View Single Post
Old 09-07-2017, 07:49 PM   #240
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pandæmonium
Posts: 25,965
Likes: 5,575 (3,762 Posts)

Originally Posted by markgobell View Post
Thomas Mair's alleged 3 esoteric, green hardbacks : Lord Levy : Prof Roger Pearson & Franz Boas : EU Referendum : David Cameron's "Bloomberg Speech"

Also posted here : Jo Cox thread :

Thomas Mair's alleged 3 esoteric, green hardbacks : Lord Levy : Prof Roger Pearson & Franz Boas : EU Referendum : David Cameron's "Bloomberg Speech"

See this post :

Thomas Mair's alleged 3 esoteric, green hardbacks : Another allegorical link discovered

• The Face of Africa, by Hans Jurgens, 1981

• Classical World: an Atlas of Mankind by R. Peterson 1985

• Modern Europe - author as yet unknown

All published under Prof Roger Pearson's, Institute for the Study of Man, Cliveden Imprint.

So who is Prof Roger Pearson ?

Wikipedia : Roger Pearson (anthropologist)

Roger Pearson (born 21 August 1927[1]) is a British anthropologist, soldier, businessman, eugenics advocate, political organiser for the extreme right, and publisher of political and academic journals. He has been on the faculty of the Queens College, Charlotte and University of Southern Mississippi, and Montana Tech, and is now retired. It has been noted that Pearson has been surprisingly successful in combining a career in academics with political activities on the far right.[2] He served in the British Army after World War II, and was a businessman in South Asia. In the late 1950s he founded the Northern League. In the 1960s he established himself in the United States for a while working together with Willis Carto publishing white supremacist and anti-Semitic literature.[3]

Pearson's anthropological work is based in an evolutionary and racialist approach, of the kind that was common in anthropology in the early 20th century, based on the idea that the progress of humankind depends on making sure that "favorable" genes are segregated out from amongst "unfavorable" "genetic formulae".[4] He has consistently advocated that the human species consists of biologically distinct races which he defines as "rival breeding populations",[4] some of which are intrinsically better fit than others, and which compete against each other in a struggle for survival, but which all too frequently intermingle to the detriment of the superior races.[5] He argues that the future of the human species depends on political and scientific steps to replace the "genetic formulae" and populations that he considers to be inferior with ones he considers to be superior, through "humane and benevolent eugenics policies".[6][7][8][9]

Pearson also published two popular textbooks in anthropology, but his anthropological views on the race question have been widely rejected as unsupported by contemporary anthropology. Consequently, Pearson faced difficulties in publishing his work. For this reason he founded several journals dedicated to publicizing research that was otherwise excluded from mainstream journals: Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies as well as Journal of Indo-European Studies, which would become the most influential journal of Indo-European linguistics. In 1978 he took over the editorship of the journal Mankind Quarterly founded by Robert Gayre and Henry Garrett, widely considered a right wing journal. Most of Pearson's publishing ventures have been managed through the Institute for the Study of Man, and the Pioneer Fund, with which Pearson is closely associated, having received $568,000 in the period from 1981-1991.[10][11][12]

Pearson's strict stance against racial and political egalitarianism also manifested in a consistent opposition to Marxism and socialism. In the 1980s he was a political organizer for the American far-right; he established the Council for American Affairs, was the American representative in the World Anti-Communist League. Pearson was World Chairman of the WACL, and in that capacity collaborated closely with the US government during the cold war, and he collaborated with international many anti-communist groups in the organisation, including followers of Reverend Moon and former German Nazis.[13][14] On his website Pearson rebuts some of the claims in the literature about him, rejecting specific accusations of race-hate, of anti-semitism, of arguing in favor of genocide, involuntary eugenics, forced repatriation of legal immigrants, subjugation or exploitation by one group of another, extreme or fascist politics including National Socialism or any totalitarian system, as well as denying accusations of impropriety.[15]

