Comments on: A Conservative Journey Through Literary America — Part 1: Introduction

By: The Quantum Conservative » Blog Archive » News Round Up 05/27/09

The Quantum Conservative » Blog Archive » News Round Up 05/27/09 — Wed, 27 May 2009 20:53:41 +0000

[...] Conservative Journey Through Western Literature Pt. One, Two, Three, and Four, by Matt [...]

By: Kagi

Kagi — Mon, 25 May 2009 05:00:49 +0000

Pound? On the left? What?

By: Robert E. Graves

Robert E. Graves — Sun, 24 May 2009 19:06:57 +0000

I brought Marx up in the context of the leftist roots of Jews. You agree with me that it was no coincidence that because he was a Jew, it is a mere coincidence that so many other jews over generations promoted his thinking?

Or you are changing the subject?

By: riz

riz — Sat, 23 May 2009 15:35:24 +0000

I agree with you on all counts here…conservatives must become a formidable presence at colleges and in pop culture, but after you write your conservative literature, to use your example, how do you get the teacher to assign it as reading material…that becomes the real challenge…writing's easy…

By: AlistZ

AlistZ — Tue, 19 May 2009 23:31:53 +0000

You're the one that brought up Marx, not me.

By: Robert E. Graves

Robert E. Graves — Tue, 19 May 2009 21:01:50 +0000

The point of this is that, though interesting, it is difficult and extremely time consuming to sort through history. When it comes to Marx and why so many Jews followed his thinking, I have to wonder about the supporting documentation. How much is real and how much is either the Jews or their enemies trying to define what future generations believe?

What I am certain of is although Marx held great disdain for religion and possible the Jewish culture, much of that hatred was an attempt to deconstruct both. To some extent it worked. Although Marx didn’t like believers, a lot of Jews liked him, and many of them denied their true beliefs.

I want Jews to take that lie away from their brothers, sisters, cousins and second cousins.

By: Robert E. Graves

Robert E. Graves — Tue, 19 May 2009 21:01:16 +0000

Do you know what happened within a couple days of Columbus landing on Hispaniola? Indians who had never seen a white man before killed 39 of his sailors. Powhattan went of two genocidal rages against John Smith’s people, killing 2/3 of them before he was stopped. This story is repeated over and over in early North American/Indian relations – especially with settlers on the outskirts of white communities. Daniel Boone had to hunt two Indians who kidnapped and raped his daughters.

However, modern historians prefer to begin the saga 250 years after it began with Wounded Knee and the Trail of Tears.

By: Robert E. Graves

Robert E. Graves — Tue, 19 May 2009 21:00:07 +0000

There is a lot of info out there about why the majority of Jews tend to be so leftist. One of the problems is that it takes a lot to cull through it all for truth. This is especially true when one point of view has been perpetuated over and over and over and over for decades – long enough to influence at least two generations of young folks.

For instance, I watched two movies from a couple decades ago. Both of them had protagonists talking about how the American Indian had been victimized by whites. Any kid growing up hearing this all the time will end up believing that whites were truly evil in their dealings with the red man.

In fact, neither side had been through a 1960s style integration movement. The Europeans were just moving out of serfdom into the industrial age. Indians were the late stone age.

By: Individualist

Individualist — Tue, 19 May 2009 04:27:05 +0000

"The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange.

The Jew is perpetually created by civil society from its own entrails.

The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of of the merchant, of the man of money in general."

I would like to respond to these three things by Marx because I think he is wrong.

(Continued)

By: Individualist

Individualist — Tue, 19 May 2009 03:41:37 +0000

I remember reading an essay where the term "social" economics was evaluated among economists. The author stated that while it seemed liberal economists were enamored and obsessed with terms like "social" justice and "social" economics the entire concept seemed to be devoid in conservative circles. It seemed they considered the entire concept beneath contempt. The only conservative mentioning the subject was Friedrick Hayek whose response was that the entire "Concept" was dangerous because it could be misused as the Nazi’s had done.

Maybe the reason that we don't seem to have "conservative" fiction is that altering stories to push a political agenda to us seems to be a bastardization of storytelling. If a conservative wants to explain his politics they write a non-fiction book whose purpose is to explain their politics. If a liberal wants to explain their politics they write a story with subtle messages to try to trick you into understanding their viewpoint.

Is this also somehting we on the right will need to learn to do? I wonder?