The first is historical. Only those who seek somehow to reduce human life to animal life don’t see the connection between the past and the future. History for them is just water under the bridge.

For those who care to know, it’s the story of who we are and what we can be. Nothing that affects us today — the banalities of our consumer-based existence or the prominence of Jewish influence — can be properly understood outside a historical framework; nothing that will ensure our destiny lies outside of its province. Hunter is to be congratulated for seeing the need for such a historical interpretation.

Once we start recruiting historians to our tendency, then I’ll know that we are going to win the cultural war — and the race war.

The second reason his two essays are significant is that he recognizes America’s “two souls.” From the very beginning of the “American project,” the country was divided against itself. One part being racial nationalist, the other liberal democratic. Those who have power over us today always resort to America’s liberal democratic soul. We can’t properly refute them without understanding how it relates to our racial national soul and to the notion that liberal democracy began as “a white thing.”

I’m hoping Hunter’s understanding will spread to “our” youth, I’ve given up on most of the so-called “adults.”

I don’t have the slightest problem discussing Jewish influence. In fact, I have an entire blog dedicated to the issue:

http://antisemitica.wordpress.com/

In the review above, I was discussing the White Republic in the Age of Jackson. Jews were nowhere near as influential back then as they later became in the Progressive era and beyond. I’m convinced that the demise of the White Republic in the Civil War was a self inflicted wound on American civilization.

“Without the Jews, America produced its own leftist radicals.”

With that statement, I had in mind Harriet Beecher Stowe, William Lloyd Garrison, Henry David Thoreau, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Thaddeus Stevens, Charles Sumner, the Grimké sisters, Frederick Douglass, and the most famous one of all, John Brown. The Radical Republicans of Reconstruction were White Gentiles. White Americans were perfectly capable of heaping up their own racial funeral pyre.

My concerns are objective — if you had said with “hardly any influence”, or “no explicit influences I could see” I would have had less of a problem with this. As stated as a totally dismissive sentence it seems political, misplaced even–because you are not doing an analysis of Jewish influences and are reviewing a book that does not even try to investigate them.

How do you know there were none? Isn’t it the pattern of Jews to keep a low profile until they get power — especially in a white republic full of white interests like the one you describe? Even today people are largely unaware of massive Jewish influences right in front of their faces — I know I used to be one of them!

In archaeology, we find artifacts in a location and surmise that certain peoples were there… can cultural movements and artifacts also be investigated in this mannner? A sort of psychological archaeology? In linguistics, languages are traced down the milennia in this manner to see where they originated.

I would like to pose this question to you based on knowledge that Jews were involved with subversive ideas and activities during the period of the French revolution… and are extremely adept at starting social movements. Even the Mormons who kept blacks out of the preisthood until the mid-1970′s eventually caved in under the massive movements here started and got rolling in earnest by Jews after the civil war — culminating in the marches of Martin Luther King Jr. and the civil rights movement. Activists from New York organized these marches. Jewish activists. Jews deny christ as the savior, yet here is a christian church with a basic belief that blacks should not be in the preisthood changing its views based on influences in culture (from many angles — not just the mentioned ones) to align with views from people who are not even christian.

Our people have a lot of compassion, openness, and tolerance for new ideas — we even thrive on them. We are easy targets for snake oil salesmen — until we gather enough information. One of the dynamics that amplifies the influence of even single man is that culture naturally takes things to extremes as people try to out-do each other on trajectories that are perceived as good or admirable. As communication and mass-media rose, so did the amplification and anonimity of influences… A double-edged sword. I do not think you can rule out Jewish influence with one sentence, and the history of jews is a history filled with gaining, peddling, and corrupting influences. We know they followed the troops with greed and influence in mind after battles destroyed white male power in many southern cities in the 1860′s — so much so that there was a famous directive passed by a famous general forbidding the Jewish carpet-baggers from following the troops it became such a problem…

Anyway, that is a discussion for another article, I just had a problem with that one statement because I don’t think it was fair. The review was well-written and excellent otherwise. I definitely want to read this book!