Why Does Ricardo Duchesne Act Like He Can’t See the Jews?

suggestedlogoRev1

Via Mangan, Richardo Duchesne at Council of European Canadians asks, The Great Fear — Why do Whites Fear their own Ethnicity?

I encourage readers to watch “The Great Debate – Xenophobia: why do we fear others?” This debate, which took place at Arizona State University, March 31, 2012, was about the human instinct to form in-groups and out-groups particularly along ethnic lines. The members in this panel (primatologist Frans de Waal, economist Jeffrey Sachs, psychologist Steven Neuberg, neuroscientist Rebecca Saxe, and physicist and mathematician Freeman Dyson) all recognized in varying ways the powerful drive within all living beings, including bacteria, to organize themselves into in-groups and out-groups; and yet the tenor and objective of the conference, as evident from the title, was to view this as a problem that needs to be transcended.

Why a problem to be transcended? Because this evolutionary selected instinct is characterized by xenophobia, fear of those groups who are different, and preference for one’s ethnic group. But why is this a problem if it is a behavioral disposition selected by nature for its survival advantages? Because this is a panel of Western scientists committed to the idea that diversity is a strength and that Western societies must be open to mass immigration. Why? Because these scientists are members of a European-created culture that has come to believe that European ethnocentrism, and only this ethnocentrism, is harmful to humanity. Therefore, Europeans, and only Europeans, must work towards universal forms of community and human solidarity without outside-ness and without fear of the other.

Duchesne goes on to note that Sachs was “the most articulate in his explicit admission that we must follow the ideology of diversity regardless of what the scientific evidence says” and wonders, “How can a man of Sachs’s intellectual stature go for an argument that is devoid of merit?”

After searching in vain for some hint of jew-awareness, I left a comment. It seems to be stuck in moderation.

The answer is not complicated. It is not a mystery. The basic mechanics of group psychology are right there in Duchesne’s discussion. Yet he makes no mention of the jews or their anti-White animus. Instead he acts as if jews and Whites are inseparable partners in one big indistinguishable “us”.

In reality the jews are the archetypical Other. Deference to and worship of the Other is a jew-created culture. A plurality of the panel Duchesne discusses, including Sachs, are jews. Jews stereotypically psychopathologize Whites for not doing enough to “transcend” supposed problems like “xenophobia”. To put it in Duchesne’s own terms, this is a behavioral disposition which confers a survival advantage to jews at the expense of Whites.

Why do Whites, especially those who think deeply about group identity and psychology, fail to distinguish and acknowledge that jews see themselves as a group separate from Whites, and that jews as a group are in fact hostile and harmful to Whites? Why do Whites insist on pretending that jews are White and would rather think and say Whites are doing this to ourselves than note the clear differences between us and them? Why?

The word “self-delusion” came often to my mind as I heard these speakers. Self-delusion is defined as the act or state of deceiving or deluding oneself. A common example, the dictionary tell us, “is a person who believes himself to be much smarter than he actually is.” But these scientists are smart. Perhaps the definition by Voltaire would apply: “The human brain is a complex organ with the wonderful power of enabling man to find reasons for continuing to believe whatever it is that he wants to believe.” But the self-delusion here is even worse since these scientists have found reasons (based on their life-long research) not to believe whatever it is they want us to believe, but they still believe what they are ideologically expected to believe. And they are doing this openly in front of a large audience without anyone pondering over this self-imposed contradiction.

It only seems like a self-imposed contradiction when you don’t distinguish jews from Whites. The jews aren’t deluding themselves. As previously noted, jews behave as they do because they are hyper-conscious of their identity and interests, not because they are unconscious. They do what they think is good for jews, and a big part of that is guilt-tripping and scapegoating Whites. But rather than seeing jews being jews, Duchesne sees “liberals”. As I wrote in Liberalism as a Suicide Pact:

The litany of White sins – slavery, colonization, holocaust – is a jewish construct. It is jews driving the guilt-tripping that causes White guilt and negative associations with White group identity. “You aren’t liberal enough!” is the gist of it. Auster and Gottfried tack yet another item onto the list: “You’re so liberal you’re killing yourself!”

