Macmillan Reference USA has just published an ‘Encyclopedia of Race and Racism‘. I’m inherently wary of efforts like this, but this one is over the top…
Harry’s Place points out that, first it has a category for ‘Zionism’ and next that that section was written by a noted anti-semite and the author of the webzine ‘Race Traitor‘. You can imagine what he wrote.
Go over and read about the whole shameful episode. My personal favorite is the response from the publisher of the encyclopedia, Frank Menchaca.
“After careful review of arguments from both sides,” he wrote to David Harris, “neither Mr. Moore (John Hartwell Moore, the encyclopedia’s Editor in Chief) nor I feel we can operate as arbitrators of these controversies.”
Right. having published this calumny, they can’t be responsible for standing behind its validity. It’s as though they hired Velikovsky to do the section on the solar system.
I am passionately opposed to efforts to limit free speech, but I am equally passionate about truth in advertising. This book is no more an ‘encyclopedia’ than this blog is, and I’ll both be letting the folks at McMillan know my feelings about it and I’ll be visiting my local library. I have no problem with the library holding this book – just as I’d have no problem with the library holding Mein Kampf or State and Revolution. But let’s not offer it the authority of being considered an encyclopedia.
Good bleeding Jesus Haploid Christ on a revolving neon stripper pole.
bq. “After careful review of arguments from both sides,” he wrote to David Harris, “neither Mr. Moore (John Hartwell Moore, the encyclopedia’s Editor in Chief) nor I feel we can operate as arbitrators of these controversies.”
Hubris followed by nescience. Two great tastes that taste great together.
Protip: People of the stature of Macmillan who publish things they call “encyloped[ic]” should rent a fscking clue, and maybe even hire an editorial review board, before they shoot their mouth, entire forehead and toupee off to let them flop in the dirt.
[I’d insert the appropriate link to a Youtube of the scene with Bobby Peru outside the held-up bank in Wild at Heart, but it’s NSFW.]
Oh wait, that should have been “People of the former stature…”
If the librarian is sympatico, also ask archly if they have the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” in the Reference section. That’s a clue, that is.
_Jesus Haploid Christ_
I always wondered what the H stood for.
Mein Kampf is actually worth reading, Hitler had interesting things to say about how to manipulate people and crowds. As to the Encyclopedia, I think it is representative of where modern scholarship is headed. Nor is the moral collapse of the publisher a surprise. If you look around, I think you will see signs of this sort of thing all over, including Obama advisor Samantha Power.
Let me give you a thought experiment here, and it is the following: without addressing the Palestine – Israel problem, let’s say you were an advisor to the President of the United States, how would you respond to current events there? Would you advise him to put a structure in place to monitor that situation, at least if one party or another [starts] looking like they might be moving toward genocide?
I don’t think that in any of the cases, a shortage of information is the problem. I actually think in the Palestine – Israel situation, there’s an abundance of information. What we don’t need is some kind of early warning mechanism there, what we need is a willingness to put something on the line in helping the situation. Putting something on the line might mean alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import; it may more crucially mean sacrificing — or investing, I think, more than sacrificing — billions of dollars, not in servicing Israel’s military, but actually investing in the new state of Palestine, in investing the billions of dollars it would probably take, also, to support what will have to be a mammoth protection force, not of the old Rwanda kind, but a meaningful military presence. Because it seems to me at this stage (and this is true of actual genocides as well, and not just major human rights abuses, which were seen there), you have to go in as if you’re serious, you have to put something on the line.
Unfortunately, imposition of a solution on unwilling parties is dreadful. It’s a terrible thing to do, it’s fundamentally undemocratic. But, sadly, we don’t just have a democracy here either, we have a liberal democracy. There are certain sets of principles that guide our policy, or that are meant to, anyway. It’s essential that some set of principles becomes the benchmark, rather than a deference to [leaders] who are fundamentally politically destined to destroy the lives of their own people. And by that I mean what Tom Freidman has called “Sharafat.” I do think in that sense, both political leaders have been dreadfully irresponsible. And, unfortunately, it does require external intervention, which, very much like the Rwanda scenario, that thought experiment, if we had intervened early…. Any intervention is going to come under fierce criticism. But we have to think about lesser evils, especially when the human stakes are becoming ever more pronounced.
