews. Jewish cultural influence and moral domination in west is consequence of spiritual self-destruction of western man and sectarianism within Christianity (radical protestantism), and it’s not the cause of that. Just see example of pre WW2 Poland as illustration.

French revolution, dechristianization of France, murdering of priests, desacralizations of Churches, destruction of traditions were all done by gentiles. Jews at that time had almost zero influence on these events. Some Enlightenment thinkers had quite negative attitudes towards Jews.

And when we speak particular “interests” about Christainity, let’s not forget that word “Catholic”- Katolikos, means “universal”.

I also wish there were a more precise term for the group toward whom Jewish radicals direct their hostility.  “White gentiles” and “Christians” are, as Wrangel emphasizes, not identical categories, and neither is precisely what we mean to say.  This isn’t a critical problem for MacDonald’s book, which focuses on America in the first half of the 20th century, when “white gentile”, “white Christian”, and “majority culture” all meant pretty much the same thing.  Today, things are more complicated.  Secular Jews are part of the dominant white culture, but this dominant culture is definitely post-Christian, rather than Jewish.  In a global context, “gentile” is indeed too general a description.

MacDonald is an atheist and embraces an explicitly materialistic worldview in which everything reduces to competition for resources with the ultimate goal of reproductive success.  We certainly want to avoid thinking this way.  On the other hand, I don’t think that identifying the interests of the Christian community necessarily means embracing this sort of reductionism.  We have non-material interests, like fostering loyalty and love for the Church, that clash with what Jews percieve to be their interest in a demoralized Christianity.

Wrangel is right that there has been liberalism and anticlericalism without significant Jewish influence.  The Jews are a tool of liberalism, not vice versa.  On the other hand, wedge minorities have been a very important tool.

Wrangel points out that Jews have had an enormous influence on some cultures (America, Weimer Germany) but not on others (Poland).  This is a fascinating observation, and I would like to think about it more.  As he says, it suggests that it’s something in some host countries that makes the difference.

11 Responses

  1. “I also wish there were a more precise term for the group toward whom Jewish radicals direct their hostility.”

    Jewish radicals are no different from any other liberals and they direct their hostility against all traditional groups including Orthodox Jews. My father is a Jewish Liberal and he hates Orthodox Jews. This is typical of Jewish Liberals. So again, the real conflict is between liberals and traditional groups, with Judaism being irrelevant.

    By the way, Wrangel’s comments are excellent.

  2. fschmidt: “By the way, Wrangel’s comments are excellent.”

    They are superficial and a perfect example of Jewish dissimulation.

    I congratulate our host on asking the right questions though… insight enough to get the attention of the Sayanim.

    But your faith will be your shield: Above all, take the shield of faith, wherewith ye may quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. Eph 6:16

    Keep asking, you’ll get there.


  3. Excellent post, it’s typical of atheists, with their lack of belief in transcendental truth to have a hard time coming up with good solutions or even criticisms of liberalism. However I would like to object to the idea that the French Revolution was a purely gentile matter. The masons, architects of the revolution, were heavily inspired by talmudic judaism. This article is quite interesting. http://tinyurl.com/fr-revolution-jews

  4. Jews might have had little influence on Polish “culture” before WWII, but Polish culture has been almost entirely wiped out by modernism. Also, Jews had considerable influence with Polish elites even before WWII.

  5. I would like to thank very much to Bonald, for his special attention to my comment in previous topic.

    I have read lot’s of MacDonald works, and he is surely a very provocative thinker, with some great insights. However, he defined Gentile psyche and society as something contrary to Jewish one.
    He then ,basically, offered a paradoxical solution, that in order to survive Jewish domination, “gentiles” should stop being spiritual gentiles and basically became spiritual Jews.

    I agree with Bonald’s observations about my comments. It is interesting to see, that rise of non-Christian groups within Christianity to power, started with weakening of apostolic Christan culture and traditional society.

    I already mentioned that protestantism in it’s various manifestations had a lot to do with it. United States and it’s mentality are generally protestant in it’s core. De Maistre, for example, directly blame protestantism, not Jews, as main spiritual cause of French revolution and collapse of old order.

    Jews, as socio-cultural group simply use spiritual confusion and dissolution in the west for their own advantage and benefit in western society.