The idea that Whites are so stupid and crazy that we’re killing ourselves is just the most recent addition to the litany of White sins.

Duchesne is associated with The Occidental Observer, but his jew-blind defense of “Western civilization” smacks more of Lawrence Auster (or Takuan Seiyo, who comments on Duchesne’s article) than Kevin MacDonald.

Why does Duchesne blame Whites without mentioning the jews? Does he think it’s not important? Does he think everyone sees and understands the jews? Is he deluding himself? Why do intelligent Whites go for the arguments jews make? Because they refuse to recognize jews as the enemy. Which one is Duchesne?

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+

19 thoughts on “Why Does Ricardo Duchesne Act Like He Can’t See the Jews?”

  1. “primatologist Frans de Waal, economist Jeffrey Sachs, psychologist Steven Neuberg, neuroscientist Rebecca Saxe, and physicist and mathematician Freeman Dyson…”

    As well as the vile host Lawrence Krauss.

    Every accusation of White racism by Jews should be taken as an invitation and a moral permission given to White people to talk freely about the Jewish non-European identity, and about their racial animus against us.

  2. A Puerto-Rican and several Jews discussing why THEIR “white club” is under siege from multiculturalism, liberalism, self-loathing….

    moving right along.

  3. “Associated with the Occidental Observer…”
    They’ve reviewed his articles, but is he credited as a writer for them?

  4. Recently in The Occidental Quarterly: Special Sections on White Pathology | The Occidental Observer – it could very well be that KMac’s admiration and respect for Duchesne goes unrequited.

    I discussed my first impressions and reservations about Duchesne in November: “White Pathology” on Saturday Afternoon with Carolyn.

    Not to put too fine a point on it, but every so-called defender of “Western civilization” I’ve ever taken the time to examine has turned out to be someone who blames Whites while excusing (or ignoring) the jews. Collin Cleary’s gushing five-part review at Counter-Currents failed to convince me that Duchesne is any different in this respect.

    I’ve just started listening to Duchesne’s interview with Red Ice. Between the feedback from his mic, his Frito Bandito voice and the utter jew-blindness of his analysis I don’t know if I will bother finishing it.

  5. Maybe he is trying to be a kosher White civil rights activist a la Taylor or Francis, either due to philosemitism or not feeling secure about his career.

  6. It’s not clear he is a brother. At any rate, the question for such an academic is, does he have tenure?

    Duchesne isn’t some random professor of say, physics. He trained under George Rudé, one of the more prominent proponents of the current dominant anti-White/anti-Western jewish-marxist worldview in academia. The job, which he chose for himself, is as a critic of this narrative. Though it is a fundamentally jewish narrative, largely originated and driven by jews with the best interests of jews in mind, Duchesne avoids this unavoidable aspect and instead traces back through history to build a case that Whites created this narrative and this situation all by ourselves. Because Aryans.

    As I noted in the post, Duchesne looks at a panel full of jews in the right here and now doing what is best for jews (specifically by psychopathologizing the goyim and telling them how to think about “xenophobia”) and says that what he sees is Whites acting crazy. His explanation:

    Why? Because these scientists are members of a European-created culture that has come to believe that European ethnocentrism, and only this ethnocentrism, is harmful to humanity. Therefore, Europeans, and only Europeans, must work towards universal forms of community and human solidarity without outside-ness and without fear of the other.

    Duchesne misrepresents a gaggle of jews promoting a jew-created jew-serving culture as Whites promoting a White-created anti-White culture. He’s come up with a new and erudite-sounding critique of the orthodox view that turns out to be no real challenge to its bottom line. It’s all still Whitey’s fault.

    Even if Duchesne is a brother, with defenders like this, who needs attackers?

  7. Marcus
    1 July 2014 at 2:55 pm

    Maybe he is trying to be a kosher White civil rights activist a la Taylor or Francis, either due to philosemitism or not feeling secure about his career

    … or about his understanding of the issue/ability to speak to it. He doesn’t do the biology angle at all, IQs, EGI, HBD … he is a Humanities specialist after all.

    ***

    It’s interesting he hasn’t passed Tan’s comment but lets Whiskey post his usual post.

