No, this is their equal:

Everything the jews touch turns to evil crud.

Can your fellow students see through this jew Lie? How about the White girls/women in your class -- they have the most difficulty seeing through the propagandasphere? How about the teacher -- is he a he or she, White or jew? What is his/her stance? Have you challenged him? The term is over now, is it not? Or is this summer term and just starting? If the latter, maybe you can keep us abreast of your jew-college-anthropological adventures.

Kevin MacDonald's Culture of Critique does an excellent job of explaining how this Boasian, equalitarian (i.e. Jewish) version of anthropology came to dominate American universities and choked off the Darwinistic strain of thinking that was leading to a genuine understanding of the races.

What passes for anthropology and even biology in today's universities takes an essentially "flat earth" stance towards race, although recent advances in the understanding of genetics, which has lead to the development of a handful of race-specific drugs, has forced the academic community to at least hint at the existence of meaningful racial differences (although open discussion of any implications these may have on intelligence have been deftly avoided).

An e-book of the MacDonald text is available for download here:

http://www.prometheism.net/articles.htm (C of C is #5 on the list of texts)

As others have stated, MacDonald is perhaps the strongest contemporary intellectual upon which we can call to support the sort of "truth" movement espoused here on VNN and elsewhere in the WN circuit. I suggest that as many of us as possible make an effort to read MacDonald’s work.

Kevin MacDonald's Culture of Critique does an excellent job of explaining how this Boasian, equalitarian (i.e. Jewish) version of anthropology came to dominate American universities and choked off the Darwinistic strain of thinking that was leading to a genuine understanding of the races.

What passes for anthropology and even biology in today's universities takes an essentially "flat earth" stance towards race, although recent advances in the understanding of genetics, which has lead to the development of a handful of race-specific drugs, has forced the academic community to at least hint at the existence of meaningful racial differences (although open discussion of any implications these may have on intelligence have been deftly avoided).

An e-book of the MacDonald text is available for download here:

http://www.prometheism.net/articles.htm (C of C is #5 on the list of texts)

As others have stated, MacDonald is perhaps the strongest contemporary intellectual upon which we can call to support the sort of "truth" movement espoused here on VNN and elsewhere in the WN circuit. I suggest that as many of us as possible make an effort to read MacDonald&#8217]Thanks for the reminder re MacDonald.

 

Everything the jews touch turns to evil crud.

Can your fellow students see through this jew Lie? How about the White girls/women in your class -- they have the most difficulty seeing through the propagandasphere? How about the teacher -- is he a he or she, White or jew? What is his/her stance? Have you challenged him? The term is over now, is it not? Or is this summer term and just starting? If the latter, maybe you can keep us abreast of your jew-college-anthropological adventures.

Hi Devere,

I know it sounds cliche', but the students really do parrot back what the teacher tells them. This goes for non-contraversial stuff, as well. Most of my classmates are women--lots of minorities. Linder uses the term "mediocrity" alot to explain things, and I would agree 120%. It's an enforced mediocrity and my fellow white males are frustrated with it as well, even though most of them are good little conservikwans.

The females tend to have a unique predilection to repeat back--most times using the same terms--as what the teacher has already given us verbally or in the reading. In my more serious politics classes, this is especially so. The fun part is that the profs are mostly white males, so they cannot help but understand the "language" of logical inquiry I use in my words and work. Indeed, I have found that it is so easy to excel in college specifically because it is so mediocre.

While I have of course never write the things there I would and do here, I have not seen as much supression of opinion at UCF as I have heard about in other places. Of course, you have to have 10x the footnotes to have a contrary opinion, but if you lay it out properly, they will give it to you. For instance, in my "Sustainability" class, I was allowed to question the premises set up by the left on the environment.

I dropped an online (get this) "Freedom and Justice" (whiteness studies) class because the Canadian negress "teacher" wouldn't accept questioning of the premise that there was such a thing as white privelidge, we were to analyze it, not question that it existed. I dropped the class, but stayed in as long as possible so I could access the msg board for the class and read the other "students'" "work." It was, as you would guess, hysterical and outrageous at the same time.

I actually get away with alot because I am a decent orator--tall, supposedly attractive, mellow-voiced, and coldly logical. I cannot tell you how flustered these lib-fems get once I lead them around to a self-contradiction just as I yank the noose. I kid you not, some lib-fems actually go as far as to say "I thought you were cool, I *LIKED* you before I knew your opinions about _____."