Obama’s cabinet and NSC could be interesting. But I’m not so sure it will be comforting.
#3: What with the virgin birth and all, it stands to reason He might not be diploid. God didn’t necessarily inseminate Mary. But in that case you’d expect Him to have been female, like a worker bee. His Y chromosome? Well, that’s just another miracle, I guess.
Attention Christians: I’m a humble agnostic. I kid because I love.
Just a guess, AL ; I’m betting that you meant to say, “It’s as though they hired Velikovsky to do the section on the solar system.”
This post brought to mind the following observation, made by another commenter on another blog, long ago and far away from here:
“Language matters. Which is precisely why it is being destroyed.”
Sorry, John – typos matter too. Fixing it now…
A.L.
“Jesus Haploid Christ ”
That was one of the funniest things I have read on a blog…
Now, back to the subject at hand.
This is yet another example of the race merchants going too far, are courting the inevitable expiration of the race-card as an effective bullying tool.
Obama will win.
Obama’s associates (and his wife) will start playing the race card every time something does not go his way. He will even play the race card on Putin.
Hence, people will finally get irate enough to fight back. Excessive players of the race-card will themselves become stereotypes that are ridiculed. The technique will be diluted forever.
“I am passionately opposed to efforts to limit free speech, ”
“Then how can you tolerate Obama’s agenda to silence all non-leftist political speech, including talk radio and blogs?”:http://www.pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/archives2/025703.php
Isn’t this exactly the opposite of being ‘liberal’? Why is Obama going so deeply into fascism?
The review from Library Media Connection is shocking, and when you click for more reviews there’s two, one from “ARBA”, which does not provide further information on what it is, and I doubt it’s the American Rabbit Breeders Association, and one from American Libraries, which is serious.
I wasn’t able to find at the Linworth store (link) if this review was accurately quoted by McMillan, but here goes…
From the Library Media Connection endorsement:
bq. _”While the set does deal with race and racism in depth, it goes well beyond those topics.”_
That’s the first sentence, and things have gone off the rails. As a reference work, it shouldn’t go well beyond its scope.
bq. _”The articles are scholarly and cover a wide variety of subjects. This set could become the ‘go-to’ print source for honors and advance placement classes in high school and religion classes that are involved in the study of racism or of marginalized groups. Highly recommended.”_
Highly recommended on what basis other than whatever prejudices the un-named reviewer might have? “Scholarly” articles on all sorts of topics including “marginalized groups” off the topics of race and racism are not what is wanted in a subject encyclopedia.
I can’t check the accuracy of the American Libraries review either, as they appear not to have heard of this work (link).
Anyway, from the purported American Libraries review:
bq. _”While the emphasis is on topics from within the United States, the three volumes also cover information from other countries. Other articles explore the treatment of African Americans and how racism has impacted Latinos, Native Americans, Jews, and other ethnic groups.”_
OK, how much information on other countries? This seems to be a set of volumes on America the racist, in which nearly _”400 articles investigate specific topics ranging from the border patrol, the Hottentot Venus, and human genetics through theories on internalized racism and symbolic racism”_ … oh yes, and in the rest of the world…
The the ARBA (??) review:
bq. _”highly recommended for high school, undergraduate, and large public library collections supporting social science students and researchers.”_
In quoting this, from who or what I don’t know, McMillian is setting a high bar for the authority of the work. Otherwise you can’t reference it.
But the truth is, you can’t. The author is not credible. So the work would be just so much propaganda cluttering the shelves.
A big, black mark for whoever at McMillan ignored the red lights flashing on this project and let the McMillan name be welded to junk.
This whole presentation looks so bogus I think someone other than the authors let their biases blinker them to problems with what they were doing.
Sorry, I messed up my quotes slightly, I should have pointed to _”Other articles explore the treatment of African Americans and how racism has impacted Latinos, Native Americans, Jews, and other ethnic groups.”_ as indicative of America-centric concerns.