Early political engagement

In 1958 he founded the Northern League for North European Friendship, an organisation promoting Pan-Germanism, Anti-semitism and Neo-Nazi racial ideology.[18][19][20] The Northern League published the journals "The Northlander" and "Northern World" which described its purpose as "to make Whites aware of their forgotten racial heritage, and cut through the Judaic fog of lies about our origin and the accomplishments of our race and our Western culture."[21] In 1959 in the Northlander, Pearson described the aim of the organization as preventing the "annihilation of our kind" and to lead Nordics in Europe and the Americas in the "fight for survival against forces which would mongrelize our race and civilization"[22] He also wrote of the need for "a totalitarian state, with conscious purpose and central control . . . to embark upon a thorough-going policy of genetic change for its population. . . . [T]here is surely little doubt that it could soon outstrip rival nations."[23] Under the pen name Edward Langford,[1] Pearson also wrote a series on "Authors of Human Science" with portraits of prominent racialists such as Arthur de Gobineau, Houston Stewart Chamberlain,[24] Arthur Keith,[25] Madison Grant[26] and Lothrop Stoddard.[27]

Pearson also corresponded with American segregationist Earnest Sevier Cox, a dedicated member of the League, who had lobbied for a federal funding to "Repatriate" African-Americans to Africa since the 1920s. Pearson assured him that "I am entirely with you on your efforts to obtain Federal aid to American Negroes who wish to return to Africa."[23]

From the beginning the League was criticized because of its open emphasis on the dysgenic and fratricidal nature of intra-European warfare, and its tendency to attract prominent ex-Nazis such as scholar Hans F. K. Günther, who received awards under the National Socialist regime for his work on race, and Heinrich Himmler's former assistant Franz Altheim, both of whom were members of the league in its early years. Other members of the league were British Neo-Nazi Colin Jordan, and John Tyndall.[28] Pearson resigned from the League in 1961, after which it became more politically oriented.[18]

It was Cox who suggested to Pearson that they should hold a meeting at Detmold, West Germany, near what was then believed to be the site where the Germanic tribes defeated the Romans in the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest. The first meeting of the League was indeed held there in 1959, with Cox and Hans F. K. Günther as keynote speakers, although Günther's participation, him being a prominent former Nazi, had to be kept low profile.[23] The event was described by locals as "National Socialism revived".[29]

On his website, Pearson states that the Northern League never advocated National Socialism or political totalitarianism, and that membership was open to anyone who wished to receive the league's publications.[15]
Anthropological views

Pearson's anthropological views drew on the theories of British anthropologist Sir Arthur Keith, who had argued that human races were distinct evolutionary units destined to compete for resources. Pearson's early writings directly cited Keith as a major influence even while recognizing that "many will see [Keith’s observations] as a defence of Hitlerite philosophy."[30] Pearson summarizes Keith's racial and evolutionary philosophy in the following manner: "If a nation with a more advanced, more specialised, or in any way superior set of genes mingles with, instead of exterminating, an inferior tribe, then it commits racial suicide, and destroys the work of thousands of years of biological isolation and natural selection."[31]

In his work Pearson describes racial types as subspecies, which he defines as "a distinctive group of individuals which are on their way to becoming separate species, but which have not been isolated long enough, or had time to become sufficiently diversified to lose the power to inter-breed". He argues that mixing between subspecies is detrimental as one subspecies will always be better suited for life than the other, and will therefore tend to avoid miscegenation.[22][32][33][34][35]

In 1995 and 1996 Pearson published a trilogy of articles in Mankind Quarterly regarding the "Concept of heredity in Western thought", a defense of hereditarianism and an denouncement of the "onslaught of egalitarianism". Pearson here repeated his defense for the view of racial groups as subspecies and he repeated his dedication to eugenicist ideas, although with the caveat that negative eugenics ought to take place as a voluntary act of altruistic sacrifice for one's species.[36] The same views were repeated in the 1996 book "Heredity and Humanity: Race, Eugenics and Modern Science".[37]



Since the SPLC are involved in the Jo Cox fraud, especially with their freeze-dried-ready-to-serve alleged Thomas Mair National Alliance / Vanguard shipping receipts ...

Here is what the SPLC have to say about Roger Pearson :

SPLC : Roger Pearson

Roger Pearson is a retired British anthropologist and purveyor of extreme racist and anti-Semitic ideas. Over the course of his career, Pearson has been a fierce defender of “Aryan” racial superiority, and has maintained ties to numerous Nazi and neo-Nazi groups and individuals, promoting and publishing their theories in pseudo-academic journals like Mankind Quarterly, which Pearson has run since 1978.