    ***

    In the Red Ice interview, isn’t he asked about the Jewish role in transforming social attitudes and doesn’t he say the best work on the subject is Eric Kaufmann’s? Quite a snub for KMac, I thought.

    ***

    Why do Whites Fear their [sic] own Ethnicity?

    We don’t. If it were up to us, none of the things Duchesne complains about would be happening.

  8. Excerpts from Exposing Faux Capitalism’s My summary of Dr. Ricardo Duchesne’s second hour on Red Ice Radio, April 18, 2014 (2nd hour is members-only):

    32m – Cultural Marxists looked for other allies

    34m – Frankfurt School
    35m – Much easier to control people with no tie to ancestors or the past
    - Convergence between leftist Cultural Marxists and right wing corporate neocons
    37m – Corporatists who think white nations are just marketplaces
    39m – Interesting convergence between Cultural Marxism and corporatism
    41m – Someone he talked with who said the Cultural Marxists are useful idiots w.r.t. corporate people, but he disagrees with that
    50m – There is a conspiratorial element to official multiculturalism

    51m – Duplicitous elites

    59m – When he searches for his name, the first thing that comes up is “racist”, but he’s never said anything remotely openly racist
    1h5m – Media pushing race mixing
    - Race has been excluded from the discussion, and it’s said to be a social construct
    1h9m – Said race has been excluded from the conversation, and it’s a war against the white race
    - Said if white people don’t develop a sense of dignity and pride, and stand up, they will be overwhelmed
    1h10m – United Nations definition of genocide
    - Said white people have to realize they have to pay the price of being called racist if they want to survive
    - Said he doesn’t care if he’s called a racist anymore, because he doesn’t accept their terms of their premises

    1h13m – Said, in his view, a society in which whites become a minority, it ceases to be a Western society, and becomes something else
    - Said if we want to preserve European Western civilization, we have to preserve Western ethnicity

    Duchesne seems well enough aware of the mechanics. Yet he excludes jews from the discussion, resorting instead to all the usual euphemisms to describe the symptoms of their poisonous, hostile influence. Is it because he’s afraid of being called “anti-semite”? At some point he’s going to have to pay that price if he wants to save the White race. Based on what I’ve heard and read of him so far, he’s just putting a new spin on the same old jew-exculpating story.

    Duchesne is more Gottfried than Auster. More academic, less polemic. He drives deeper and gets more specific than either of those jews ever have. But this makes his silence on the jews all the more troubling. I don’t see how pretending the jews don’t exist helps Whites. I’d like to hear him explain why he thinks it does.

  9. He goes further here:

    http://www.eurocanadian.ca/2014/06/the-straussian-assault-on-americas.html

    “Havers observes that Strauss was particularly worried about the inability of liberal regimes, as was the case with the Weimar republic, to face up to illiberal challenges. He wanted a liberal order that would ensure the survival of the Jews, and the best assurance for this was a liberal order that spoke in a neutral and purely philosophical idiom without giving any preference to any religious faith and any historical and ethnic ancestries. He wanted a liberalism that would work to undermine any ancestral or traditionally conservative norms that gave preference to a particular people in the heritage of America’s founding, and thereby may discriminate against Jews. Only in a strictly universal civilization would the Jews feel safe while retaining their identity.”

  10. [Strauss] wanted a liberal order that would ensure the survival of the Jews

    Karl Popper is another example of how jews want what’s good for the jews and judge everything else in those terms.

    In Yockey on Liberalism – Part 5 I referred to The Authoritarian Personality:

    Some observers have criticized what they saw as a strongly politicized agenda to The Authoritarian Personality. Social critic Christopher Lasch[26] argued that by equating mental health with left-wing politics and associating right-wing politics with an invented “authoritarian” pathology, the book’s goal was to eliminate antisemitism by “subjecting the American people to what amounted to collective psychotherapy—by treating them as inmates of an insane asylum.” Similarly, Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek wrote, “It is precisely the kind of group loyalty, respect for tradition, and consciousness of differences central to Jewish identity, however, that Horkheimer and Adorno described as mental illness in Gentiles. These writers adopted what eventually became a favorite Soviet tactic against dissidents: anyone whose political views differed from theirs was insane.