It ought not to have been possible for the bogus information pointed to by Ben Cohen at Harry’s Place to slip by unnoticed, given the warning signs on this.
ARBA is the American Reference Books Annual which appears to be a purportedly neutral review and resource site for librarians and other information professionals.
At the bottom of the about page there we find out it part of Libraries Unlimited a publisher of librarian specific stuff, which is in turn a member of Greenwood Publishing Group which is in turn a division of Houghton Mifflin Corp, which of course publishes a variety of educational and reference materials of their own.
So why is all this of any interest at all? Well apparently Cengage, parent company of Gale/Macmillan has recently acquired the college wing of Houghton Mifflin and, well quoted from the press release
Under a long-term agreement that will be executed at closing of the transaction, Cengage and Houghton Mifflin will cooperate to expand the distribution of Cengage’s college textbooks and related materials into the U.S. high school market, with particular emphasis on Advanced Placement and Honors programs.
which is kinda interesting given the
“highly recommended for high school, undergraduate, and large public library collections supporting social science students and researchers.”
quote from the review. Appears to be some vigorous mutual back scratching going on here. No real point to this, other than that I was kinda startled (although, on reflection, I really shouldn’t be) of how inbred the education/reference publishing market is. Which would explain the copious stupidity on display here.
Thanks, Treefrog.
_Then how can you tolerate Obama’s agenda to silence all non-leftist political speech, including talk radio and blogs?_
Strangely, that article spends the bulk of its words trying to make internet ‘Network Neutrality’ into a liberal bogeyman. What’s up with that?
Its scary?
As election day gets closer, and McCain’s campaign flails more, it’s interesting to see how quickly almost every thread with any political content is being hijacked into anti-Obama raving and frothing. (This time around, in less than ten comments, with rumblings at #4!) Puts any “Palin Derangement Syndrome” from which American “leftists” suffer to shame. . .
“Puts any “Palin Derangement Syndrome” from which American “leftists” suffer to shame. . . ”
…yeah, right. Leftists have hurled any and every foul statement about Palin that their puny intellects could produce. You never see a pro-US person say things about Obama like what Madonna or Sandra Bernhard say about Palin.
Pro-US people always maintain better decorum and manners than leftists. Both sides know this.
_Pro-US people always maintain better decorum and manners than leftists_
You mean like referring to people who agree with your opinions as “Pro-US people?” I suppose that makes me an “anti-US person.” Very polite of you.
GK is unusually sharp today.
How true! Pro-US persons say about Obama, “Pity I can only give him $2300, but here is my check.”
Anti-US people wave signs like these.
Thank you, Andrew, I needed a chuckle this morning…
A.L.
“I suppose that makes me an “anti-US person.” Very polite of you.”
I don’t know enough about you in particular, but I maintain that about 70% of the US population is pro-US (Republicans, Libertarians, and moderate Democrats), about 20% are neutral/uninterested, and 10% are an anti-US fifth-column left.
Individuals who actively ignored or even encouraged 8 years of Bush assassination fantasies, and now say horrible things about Palin, fall into the anti-US group.
Virtually no GOP supporter says those things about Obama. The left even plants shills in GOP audiences to try and make the GOP falsely look ‘racist’.
GK on target again:
For example, former Senator George Allen. The Democrats planted a non-white person in his audience—not exactly a shill, but not a supporter—and the candidate was pilloried as racist just for calling him a macaque! This could not possibly have been racist because Sen. Allen is a pro-US patriot in the mold of Jefferson Davis and William Yancey!
I think S. Sidharth deserved what he got, given that he was harassing Allen.
Both Hillary and Biden said far more derogatory things about Indians (as an entire community) than Allen ever did (which was directed only at an individual). You clumsily ignore this, even though you know about these incidents.
I am Indian, so I suppose you will lecture me on what Indians are supposed to consider as racist vs. not, based on the party of the offender. Typical left-wing condescencion towards non-whites.
