H/T Rod Dreher
Over at Slate, Alan Levinovitz sounds like a cartoon character from the pages of Der Stürmer:
“In a somber speech to its board of trustees delivered on Feb. 21, Stanford University’s ex-provost John Etchemendy warned that intolerance is the greatest threat facing American universities today. Adding his voice to a growing bipartisan chorus, Etchemendy argued that liberal academics too often assume their opponents are evil or stupid, turning institutions of higher education into unproductive echo chambers instead of arenas for open debate. “Intellectual monocultures … have taken over certain disciplines,” he observed grimly. “The university is not a megaphone to amplify this or that political view, and when it does it violates a core mission.” …
Intolerant is an effective slur, but critics who deploy it fail to recognize that intolerance is often desirable. Something did go wrong at Middlebury, but it certainly wasn’t due to students’ intolerance. …
Accepting that intolerance is a force for good can be difficult. This is especially true for liberals, who now find themselves the target of a slur they were instrumental in weaponizing. …
White supremacists, creationists, and vaccine skeptics refer to their exclusion from higher education and mainstream media as a form of intolerance. And they’re right—academic institutions are intolerant of their views. Yet we can all agree that Stanford needn’t change its hiring practices. Those who strive to stamp out these dangerous views are intolerant, but justly so. …
Progress today depends, as it always has, on the refusal to tolerate falsehood and immorality. In certain circumstances proper intolerance will demand reasoned discourse; in others it will demand shouting and breaking the law. We may disagree about how to fight for what’s right, but that disagreement should come in the context of recognizing our proud participation in a long, necessary history of virtuous intolerance. Only then can we hope to defend truth unfettered by hypocrisy and self-contradiction.”
We’re willing to say all the things Rod Dreher is unwilling to say. I don’t care about the taboo on “anti-Semitism.” I’m willing to say that Alan Levinovitz is exactly the type of Jew that Kevin MacDonald was talking about in his book The Culture of Critique.
It’s simply true that every major culture producing institution in the United States – academia, the news and entertainment media, the judiciary – is under the sway of networks of Jewish activists who push certain narratives while repressing other ideas on the basis of ethnic self interest. Jews are massively overrepresented in these institutions and the effect of their presence is to refract our culture through a Jewish prism and distort it in ways the White majority finds undesirable.
Levinovitz goes on to say in another article that anti-Semites are basically correct:
“I won’t quit because my colleagues and I are part of a sacred order, bound to seek out and profess truth, no matter how complicated or unappealing that truth might be. …
Maybe you just don’t care. Having watched the presidential debates, I think it’s safe to say that proper argumentation isn’t the highest value for you and your colleagues. In fact, humanities professors like me work against many of your core values. Explaining the origin and persistence of creationist pseudoscience? Religion and philosophy. Shutting down racists and sexists who explain discrimination with “natural differences”? Anthropology and history. We can’t take all the credit, of course, but the fact that the arc of history seems to bend toward justice is due, at least in part, to the efforts of humanities scholars. …”
I will give Alan Levinovitz some credit for his testimony.
He’s making it easier for Daily Stormer to point out that Jews really are working against our core values. There really are these networks of Jewish zealots like Levinovitz in our universities who believe in “virtuous intolerance” and who are collectively poisoning our Christian culture.
Just as Europeans have a flaw that allows them to be subverted by Jews, so too do they have flaws that allows them to collapse in on themselves time and time again. That would be hubris. They go out of their way initially to pretend like they don’t exist and that they’re just some innocent minority and as time moves forward so too does their power and influence. Once dominating the host society, like clockwork, they begin to unravel relishing in the distaste the host society has for them proclaiming everything was true from the start.
The failure for Jews to self-reflect is what leads to pogroms time and time again. It’s the circle of life in a way if you think about it until one side eventually goes all the way. You could make the case that this was the time in which they decided to go all the way breaking from tradition to actively destroy our civilization globally. The question is when things reverse, do we be so kind or do we return the favor likewise? For realsies this time.
Net time you hear an MSM boot-licker kvetching about press freedom, point to this article and tell them that they deserve exactly as much freedom as they would give to us.
“Alan Levinovitz is an assistant professor at James Madison University and the author of The Gluten Lie: And Other Myths About What You Eat. His next book is about the dangers of nostalgia.”
Lol. Yes having a romantic connection to your history is ‘Dangerous’. He should just work for the killjoys at SNOPES.
Let me pre guess his thesis: Nostalgia is dangerous because it allows us to romanticize, and long for the past. This clouds the fact that the past was pure oppression and exclusion of minorities. White nostalgia is just pining after a past White male hegemony that never really existed, but is dangerous in the fantasy that it did. Close enough.
Simply substitute “orthodoxy” and “heresy” into the Levinovitz statement as appopriate and you have a perfect recapitulation of the medieval university defending its religion.
Another good article.
Jews need to be purged from Academe and the Professions like they were Once Upon a Time.
It starts with personal, individual “boycotting”. Know who you’re giving your money to, and be selective.
The first step in the boycotting is for one to stop watching all new Hollywood movies and TV shows (Mel Gibson films are an exception).
Jewish power does absolutely need to be broken, but Jews should been seen as a subversive group of whites rather than as ethnic enemies. There are a few Jews on our side like Paul Gottfried, and ultimately in an altright society Jews should be given the choice of either joining the larger community of white nationalities and ceasing subversion or going to Israel.
Nope. Spencer had it right. Jews can go be Jews in Israel. No Jews in America or Europe. Jews aren’t White and are not of the European race.
Jews need to be purged from our solar system. They can find another one