. . . as if I sought female approval from tramps who are about as 1/5th as hot and 1/10th as smart as my molecular-biologist wife. I've actually had women loose their temper and leave the room (to cry, preseumably) after I won a debate on whether there are intrinsic sex-roles.

Linder is right--they've gone so long without any sort of criticism that they've grown "tone-deaf" to cold reason. When someone does question their silliness using the socratic method, they have an absolute melt-down.

None of them know about jews, AFAIK, but the white males know something is definately wrong. At present, they express this through conservatism--which is a healthy sign, IMO. Perhaps I see it this way because this is how I awakened only last fall. One thing you *can* get away with now vs. a few years ago is that you can criticize the multi-cult.

Re: school terms

I am taking this summer, the first one in 3 years, off school (but not work!) to relax, surf, work on some music, and develop ideas for my dissertation. I'm also helping October Sun Films with research for the next project. For that, I was referencing some of my old text, and that was what reminded me of this passage from my anthro.

http://77.1911encyclopedia.org/N/NE/NEGRO.htm

NEGRO

NEGRO (from Lat. niger, black), in anthropology, the designation of the distinctly dark-skinned, as opposed to the fair, yellow, and brown variations of mankind. In its widest sense it embraces all the dark races, whose original home is the intertropical and sub-tropical regions of the eastern hemisphere, stretching roughly from Senegambia, West Africa, to the Fijian Islands in the Pacific, between the extreme parallels of the Philippines and Tasmania. It is most convenient, however, to refer to the dark-skinned inhabitants of this zone by the collective term of Negroids, and to reserve the word Negro for the tribes which are considered to exhibit in the highest degree the characteristics taken as typical of the variety. These tribes are found in Africa; their home, being south of the Sahara and north of a not very well-defined line running roughly from the Gulf of Biafra with a south-easterly trend across the equator to the mouth of the Tana. In this tract are found the true negroes; and their nearest relatives, the Bantu-negroids, are found to the south of the last-mentioned line. The relation of the yellowish-brown Bushman and Hottentot peoples of the southern extremity of Africa to the negro is uncertain; they possess certain negroid characters, the tightly curled hair, the broad nose, the tendency towards prognathism; but their color and a number of psychological and cultural differences would seem to show that the relation is not close. Between the two a certain affinity seems to exist, and the Hottentot is probably the product of an early intermixture of the first Hamito-Bantu immigrants with the Bushman aborigines (see AFRICA: Ethnology). The relation of the negroids of Africa to those of Asia (southern India and Malaysia) and Australasia cannot be discussed with profit owing to lack of evidence; still less the theories which have been put forward to account for the wide dispersal from what seems to be a single stock. It will be sufficient to say that the two groups have in common a number of well-defined characteristics of which the following are the chief: A dark skin, varying from dark brown, reddish-brown, or chocolate to nearly black; dark tightly curled hair, flat in transverse section,1 of the " woolly "

or the " frizzly " type; a greater or less tendency to prognathism; eyes dark brown with yellowish cornea; nose more or less broad and flat; and large teeth. Sharing these characteristics, but distinguished by short stature and brachycephaly, is a group to which the name Negrito (q.v.)

has been given; with this exception the tendency among the negroids appears to be towards tall stature and dolichoce-phaly in proportion as they approach the pure negro type. As the most typical representatives of the variety are found in Africa, the Asiatic and Australasian negroids may be dismissed with this introduction. The negro and negroid population of America, the descendants of the slaves imported from West Africa, and in a less degree, from the Mozambique coast, before the abolition of the. slave-trade, are treated separately below. In Africa three races have intermingled to a certain extent with the negro; the Libyans (Berbers: q.v.) in the Western Sudan-; and the Hamitic races (q.v.) and Arabs (q.v.) in the east. The identity of the people who have amalgamated with the negro to form the Bantu-speaking peoples in the southern portion of the continent is not certain, but as the latter appear to approach the Hamites in those characteristics in which they differ from the true negroes, it seems probable that they are infusec with a proportion of Hamitic blood. The true negroes show greal similarity of physical characteristics; besides those already mentioned they are distinguished by length of arm, especially of fore arm, length of leg, smallness of calf and projection of heel characteristics which frequently fail to appear to the same degree among the Bantu, who are also as a rule less tall, less prognathous, ess platyrrhine and less dark. A few tribes in the heart of the negro domain (the Welle district of Belgian Congo) show a endency to round head, shorter stature and fairer complexion; mt there seems reason to suppose that they have received an nfusion of Libyan (or less probably Hamitic) or Negrito blood. The color of the skin, which is also distinguished by a velvety .urface and a characteristic odour, is due not to the presence of any special pigment, but to the greater abundance of the color-ng matter in the Malpighian mucous membrane between the nner or true skin and the epidermis or scarf skin.2 This coloring matter is not distributed equally over the body, and does not reach its fullest development until some weeks after birth; so that new-born babies are a reddish chocolate or copper color. But exce'ss of pigmentation is not confined to the skin; spots of pigment are often found in some of the internal organs, such as the liver, spleen, &c. Other characteristics appear to be a liypertrophy of the organs of excretion, a more developed venous system, and a less voluminous brain, as compared with the white races. In certain of the characteristics mentioned above the negro would appear to stand on a lower evolutionary plane than the white man, and to be more closely related to the highest anthropoids. The characteristics are length of arm, prognathism, a heavy massive cranium with large zygomatic arches, flat nose depressed at base, &c. But in one important respect, the character of the hair, the white man stands in closer relation to the higher apes than does the Negro. Mentally the negro is inferior to the white. The remark* of F. Manetta, made after a long study of the negro in America, may be taken as generally true of the whole race: " the negro children were sharp, intelligent and full of vivacity, but on approaching the adult period a gradual change set in.