Once again, your arguments are so weak and pathetic that you are in a class by yourself. This is known as ‘jumping the sea-cucumber’.
“Madonna and Sandra Bernhard”? Oh, now _there’s_ a pair of pundits who speak for me and the rest of the country that’s left of the ever-rightward-moving center, and for US Democratic Party. . . Sheesh, I thought I was only going to be held responsible for stupid stuff that _Barbara Streisand_ says, in exchange for which I got to make fun of Mel Gibson… Does anyone even think Sandra Berhardt is _funny_ any more?
“…Does anyone even think Sandra Berhardt is funny any more?”
Well, no leftists are funny…
“…of the ever-rightward-moving center,”
What leads you to think the center is moving rightward? Obama is further to the left than Kerry, Gore, or Bill Clinton, yet will get more of the popular vote than any of them.
How on earth do you think the center is moving rightward?
According to the article, Israel started the war of 1948 by attacking Deir Yassin.
The usual fools are listed as sources: Benny Morris, Finklestein, and an assortment of kapos and Marxist scum. I’m sure they’re all very proud of themselves, and Julius Streicher would be proud, too.
Glen, could I trouble you for an exact quote? Even anti-Zionists are unlikely to make such an anachronistic claim about Deir Yassin.
GK, [***redacted***] When you show up on a thread the quality of “conservative” argument plummets. (Evidence for shills?) [***redacted***]
[Redactions by Marshal “Big Tuna” Maximus. –NM]
Andrew – the “entire article is here.”:http://www.ccsu.edu/library/Bernstein/Zionism.pdf (.pdf file)
GK, if someone’s funny, by your logic, they can’t be leftist. So, John Stewart, Colbert, and Rachel Maddow are Republicans, or at least “pro-US (Republicans, Libertarians, and moderate Democrats)”! Cool!
“GK, if someone’s funny, by your logic, they can’t be leftist. So, John Stewart, Colbert, and Rachel Maddow are Republicans, or at least “pro-US (Republicans, Libertarians, and moderate Democrats)”
Yes, John Stewart and Colbert are pro-US. So is Bill Maher. I don’t know much about Rachel Maddow.
Once again, Lazarus swiftly plummets to a humiliating and shambolic defeat.
He insists that George Allen’s arguably meaningless term against an individual harassing him is ‘racism’, but Biden’s and Hillary’s unprovoked smears against the entire ethnic group are not.
As a member of the group in question, Lazarus lectures me that I am only allowed to think the Republican’s comments are racist, while the Democrats’ are not (even though they are more expansive). As a person of color, I can’t possibly think for myself, and Lazarus has to point it out for me.
So, tell me, are Bobby Jindal, Dinesh D’Sousa, and Asst. Treasury Secretary Neel Kashkari ‘race traitors’ now?
Until now, I merely though that Lazarus was an ideologue and illogical pettifogger. [***redacted***] Then again, leftism always goes hand-in-hand with a condescending, patronizing brand of racism that they can scarcely contain once a non-leftist minority (or woman) comes along.
[Redaction by NM]
R-Gould-Saltman,
You have yet to back up your statement that the center is moving rightward.
Why aren’t you providing evidence of your claim?
GK? AJL? Please try to coolly assess the current level of acrimony and see if you can’t dial it back a bit. Thanks.
Marshal Nortius “Big Tuna” Maximus, acting in that capacity.
Lazarus brought up the George Allen thing out of the blue. I challenge him to explain why George Allen’s single word is somehow worse than Hillary’s and Biden’s statements about the same community (MY community).
I await his answer among the chirping crickets……
Thank you, Glen. I would not have believed it if I hadn’t read it. The article is not only biased, it is also factually inaccurate in many particulars. Really quite unfortunate </understatement>. If he had relied on Morris or even Finkelstein, I would have expected some sort of low-level accuracy, but he seems to have drawn mainly from Lenni Brenner and Uri Davis, both of whom (IIRC) are literal Trotskyist fanatics.
I know I should disengage from GK, but I must point out that on his logic, if a black person were to have harassed George Allen (allowing, merely for the sake of argument, that S.R. Sidharth’s behavior amounted to harassment), it would then be deserved and in no way racist for Allen to call that black person the N-word (which I would prefer to write out, but am not aware of WoC policy on such language).
The tone is improving, and I now approve the continuance of this thread along that trend. 😀
Schoolmarm “Big Tuna” Maximus thanks the class for putting down their peashooters.
A good place to drop in this observation, since the thread it came from was closed down.
From an exchange with Mark B.
Me: “Suppose I said that I heard Obama called a “N-gg-r” at a McCain rally? Suppose Obama said this?”
Him: Bad analogy. Only works if Republican activists had a long, stories, constant history of that kind of talk.
Now take a look at “this”:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/15/10043/208/540/631035 and tell me that you still doubt the possibility or probability of my conjecture.
At least twice the issue of Obama’s race is brought up in unflattering terms by McCain supporters.
Again, Lazarus cannot even admit that Biden and Hillary made derogatory comments about Indian-Ameicans. Those don’t count, only the arguably meaningless word that George Allen said counts. To equate ‘macaca’ to ‘N*****r’ is absurd. No one even knew what macaca meant until Allen said it.
Lazarus gave a mile-wide berth to my straightforward question in #34. He avoided answering it. I will keep pressing him on it with great persistence.
Also, Lazarus self-appoints himself as what an insult towards an Indian-American is. I, being of the group myself, am not equipped to decide this for myself. I am just a picturesque savage that needs a leftist to tell me what to think.
It is well-known that Democrats have a far worse history of racism than Republicans (slavery, dixiecrats, Strom Thurmond, George Wallace, Robert Byrd, etc.). This appears to be alive and well in 2008. The condescending brand of racism that is pervasive among leftists today is what we are seeing here.
GK, I seem to recall that Biden made a racially-insensitive gaffe about Indian-Americans. He didn’t use a slur.
I knew what “macaca” was right away although under its usual spelling. I would try out a few words on you that you might think are meaningless, but I don’t know how broad the marshals’ vocabulary is, nor which foreign languages they speak. I decline to agree that it is somehow better than n—–r.
Are you mounting a defense of Allen that he has some sort of Tourette’s that made him utter, twice, random syllables that turned out to be a slur in his grandmother’s native country? Of course, Allen is the only candidate every to use (part) Jewish ancestry against himself, so anything is possible.
[ Broad enough. — M.F. ]
[ Broad enough. — M.F. ]
Quelle fromage.
Don’t cry for me… ?
1) So if Biden does it, it is merely a ‘gaffe’? You avoided Hillary’s ‘Gandhi owned a gas station’ statement altogether. Both were addressed to the whole ethnic group.
2) Yet George Allen saying something a word (this too to someone harassing him), that turns out to be a term in another language in a country that one of his four grandparents lived in, that is substantial?
No thinking person would say that 2) is worse than 1), unless they view everything through a lens of Democrats being exempt from any standard that Republicans are held to. Given that Democrats have a far worse record of racism than Republicans over the last 150 years, such bias is dishonest in the extreme.
Also, it still appears that you think I need a white leftist to tell me which statements against my group should offend me (based on the party of the offender) and which should not. Allen’s term (meaningless in the English language) against someone harassing him is far worse than Biden and Hillary’s insults towards the ENTIRE group.
People of my skin color are not smart enough to decide what should offend me, as per white leftists.
Are any of you folks familiar with Kevin Smith’s movie Clerks II?
IN it, Dante’s Caucasian slacker friend Randal uses an expression he thinks just harmlessly means “lazy loser on a porch” because his Gramma used to use it — come to find out it means “lazy African-American loser on a porch”. Oops.
Quel fromage, vraiment!
Not trying to defend it; I nonetheless think it’s perfectly possible that’s what happened with the “Macaca Moment”.
Doesn’t matter now, society has spoken, case closed.
Race is being given to much credit than it deserves. It seems like the mainstream media illuminati are the ones holding tight to racism. It’s one thing to address it, but to say it’s why the socialist view isn’t widely accepted is beyond ridiculous.