3 ms·
> As for E. Michael Jones, he didn't start going into his theory of the Jews until after he wrote his other work. Yeah, and I'm more than a little creeped-out
by logjam 15y ago
> As for E. Michael Jones, he didn't start going into his theory of the Jews until after he wrote his other work.
Yeah, and I'm more than a little creeped-out calling anything this guy produces a "theory" or even "work".
Since you keep bringing up this guy's theories as such a transformative event for you and all, just for edification, here's what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about his "theory of the Jews":
"The magazine's cover stories over the last year or so are instructive: "Judaizing: Then and Now," "John Huss and the Jews," "The Converso Problem: Then and Now," "The Judaism of Hitler," "Shylock Comes to Notre Dame" and so on. Jones runs through all the usual anti-Semitic canards -- the ideas that "Jewish media elites" run the country, that Jews are "major players" in pornography, and that Jews are behind Masonry and the French Revolution -- but that's only the start. He also accuses Jews of poisoning society with thinkers such as Karl Marx (a devotee of Satan, says Jones) and Sigmund Freud (who set off an epidemic of sexual sin, he says). And he describes the World War II Nazi genocide of the Jews as "a reaction to Jewish Messianism (in the form of Bolshevism)." Last April, in an article raging about a new president of Notre Dame University, Jones charged that anyone who went to a mainstream university would emerge "with a Jewish world view … and maybe a Jewish spouse." Jones, who has written nine books and hundreds of articles, regularly cites extremist sources, especially the American Free Press run by veteran anti-Semite Willis Carto. He also has taken up race, most obviously in his "Rooted Culture" conferences that include a trip to Germany. The 2005 trip theme would be familiar to any neo-Nazi -- "the continuing deracination in Germany." Jones has one other line of business that would be familiar to the racist right: the "neo-ethnic songs" he sells as part of a bid to create what he calls a true "Volk" music."
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2006/winter/the-dirty-dozen?page=0,2 http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/br...
Sounds to me like his "theory of the Jews" stupidity didn't exactly evolve too far from his "theory of the blacks", eh?
> Diversity + Proximity = War
And now...let's see here now...such an elegant little equation for Hacker News here and all...concise...and war...sounds harsh...so, according to the 2000 census, the following U.S. cities were more diverse than Detroit: Long Beach, Oakland, Los Angeles, New York, Houston, Sacramento, San Jose, Chicago, Dallas, Anaheim, Newark, San Francisco, Miami, Riverside, San Diego, Fort Worth, Boston, Honolulu, Santa Ana, Milwaukee, Denver, Austin, Tampa, Philadelphia, San Antonio, Albuquerque, Tucson, Corpus Christi, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Cleveland, Buffalo, Arlington, Norfolk, Charlotte, Washington, Minneapolis, Kansas City, St. Paul, Omaha.
So they should all be war zones - that's what your equation tells us, eh? Yugoslavia. Bosnia. Ethnic cleansing in all those cities much more diverse than Detroit. Isn't that the phrase in the title of E. Michael Jones little racist book you keep leaving off for some reason: "The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal as Ethnic Cleansing"?
Horseshit.
- winestock 15y agoAs I wrote in the previous post, Jones wrote that book before he started writing about Jews. Since you refuse to draw the implied inference, then I will do it for you: I disagree with E. Michael Jones about the Jews; I think that E. Michael Jones is wrong about the Jews. Think before you post. If I agreed with Jones about the Jews, then why would I bother pointing out what time he wrote which opinion? Since that's settled (I hope), you should try to refute the claims of Jones with which I agree rather than those with which I disagree. But you don't even try. You go for point & sputter. Why don't you pull a Godwin while you're at it? Furthermore, the fact that I agree with some of a persons opinions does not imply agreement with all of that persons opinions. Pick any of your heroes; almost certainly they will hold at least one opinion which you find repellant. I won't hold that against you. One would think that that would go without saying around here. More the fool I. As for Diversity + Proximity = War, that is rough description. In order for different groups to be in conflict with each other, they must be within striking distance of each other. Take a closer look at those supposed counter-examples which you site. In Los Angeles and other cities of southern California, Hispanics have been in conflict with Blacks for a while. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/homicidereport/2007/03/marchers_protes.html http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/homicidereport/2007/03/march... New York City has had friction between not only races, but ethnic groups for a long time. Have you heard of the movie Gangs of New York? It was based on a non-fiction book written in 1928. I'll keep this post as short as I can and invite you to fire up your favorite search engine and enter "racial tension X" without quotes, substituting one of the cities in your list for X. It does not make for pleasant reading.