About Roger Pearson

Pearson advocates for total racial isolation, arguing that the possibility of “interbreeding” between “higher” and “lower” races will result in the “devolution” of the more “highly evolved” race. He has also been, either directly or through his organizations, among the most significant recipients of grant money from the eugenicist Pioneer Fund, receiving regular support over several decades.

In His Own Words:

“If a nation with a more advanced, more specialized, or in any way superior set of genes mingles with, instead of exterminating, an inferior tribe, then it commits racial suicide, and destroys the work of thousands of years of biological isolation and natural selection.”

—“Sir Arthur Keith and Evolution,” Northern World, 1957

“A note from Germany reveals the appalling aftermath of World War II. During ten years of occupation 67,000 illegitimate children were left by the occupying forces, who were drawn from widely different parts of the world. As a matter of policy Negro troops were stationed in Germany by the American government, and Moorish troops by the French government. It is calculated that well over half these children were born of Negro soldiers alone. This note takes no account of the Russian zone of occupation, where the position is believed to be even worse.”

—“German Problem,” Northlander, 1958

“It would appear possible that Africa may be the ancestral home of the human species, who would have spread outwards from the African continent while still in the sub-human or ‘missing link’ stage of development. This theory of an African origin is interesting as the African Negro remains the most ape-like in appearance of all the existing races of man. This does not mean we are descended from Negroes any more than that we are descended from monkeys, but merely that we share common ancestors with both Negroes and monkeys, and have evolved further and lost the ape-like appearance of our original ancestors which, however, to a greater or lesser extent still characterizes Negroes and monkeys.”

—“Early Beginnings,” Eugenics and Race, 1966

“[Fear of the ‘yellow peril’] was based on evidence, already apparent but since then magnified many times, that while the white race was threatened by a decline in numbers and quality, the speed with which the population of Asia was increasing, and the attempts Asians were already making to migrate into North America, constituted a threat to the United States which then perceived itself as a white nation.”

—“The Concept of Heredity in the History of Western Culture, Part One,” Mankind Quarterly, 1995

“Race by any name is a biological reality that has acquired a wide range of cultural associations. What is more it is a biological reality that can be shown to have significant behavioral implications. Sub-Saharan African Negroes tend to have more dense bones and to develop more powerful muscles than Caucasoids or Mongoloids, and so have a natural advantage in boxing, others due to their height have an advantage in basketball. But mathematicians are more commonly found amongst Caucasoids or Mongoloids. Behavioral potential resides in the genes.”

—“The Debate on Race,” Mankind Quarterly, 2002


British-born anthropologist Roger Pearson is, in the words of historian and psychologist William Tucker, “perhaps the most important postwar exponent of the racial science that had characterized the Third Reich.” Through his own writings and the numerous journals he has founded, edited, or published, Pearson has spent decades promoting Nordic racial superiority and arguing for the need to maintain Aryan “purity.”

Pearson’s career as a publisher began with his establishment in 1956 of Northern World, a magazine dedicated to pan-Nordic solidarity and racial segregation. Northern World published, among others, the Nazi race theorist Hans F.K. Günther, who Pearson described as “one of the world’s greatest names in the field of raciology.” Günther, described by Nazi government officials as having “laid the groundwork for the struggle of our movement and for the legislation of the National Socialist Reich,” provided Pearson with a theoretical framework for understanding Nordic superiority, leading Pearson to emphasize not only the importance of racial purity and the supposed dangers of “mingling” with “lesser” races, but the necessity of “exterminating inferior tribe[s].”

This theoretical framework, derived from Günther, but also other prominent scientific racists like the anthropologist Arthur Eddington, relied on bizarre appropriations of evolutionary theory to provide “scientific” foundations for Nordic superiority. According to Pearson, Nordic Europeans stand “at the very peak of evolutionary progress — the highest form of life that Nature has ever produced.” In addition to promoting Aryan superiority, Pearson deployed pseudo-evolutionary arguments to warn of the dire threat posed by miscegenation. He claimed that “Nature” dictates that “those who are unfit can improve their prospects only by intermarriage with those who are fit. Those who are fit can suitably destroy their own prospects by marriage with those who are unfit.” To combat this prospect, society must “follow the dictates of the eugenicist.” Otherwise, the “people of the Western world … will have instead of healthy races that breed true, and produce generally healthy stock in their own likeness, only a confused mass of genetic qualities, good and bad all mingled together, producing repeated failures, no matter how far science may advance.”