    As for the rest of comments…

    – I tend to disagree with fschmidt, on some issues of Jewish liberals vs traditionalists. Both Jewish liberals and traditionalists are hostile to Christian culture, although on different basis. On this issue both of them have “cognitive resonance”. Great number of Jewish atheists/secularists (with Karl Marx as strong exception) have/had quite respect towards Jewish rabbinical traditions(not with religion in particular), which we cannot say on gentile atheists, who share the same hostility and despise towards Christian civilization from which they came to be. This further boost sense of superiority and mission in both secular and traditional Jews towards Christians and traditional Christian culture in west. However, I don’t blame Jews for causing that situation, but internal historic development in Christendom.

    – I fully agree with Marin on first half of his comment, and partially on second half. Freemasonry had a great influence on French revolution, but Freemasonry was not a monolithic movement. In 18 century Freemasonry was split between pro-Enlightenment and mystical-spiritual branch. These two were in conflict. Freemasonry borrowed from various spiritual traditions it’s eclectic symbolism, which also include Jewish and biblical traditions.
    Mystical branch of Freemasonry was greatly opposed to revolution.
    Rosicrucians were opposed to both Enlightenment and French revolution. Prussian emperor Friedrich Wilhelm II was Rosicrucian and main opponent to revolution and Enlightenment.
    Joseph De Maistre was Freemason, reactionary, ultra-Catholic, monarchist and most vocal opponent of revolution.
    Louis-Phillipe of Orlean was cousin of French king, Freemason and great supporter of revolution and execution of his cousin, the King.
    Atheists cannot become members of Freemasonry.
    Lots of Enlightenment thinkers were Atheists.
    So things are not that simple.

  6. “Radical Protestantism” at fault? This is a Catholic bias showing through.

    Need I remind Wrangle about the widespread presence of anti-Jewish laws and customs in American WASP culture, up into the post-WW2 era?

    Jews drove their Civil Rights wedge deeply into America’s RACIAL divide. i.e. they piggybacked on the civil rights movement to destroy anti-Jewish laws. And let’s be honest, they led the civil rights movement. “Divide and conquer” is an apt phrase that comes to mind.

  7. “Today, things are more complicated.”


    Surely what Western reactionaries want is an old-fashioned Christian state. From that perspective, nationalism is a modern error. As King Frederick William II of Prussia wisely said when told he needed to prepare the nation for war with the First Republic, “Nation? That sounds Jacobin!”

    If my country’s godless white elites choose to stop breeding and import Christian Latinos and Africans to keep the population up, they accidentally do the Christian cause a service. If most white people reject Christ in favor of Stuff White People Like, the Christian immigrants are our proper allies and marriage pool.

  8. Let’s not pretend this action was spontaneous. Anti-Jewish laws and private customs took a significant blow because of the example of the Nazis.

    A major round of anti-discrimination laws passed in reaction to Nazism. (Perhaps comparable to the anti-Shariah push in the US, but with elite backing.) This flipped all the businesses, media and universities to anti-racist / anti-anti-Semite instead of pro- or merely non-.

    It was this legal environment that allowed upwardly mobile Jews and Catholics, as well as others, to beat on the establishment and transform it. For the most part it’s not a plot, it’s just a self-perpetuating and expanding movement / patronage machine / shakedown.

    If you could figure out a trad-friendly discrimination category and get a bunch of Ivy League law school kids to file suits about it, you could turn this country around pretty fast.

  9. “import Christian Latinos and Africans…..do the Christian cause a service….the christian immigrants are our proper allies and marriage pool.”

    If you are European, then your version of christianity justifies the genocide of your own European race by miscegenation. What a disgusting ideology. Haiti is christian also. Just move there Christian. Comments by Christians like this is the reason why I haven’t gone to church since I was 18 years old. Modern christianity is a genocide cult for Europeans.

  10. Kevin MacDonald is an advocate for the caucasian people of European descent everywhere they live throughout the world. His first concern, though, seems to be the Celtic and Germanic people.

  11. Godless secularism is the death cult. That is how abortion is justified. When fellow members of the same race will not reproduce themselves population replacement becomes somewhat inevitable.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: