Racial Pride/Tribalism and Orthodoxy. Are they compatable?

[George Australia]

......+Fr. James

Excuse me, but are you the same "Fr. James Thornton" who wrote the pile of rubbish located at: http://www.amren.com/968issue/968issue.html?

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Excuse me, but are you the same "Fr. James Thornton" who wrote the pile of rubbish located at: http://www.amren.com/968issue/968issue.html?

Gregory, no need for the overly disparaging remark.

I read excerpts of the article and didn't see anything disagreeable - am I missing something? (take it easy now).

[George Australia]

Gregory, no need for the overly disparaging remark.

I read excerpts of the article and didn't see anything disagreeable - am I missing something? (take it easy now).

Why does everyone keep calling me Gregory?
Did you miss this?:

"Man is the hardiest of all animals, and the white races, builders of our civilization, the hardiest of all races. . . . The great white races owe their success to the perfection of their nervous system – a nervous system which, although very delicate and excitable, can, however, be disciplined. To the exceptional qualities of their tissues and consciousness is due the predominance over the rest of the world of the peoples of western Europe . . . ."

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

"Gregory"

Can't say that I read that.

What makes people think "Whites" are better is beyond me. "Whites", partcularly those who only a few centuries ago were barbarian hordes, were among the most uncivilized in the world and are not responsible for any great success's, unless one considers mans cleverness toward materialism and science "civilization" and "success".

I always thought Native Americans had one of the best civilizations.

[Anastasios]

Yeah but George what you quoted was not Fr James' words, but a quote Fr James used to show that such discussion used to occur freely in scientific studies. Now I think Fr James is way off base but I think you should be fair enough not to misquote him.

Anastasios

[George Australia]

Now I think Fr James is way off base but I think you should be fair enough not to misquote him.

Anastasios,
I don't think this is a misquote- It is a quote from the article. In the context it was used, is JT stating that such discrourse is unacceptable?

[Anastasios]

Now I think Fr James is way off base but I think you should be fair enough not to misquote him.

Anastasios,
I don't think this is a misquote- It is a quote from the article. In the context it was used, is JT stating that such discrourse is unacceptable?

Yes but you seem to indicate that Fr James is saying this. He quotes this--very true--and then goes on to say that

This forthright statement caused not the slightest ripple of controversy when it was published in 1935, nor did it do so in subsequent editions of his book published even in the immediate postwar years. As recently as that, men seemed able to discuss and debate things, and to disagree with one another, without resorting to hyperbole, ad hominem attacks, hysteria, and defamatory labelling. Intelligent men were still able to focus their minds on facts and issues and to think and express themselves rationally.

Now let me be clear: I think even his commentary is absurd I am just saying that let's be clear he didn't say that quote. He was using it as an example of how scholarly debate in the 1930's allowed this type of discussion.

My issue with it is that those "scholars" in the 1930's were eugenicists and social darwinists!

Anastasios