In an effort to take a more activist approach to promoting the ideas he published in Northern World, Pearson founded the Northern League in 1958, a “Pan-Nordic cultural organization” dedicated to convincing Northern Europeans to recognize “their common problems and their common destiny,” and to come to “an appreciation… of the threat of biological extinction with which we [i.e. Nordics] are threatened.” Many Nazis and neo-Nazis quickly joined Pearson’s Northern League including, among others, Günther, Franz Altheim (a classicist and historian for Ahnenerbe, the Nazi archaeological institute founded by Heinrich Himmler), Colin Jordan (leader of the World Union of National Socialists and National Socialist Movement in the United Kingdom), and John Tyndall (deputy leader of the National Socialist Movement in the United Kingdom, leader of the British National Front, and founder of the British National Party).

The Northern League maintained its own newsletter, Northlander, which Pearson published alongside Northern World. Northlander focused primarily on the perceived problems of immigration and “mongrelization” in majority-white countries, support for the apartheid regime in South Africa, and the threat of Jewish influence on society. Pearson, writing both under his own name, various pseudonyms, and in unsigned editorials, railed against the court system which, he alleged, promoted the interests nonwhites over whites (a phenomenon Pearson described as “Jewisprudence”). He also published essays and letters from figures like Mississippi US Rep. Arthur Winstead, who provided Northlander with an open letter to President Dwight D. Eisenhower, accusing him of hypocrisy for espousing an interest in pure-bred dogs while “giv[ing] aid and comfort to those who would mongrelize the human race.”

Following the demise of Northern World, Pearson established a new journal, Western Destiny, with fellow white supremacist publisher Willis Carto in 1964-1965. Somewhat bizarrely, Pearson adopted the pseudonym “Edward Langford” for this project, the first of many pseudonyms he has used over the course of his career. Western Destiny heavily emphasized anti-Semitism, repeatedly praising South Africa and Rhodesia, which were ruled by a tiny minority of whites “enlightened and conscious of the truth about the Culture Distorter [i.e., Jews, in the terminology of neo-Nazi mystic Francis Parker Yockey], openly and proudly declaring that they stand for White Civilization.”

In 1966 and 1967, Pearson edited and published a new journal, the New Patriot, this time under the pseudonym of “Stephen Langton.” The New Patriot marked a turn towards a more academic portrayal of Pearson’s fringe racism and anti-Semitism, presenting itself as a scholarly magazine dedicated to “a responsible but penetrating enquiry into every aspect of the Jewish question.” Despite his pretensions to respectability, the New Patriot was a self-evidently racist outlet, publishing outlandish and outrageous claims, including that Jews had been the aggressors in 1930s Germany, demanding the “extermination or genocide of the German nation.” The magazine also decried the “be-Jewing of art” and the degeneration of music into “jungle-style dances” that were popular with “the Negro and the Jew” but to which “the European form is inherently unsuited.”

Pearson’s underlying ideology has not changed over the more than five decades he has been active. His strategy, however, has evolved. Where he once relied on incendiary rhetoric to rile up Nazi sympathizers and fascist activists, the changing political climate forced him to repackage his ideas in more neutral-sounding, jargon-laden language, hiding hardcore racism behind a façade of scholarly respectability. Having obtained a Ph.D. in anthropology from the University of London in 1969, Pearson was hired at the University of Southern Mississippi, first as an assistant professor in 1967, then in 1971 as a full professor and chair of the department of anthropology and sociology. As chair of the department, Pearson presided over its absorption of the philosophy and comparative religion departments, and immediately proceeded to eliminate every non-tenured faculty member he could. To replace these experienced and credentialed professors, Pearson hired political allies like Donald Swan, a convicted felon and neo-Nazi who never completed his doctorate, and Robert Kuttner, a biologist with no anthropological training, but a string of publications in Pearson’s Northern World and Western Destiny. Prior to his position at the University of Southern Mississippi (USM), Kuttner had worked for a few weeks under Stanford physicist and prominent eugenicist William Shockley, who recommended Kuttner for the job, attesting that he was “adequately prepared to teach anthropology.” Claude Fike, the dean of arts and sciences at USM and himself a vocal proponent of racial segregation, said of Pearson that he had “used his post as an academic façade to bring in equal-minded fanatics.”