  11. Sailer is remembering the jews again. He dug up the original context for the Lasch/Zizek paragraph quoted above. Slavoj Žižek on Kevin MacDonald’s “Culture of Critique”. He introduces it like so:

    Žižek summarizes MacDonald’s controversial argument quite lucidly. In fact, the superstar professor achieves a higher degree of clarity while expounding MacDonald’s message than in any other passage I’ve read by Žižek

    Duchesne should read it. This portion in particular better answers the questions he’s asking:

    Although he came later, the “French-Jewish deconstructionist Jacques Derrida” followed the same tradition when he wrote: “The idea behind deconstruction is to deconstruct the workings of strong nation-states with powerful immigration policies, to deconstruct the rhetoric of nationalism, the politics of place, the metaphysics of native land and native tongue… The idea is to disarm the bombs… of identity that nation-states build to defend themselves against the stranger, against Jews and Arabs and immigrants…” As MacDonald puts it, “Viewed at its most abstract level, a fundamental agenda is thus to influence the European-derived peoples of the United States to view concern about their own demographic and cultural eclipse as irrational and as an indication of psychopathology.” This project has been successful: anyone opposed to the displacement of whites is routinely treated as a mentally unhinged “hate-monger,” and whenever whites defend their group interests they are described as psychologically inadequate – with, of course, the silent exception of the Jews themselves: “the ideology that ethnocentrism was a form of psychopathology was promulgated by a group that over its long history had arguably been the most ethnocentric group among all the cultures of the world.”

    Sailer concludes by catching a glimpse of himself in Zizek:

    I’m guessing that the last two sentences are Žižek’s denunciation of the preceding argument he quite ably recounted. But it’s striking how much more opaque Žižek’s prose suddenly becomes when he switches to elucidating what are, presumably, his own ideas, such as they are.

  12. ben tillman sums up KMac:

    Book 1 & Thesis 1: A Jewish group evolutionary strategy developed.

    Book 2 & Thesis 2: In some historical instances, Europeans developed group evolutionary strategies to compete with the Jewish group.

    Book 3 & Thesis 3: A number of Jewish intellectual movements of the 20th century were designed to prevent European-derived peoples from developing group strategies to compete with the Jewish group.

  13. I recently heard a interview with Ricardo on RedIce Creation. He said so many right things, yet never mentioned jews. I found that to be very odd. With he was talking and leaving jews out of the equation left me baffled as to why? He kept saying ‘cultural marxists” or “marxists” “left” ” liberalism” How and why would somebody do that? It has to be intentional. I also kept thinking I remember reading something on him not to long ago. Then I remembered yesterday, it was here. Thanks for this write up. Thanks

  14. Ricardo Duchesne knows what he’s doing. he won’t speak on anything before he has studied it fully. As of now, he has the entire country in an uproar, and the great thing is, he’s got a PC shield as he’s mixed race, albeit primarily European. The the major news papers covering his spat with Kerry Jang, the Chinese white guilt hustler and flooded with comments in favour of Duchesne, the Globe and Mail article has over one thousand.

    The government is spooked, they have cancelled the planned importation of 10000 Syrian refugees, it’s like a dam has burst. Duchesne knows the political climate here, things have to approached carefully and diplomatically, Canada is deep in the PC kool-aid.

    He has already accomplished something I never thought I would see here. And he’s a fighter, don’t worry about him, keep an eye on his work.

  15. Agreed, Iloonun.

    Plus, Canada’s draconian “hate” laws may be an impediment to Prof. Duchesne’s reluctance in the naming of perfidious jews. Unlike the United States, we don’t have the full protection of free speech in Canada. It was jewish influence that lobbied for these laws to be given power over what should be a sovereign citizen’s right to speak, write or transmit any information they wish. So, I believe he is treading softly in his intended direction without simultaneously waging war on too many fronts at one time.

    Also, before naming the “who” in this matter, unawakened Canadians require careful handling and must be spoon-fed with small doses of reality before the brainwashing affects of p.c. are over-ridden.

Comments are closed.