The intellect seemed to become clouded, animation giving place to a sort of lethargy, briskness yielding to indolence. We must necessarily suppose that the development of the negro and white proceeds on different lines. While with the latter the volume of the brain grows with the expansion of the brainpan, in the former the growth of the brain is on the contrary arrested by the premature closing of the cranial sutures and lateral pressure of the frontal bone.3 This explanation is reasonable and even probable as a contributing cause; but evidence is lacking on the subject and the arrest or even deterioration in mental development is no doubt very largely due to the fact that after puberty sexual matters take the first place in the negro's life and thoughts. At the same time his environment has not been su;h as would tend to produce in him the restless energy which h,as led to the progress of the white race; and the easy conditions of tropical life and the fertility of the soil have reduced the struggle for existence to a minimum. But though the mental inferiority of the negro to the white or yellow races is a fact, it has often been exaggerated; the negro is largely the creature of his environment.

NEGRO 345

and it is not fair to judge of his mental capacity by tests taken directly from the environment of the white man, as for instance tests in mental arithmetic; skill in reckoning is necessary to the white race, and it has cultivated this faculty; but it is not necessary to the negro. On the other hand negroes far surpass white men in acuteness of vision, hearing, sense of direction and topography. A native who has once visited a particular locality will rarely fail to recognize it again. For the rest, the mental constitution of the negro is very similar to that of a child, normally good-natured and cheerful, but subject to sudden fits of emotion and passion during which he is capable of performing acts of singular atrocity, impressionable, vain, but often exhibiting in the capacity of servant a dog-like fidelity which has stood the supreme test.

Hi Devere,

I know it sounds cliche', but the students really do parrot back what the teacher tells them. This goes for non-contraversial stuff, as well. Most of my classmates are women--lots of minorities. Linder uses the term "mediocrity" alot to explain things, and I would agree 120%. It's an enforced mediocrity and my fellow white males are frustrated with it as well, even though most of them are good little conservikwans.

The females tend to have a unique predilection to repeat back--most times using the same terms--as what the teacher has already given us verbally or in the reading. In my more serious politics classes, this is especially so. The fun part is that the profs are mostly white males, so they cannot help but understand the "language" of logical inquiry I use in my words and work. Indeed, I have found that it is so easy to excel in college specifically because it is so mediocre.

While I have of course never write the things there I would and do here, I have not seen as much supression of opinion at UCF as I have heard about in other places. Of course, you have to have 10x the footnotes to have a contrary opinion, but if you lay it out properly, they will give it to you. For instance, in my "Sustainability" class, I was allowed to question the premises set up by the left on the environment.

I dropped an online (get this) "Freedom and Justice" (whiteness studies) class because the Canadian negress "teacher" wouldn't accept questioning of the premise that there was such a thing as white privelidge, we were to analyze it, not question that it existed. I dropped the class, but stayed in as long as possible so I could access the msg board for the class and read the other "students'" "work." It was, as you would guess, hysterical and outrageous at the same time.

I actually get away with alot because I am a decent orator--tall, supposedly attractive, mellow-voiced, and coldly logical. I cannot tell you how flustered these lib-fems get once I lead them around to a self-contradiction just as I yank the noose. I kid you not, some lib-fems actually go as far as to say "I thought you were cool, I *LIKED* you before I knew your opinions about _____."