Although he continues to present himself to this day as an anthropologist, Pearson’s academic career was remarkably short-lived. After three years at USM, he moved to the Montana College of Mineral Science and Technology, which he resigned from the following year to found the Institute for the Study of Man, an organization dedicated to studying “the origins and nature of man in order that contemporary Western society and its pressing problems might be more closely perceived.” This institute was funded with grants from the Pioneer Fund, the largest and last source of funding for research into and promotion of eugenics and “race science.”

In 1978, Pearson took over editorship of the pseudo-academic journal Mankind Quarterly. Mankind Quarterly purports to be merely a “quarterly journal of anthropology in the broadest sense of ‘the science of man’,” but is in fact a vehicle for scientific racism. In a book intended for like-minded audiences, Richard Lynn, a frequent contributor and the head of the Ulster Institute for Social Research which now publishes it, described Mankind Quarterly as being established for the purpose of “presenting the hereditarian [i.e., biological determinist] case on race differences and related issues.”

The same year that Pearson acquired Mankind Quarterly, he made one last effort to promote an openly neo-Nazi agenda. Pearson worked to secure leadership positions in more mainstream conservative and right-wing organizations, including the Heritage Foundation, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, and the American Security Council. His presidency of one of these organizations, the far-right Council on American Affairs, automatically made him the chairman of the 1978 conference of the World Anti-Communist League (WACL). The Washington Post covered the conference, and revealed that Pearson had used it as a vehicle to promote a much more extreme ideology than its conservative members were willing to accept.

The WACL conference under Pearson was, according to Post journalist Paul Valentine, an effort to marshal the “forces of authoritarianism, neo-fascism, racial hierarchy, and anti-Semitism.” Openly fascist European groups like Italy’s Movimento Sociale Italiano-Destra Nazionale were formally admitted under the innocuous-sounding “MSI.” A Mexican delegation circulated material deriding a recent NBC television show on the Holocaust as a “gigantic campaign of Jewish propaganda to conceal their objectives of world domination.” French, Australian, South African, and American white supremacists and nationalists were invited and attended in significant numbers. Pearson’s own assistant during the conference was Earl Thomas, a former storm trooper in the American Nazi Party, and when forced to expel two men distributing anti-Semitic literature from the National States Rights Party, he was quoted as telling them, “Not that I’m not sympathetic with what you’re doing … but don’t embarrass me and cut my throat.” He then asked them to give his regards to the secretary of the party.

The Washington Post article caused something of a furor, costing Pearson his position as chairman of the WACL, as well as his removal from the editorial board of the Heritage Foundation and a request from the White House to stop using comments from Ronald Reagan praising Pearson in his self-promotion. In the aftermath of the debacle, Pearson abandoned his efforts to promote naked racism and redoubled his work to transform his Nazi-derived racial ideology into something respectably scholarly. Towards that end, Pearson has attempted to rehabilitate his image by rewriting the history of eugenics and scientific racism. His 1991 book, Race, Intelligence and Bias in Academe, set out to rescue the reputations of notorious academic racists, including, among others, Arthur Jensen, William Shockley, and J. Philippe Rushton, from a growing public awareness of the ideology lurking behind their work. According to Pearson, these figures were all victims of an international Marxist conspiracy made up of student activists, the media, “neo-Lysenkoist” biologists, and historians. Pearson also maintains a personal website flatly denying the most damning facts about his life and career, despite the existence of ample documentation.


Note : William Shockley the co-inventor of the transistor, also popped up in the Pavlo Laphsyn "terrorism narrative" back in 2010.

See also : Roger Pearson's website :

My earlier use above of the phrase, "Biological Anthropology" was incorrect.

Roger Pearson's anthropology is generally referred to now as, racial or scientific anthropology.

In contrast to "Boasian Anthropology" as espoused by Franz Boas :

Wikipedia : Boasian anthropology

Boasian anthropology was a school within American anthropology founded by Franz Boas in the late 19th century. It was based on the four-field model of anthropology uniting the fields of cultural anthropology, linguistic anthropology, physical anthropology, and archeology under the umbrella of anthropology. It was based on an understanding of human cultures as malleable and perpetuated through social learning, and understood behavioral differences between peoples as largely separate from and unaffected by innate predispositions stemming from human biology - in this way it rejected the view that cultural differences were essentially biologically based. It also rejected ideas of cultural evolution which ranked societies and cultures according to their degree of "evolution", assuming a single evolutionary path along which cultures can be ranked hierarchically, rather Boas considered societies varying complexities to be the outcome of particular historical processes and circumstances - a perspective described as Historical particularism.

Another important aspect of Boasian anthropology was its perspective of cultural relativism which assumes that a culture can only be understood by first understanding its own standards and values, rather than assuming that the values and standards of the anthropologist's society, can be used to judge other cultures. In this way Boasian anthropologists did not assume as a given that non-Western societies are necessarily inferior to Western ones, but rather attempt to understand them on their own terms. From this approach also stemmed an investment in understanding and protecting cultural minorities, and in critiquing and relativizing American and Western society through contrasting its values and norms with those of other societies. Boasian anthropology in this way tended to consider political activism, through scientific education about society, a significant part of the scientific project.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

The program of research and public education activities pursued by Boas, his former students, and their associates—eventually including most of the field of anthropology as practiced in the United States—encompassed a number of discrete areas of inquiry and activity. These include many anthropological specializations and neighboring inter-disciplines, such as those known today as museum anthropology, folkloristics, linguistic anthropology, Native American studies, and ethnohistory.[7][8][9][10][11][12]



So who is Franz Boas / Boaz ?

Wikipedia : Franz Boas

Franz Uri Boas (/?fr??nz ?bo?.æz/; German: [?bo?as]; July 9, 1858 – December 21, 1942)[2] was a German-American[3] anthropologist and a pioneer of modern anthropology who has been called the "Father of American Anthropology".[4][5] His work is associated with the movement of anthropological historicism.[6]

Studying in Germany, Boas was awarded a doctorate in 1881 in physics while also studying geography. He then participated in a geographical expedition to northern Canada where he became fascinated with the culture and language of the Baffin Island Inuit. He went on to do field work with the indigenous cultures and languages of the Pacific Northwest. In 1887 he emigrated to the United States where he first worked as a museum curator at the Smithsonian, and in 1899 became professor of anthropology at Columbia University where he remained for the rest of his career. Through his students, many of whom went on to found anthropology departments and research programmes inspired by their mentor, Boas profoundly influenced the development of American anthropology. Among his most significant students were Manuel Gamio, A. L. Kroeber, Ruth Benedict, Edward Sapir, Margaret Mead, Melville Herskovits, and Zora Neale Hurston.[7]

Boas was one of the most prominent opponents of the then popular ideologies of scientific racism, the idea that race is a biological concept and that human behavior is best understood through the typology of biological characteristics.[8] In a series of groundbreaking studies of skeletal anatomy he showed that cranial shape and size was highly malleable depending on environmental factors such as health and nutrition, in contrast to the claims by racial anthropologists of the day that held head shape to be a stable racial trait. Boas also worked to demonstrate that differences in human behavior are not primarily determined by innate biological dispositions, but are largely the result of cultural differences acquired through social learning. In this way, Boas introduced culture as the primary concept for describing differences in behavior between human groups, and as the central analytical concept of anthropology.[7]

Among Boas's main contributions to anthropological thought was his rejection of the then popular evolutionary approaches to the study of culture, which saw all societies progressing through a set of hierarchic technological and cultural stages, with Western European culture at the summit. Boas argued that culture developed historically through the interactions of groups of people and the diffusion of ideas, and that consequently there was no process towards continuously "higher" cultural forms. This insight led Boas to reject the "stage"-based organization of ethnological museums, instead preferring to order items on display based on the affinity and proximity of the cultural groups in question.