. . . as if I sought female approval from tramps who are about as 1/5th as hot and 1/10th as smart as my molecular-biologist wife. I've actually had women loose their temper and leave the room (to cry, preseumably) after I won a debate on whether there are intrinsic sex-roles.

Linder is right--they've gone so long without any sort of criticism that they've grown "tone-deaf" to cold reason. When someone does question their silliness using the socratic method, they have an absolute melt-down.

None of them know about jews, AFAIK, but the white males know something is definately wrong. At present, they express this through conservatism--which is a healthy sign, IMO. Perhaps I see it this way because this is how I awakened only last fall. One thing you *can* get away with now vs. a few years ago is that you can criticize the multi-cult.

Re: school terms

I am taking this summer, the first one in 3 years, off school (but not work!) to relax, surf, work on some music, and develop ideas for my dissertation. I'm also helping October Sun Films with research for the next project. For that, I was referencing some of my old text, and that was what reminded me of this passage from my anthro.

Thanks for this thorough fill-in on the current college scene, Theseus. It's been about fifteen years since I've attended college. Of course, I was a conservative somnambulist then, despite peridic bongs to the forehead by somehow noticed inexplicable realities. I live in a (White except for the college) college town -- and so can't help noticing the increasing percentage of ugly imbecilic pre-human niggers in and about the campus getting their pick of silly White girls these days. There never used to be rapes here. Now the rapes of silly White girls are becoming rather common, although you'd never know it by reading the local jew-rags. Important to keep it hush hush, you know -- or silly White girls might not want to come to act as bait for the desperately needed niggers. I've been thinking about taking some classes again, just to be a grain of sand in the slimy college oyster's shell and to watch. Might be fun -- and maybe I could even prompt a White pearl or two to form despite itself.

Have you awakened any of your classmates?

We knew more in honest pre-jew 1911 than in lying post-jew 2006:

Other characteristics appear to be a liypertrophy of the organs of excretion, a more developed venous system, and a less voluminous brain, as compared with the white races. In certain of the characteristics mentioned above the negro would appear to stand on a lower evolutionary plane than the white man, and to be more closely related to the highest anthropoids. The characteristics are length of arm, prognathism, a heavy massive cranium with large zygomatic arches, flat nose depressed at base, &c. But in one important respect, the character of the hair, the white man stands in closer relation to the higher apes than does the Negro. Mentally the negro is inferior to the white. The remark* of F. Manetta, made after a long study of the negro in America, may be taken as generally true of the whole race: " the negro children were sharp, intelligent and full of vivacity, but on approaching the adult period a gradual change set in.

The intellect seemed to become clouded, animation giving place to a sort of lethargy, briskness yielding to indolence. We must necessarily suppose that the development of the negro and white proceeds on different lines. While with the latter the volume of the brain grows with the expansion of the brainpan, in the former the growth of the brain is on the contrary arrested by the premature closing of the cranial sutures and lateral pressure of the frontal bone.3 This explanation is reasonable and even probable as a contributing cause; but evidence is lacking on the subject and the arrest or even deterioration in mental development is no doubt very largely due to the fact that after puberty sexual matters take the first place in the negro's life and thoughts. [color="Red"][A most interesting observation and worthy of scientific study. Don't expect it in our lifetime.] At the same time his environment has not been su;h as would tend to produce in him the restless energy which h,as led to the progress of the white race; and the easy conditions of tropical life and the fertility of the soil have reduced the struggle for existence to a minimum. [color="red"][This concept is just now getting reborn. The gd jews have put science on hold for 100 years.] But though the mental inferiority of the negro to the white or yellow races is a fact, it has often been exaggerated; the negro is largely the creature of his environment.

and it is not fair to judge of his mental capacity by tests taken directly from the environment of the white man, as for instance tests in mental arithmetic; skill in reckoning is necessary to the white race, and it has cultivated this faculty; but it is not necessary to the negro. [color="Red"] On the other hand negroes far surpass white men in acuteness of vision, hearing, sense of direction and topography. [color="red"][Again, this is just now being rediscovered.] A native who has once visited a particular locality will rarely fail to recognize it again. For the rest, the mental constitution of the negro is very similar to that of a child, normally good-natured and cheerful, but subject to sudden fits of emotion and passion during which he is capable of performing acts of singular atrocity, [color="red"][How true is this!] impressionable, vain, but often exhibiting in the capacity of servant a dog-like fidelity which has stood the supreme test.