Boas also introduced the ideology of cultural relativism which holds that cultures cannot be objectively ranked as higher or lower, or better or more correct, but that all humans see the world through the lens of their own culture, and judge it according to their own culturally acquired norms. For Boas the object of anthropology was to understand the way in which culture conditioned people to understand and interact with the world in different ways, and to do this it was necessary to gain an understanding of the language and cultural practices of the people studied. By uniting the disciplines of archaeology, the study of material culture and his

tory, and physical anthropology, the study of variation in human anatomy, with ethnology, the study of cultural variation of customs, and descriptive linguistics, the study of unwritten indigenous languages, Boas created the four field subdivision of anthropology which became prominent in American anthropology in the 20th century.[7]



Kevin MacDonald, owner of the website which also featured in the alleged "Thomas Mair library googlings" narrative ...

included an analysis of the conflict between "scientific vs Boasian" anthropology in Chapter Two of his book, The Culture of Critique

The Boasian School of Anthropology and the Decline of Darwinism in the Social Sciences

Several writers have commented on the “radical changes” that occurred in the goals and methods of the social sciences consequent to the entry of Jews to these fields (Liebman 1973, 213; see also Degler 1991; Hollinger 1996; Horowitz 1993, 75; Rothman & Lichter 1982). Degler (1991, 188ff) notes that the shift away from Darwinism as the fundamental paradigm of the social sciences resulted from an ideological shift rather than from the emergence of any new empirical data. He also notes that Jewish intellectuals have been instrumental in the decline of Darwinism and other biological perspectives in American social science since the 1930s (p. 200). The opposition of Jewish intellectuals to Darwinism has long been noticed (Lenz 1931, 674; see also comments of John Maynard Smith in Lewin [1992, 43]).1

In sociology, the advent of Jewish intellectuals in the pre–World War II period resulted in “a level of politicization unknown to sociology’s founding fathers. It is not only that the names of Marx, Weber, and Durkheim replaced those of Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer, but also that the sense of America as a consensual experience gave way to a sense of America as a series of conflicting definitions” (Horowitz 1993, 75). In the post–World War II period, sociology “became populated by Jews to such a degree that jokes abounded: one did not need the synagogue, the minyan [i.e., the minimum number of Jews required for a communal religious service] was to be found in sociology departments; or, one did not need a sociology of Jewish life, since the two had become synonymous” (Horowitz 1993, 77). Indeed, the ethnic conflict within American sociology parallels to a remarkable degree the ethnic conflict in American anthropology that is a theme of this chapter. Here the conflict was played out between leftist Jewish social scientists and an old-line, empirically oriented Protestant establishment that was eventually eclipsed:

This chapter will emphasize the ethnopolitical agenda of Franz Boas, ...


Yet another "thought leader" from Columbia University, one of the main seats of academia where Theodor Adorno's "Frankfurt School" became ensconced, courtesy of the AJC - the American Jewish Committee.

Many of these ended up in the CIAs MKULTRA program.

Also, speaking of "Cultural Marxism" and Karl Marx and MKULTRA, look no further than this if you want to know the real purpose behind all of those MKULTRA sub-projects :

See DIF post : MKULTRA : Karl Marx

See also : : Manufacturing the Deadhead: A Product of Social Engineering… by Joe Atwill and Jan Irvin

So, in addition to the kabbalistic reasons summarised above in the quoted earlier post, perhaps we should now also include Franz Boas thus :

David Cameron's EU Referendum "Bloomberg Speech" on 23 January 2013

Independent : The speech that was the start of the end of David Cameron

Mr Cameron gave the all-clear for the referendum back in January 2013. Here's why

Oliver Wright, Charlie Cooper

24 June 2016


And so, in January 2013, in what is known as the Bloomberg speech, Mr Cameron made his fateful pledge of an in/out referendum if the Conservatives won the 2015 election.


Here is Cameron's speech in full from the website :

EU speech at Bloomberg

Prime Minister David Cameron discussed the future of the European Union at Bloomberg.

Published: 23 January 2013

Delivered on: 23 January 2013


Quite why our "Jo Cox / Thomas Mair narrative" myth-makers chose not to include one of Franz Boas' books in the above alleged photograph of "Mair's specially selected books", is a mystery ...

They are clearly not so shy when they chose to include allegories based on other books and videos ...

Perhaps the underpinning kabbalism linking the death of Boas to one of the real reasons why the Jo Cox event occurred, the UK's EU Referendum, would have been a little too obvious ...


Are you able to work out connection between Jo Cox and Brexit too?

I think you'll find connection there.

By the way, I am still waiting for your reply which you have linked above.

It's between Justin Beiever and that German guy.

Just a reminder.

Last edited by elshaper; 09-07-2017 at 07:50 PM.
elshaper is offline   Reply With Quote