News

Zuckerberg’s Sister: Don’t Let the “Racists” Take Over the Classics!

Donna Zuckerberg

ACCORDING TO Jewish classics professor Donna Zuckerberg — who happens to be Mark Zuckerberg’s sister — “White supremacy” and young alt-right-wingers are a big threat to the classics.

No, the amorphous online movement that is slowly becoming synonymous with White nationalism isn’t a menace to the classical canon because they want schools to stop teaching it — it’s due to their deep interest in reading Homer, Plato and Plutarch.

That’s the logic behind Donna Zuckerberg’s recent post on the Eidolon website. Zuckerberg is a classicist who understands her field of study no longer generates as much interest as it did in centuries past. But she’s horrified that people she hates are reviving interest in her favorite subject because the alt right — like pretty much all who studied classics in the past — see Greco-Roman antiquity as the foundation for Western civilization.

That notion is “a slippery slope to white supremacy,” according to Zuckerberg, and professional classicists should forcefully lecture interested minds that the Greco-Roman tradition should not be studied for any reasons pertaining to Western civilization.

Instead, it should be studied for other, totally undefined reasons that somehow includes modern left-wing obsessions.

Zuckerberg’s argument implies that the only people who should be talking about classics are those with doctorates in the field and conform to left-wing orthodoxy. She also conflates anyone who sees the great books as the pillars of Western culture with the White nationalists of the alt right. She spends most of one paragraph attacking conservative scholar Victor Davis Hanson for his criticism of how leftist academic interests ruin the study of the Greco-Roman canon.

Zuckerberg expresses the hope that if classicists “fight back” against Donald Trump and the alt right and emphasize how the field now focuses primarily on diversity, they can keep the academic discipline right-wing-free and in the good esteem of the intelligentsia.

Unfortunately for her, the classics has a much bigger problem than the alt right reading its most popular works. No matter how much Zuckerberg professes the field’s new-found interest in “diversity,” it’s still pretty much entirely about elite White men, as she herself admits.

That makes it ripe for the chopping block by the campus Left.

Let’s take into account some recent examples of how college students have treated the veneration of late great White men.

Earlier this month, students at the University of Pennsylvania removed a portrait of William Shakespeare from a campus building and replaced it with a frame of the Black lesbian poet Audre Lorde. Students dumped the Shakespeare portrait in the office of the head of the English Department, who couldn’t have been more pleased with this act on behalf of diversity.

“Students removed the Shakespeare portrait and delivered it to my office as a way of affirming their commitment to a more inclusive mission for the English department,” department head Jed Etsy told the school newspaper. He added in another statement on the matter, “We invite everyone to join us in the task of critical thinking about the changing nature of authorship, the history of language, and the political life of symbols.”

The students were a bit more direct in their remarks on this strike against the hegemony of traditional Western culture, with one Penn Quaker happily tweeting: “Shakespeare just got deported and replaced by Audre Lorde I LOVE EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING.”

Over the summer, anti-Whites at Yale University demanded a “decolonized” English curriculum that ditched Shakespeare, John Milton and other luminaries because they were White and the syllabuses needed more diversity. To not do so perpetuates “a culture that is especially hostile to students of color.” Because reading the words of White men — even when they offer universal truth or inspiring portrayals of the human condition — does immense damage to those who are not White men, apparently.

In April, the student body at Stanford University overwhelmingly rejected a measure to bring back a Western civilization course requirement. One column in the Stanford’s newspaper argued against the measure because the course requirement would uphold “white supremacy, capitalism and colonialism, and all other oppressive systems that flow from Western civilizations.”

In 2015, members of Columbia University’s “Multicultural Affairs Advisory Board” wanted trigger warnings for works of Greek mythology because they contain material “that marginalizes student identities in the classroom.” These self-declared multicultural advisers added, “These texts, wrought with histories and narratives of exclusion and oppression, can be difficult to read and discuss as a survivor, a person of color, or a student from a low-income background.”

Thus, invoking identity politics to defend your discipline heavy on dead White men from your political foes is incredibly stupid. The campus Left is not going to suddenly take an interest in your subject just because you and your fellow classicists wrote an angry letter to Trump. The subject is still about White men and their history, which is enough of a sin in the eyes of campus leftists who demand diversity above all else. …

So unless Zuckerberg can somehow argue Julius Caesar was actually a transgender Black man, her hopes of winning favor with college-based social justice warriors will likely be dashed. …

* * *

Source: Daily Caller

For Further Reading

Previous post

1,574 Per Day: Border Officials Struggle Under Increasing Wave of Illegal Migration

Next post

Fake News: New York Times Claims Self-Driving Truck Kills 9 in Berlin

2 Comments

  1. James Clayton
    December 23, 2016 at 12:00 pm — Reply

    Revilo Oliver American professor of CLASSICAL philology, Spanish, and Italian at the University of Illinois…

    Philology is the study of language in written historical sources; it is a combination of literary criticism, history, and linguistics. It is more commonly defined as the study of literary texts and written records, the establishment of their authenticity and their original form, and the determination of their meaning.

    A Tribute to Dr. Revilo P. Oliver | National Vanguard
    nationalvanguard.org/2015/04/a-tribute-to-dr-revilo-p-oliver/
    Apr 11, 2015 – A Tribute to Dr. Revilo P. Oliver. Bradford … By such a standard, Revilo Oliver was an Aryan among Aryans …

    Revilo P. Oliver › The life and works of a great American writer and …
    http://www.revilo-oliver.com/
    Feb 10, 2015 – Originally written for inclusion in Frederick Seelig’s book Destroy the Accuser, this is Professor Revilo P. Oliver’s learned and insightful analysis …

    The Lost Ten Tribes by Professor Revilo P. Oliver
    http://www.revilo-oliver.com/rpo/Lost_Ten_Tribes.html
    by Professor Revilo P. Oliver (private correspondence, December 1989) …. published material by Dr. Oliver and keeping his classic works in print and available.

    Full text of “The Jewish Strategy” – Internet Archive
    http://www.archive.org/stream/…/The-Jewish-Strategy-Revilo-Oliver_djvu.txt

    The Origins of Christianity : Revilo P. Oliver : Free Download …
    https://archive.org/details/TheOriginsOfChristianity
    Aug 21, 2007 – Author argues the Christianity is wrong for Aryans …

    https://racialobserver.com/2016/07/06/the-holohoax-by-revilo-p-oliver/
    Jul 6, 2016 – THE “HOLOHOAX” by Professor Revilo P. Oliver November 1984 …

  2. Anthony Collins
    December 24, 2016 at 7:30 am — Reply

    Jews like Donna Zuckerberg seek to denature and Judaize the culture of the peoples they afflict. Their modus operandi is described in Dietrich Eckart’s Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin:

    “Every time new and promising opportunities for meddling have arisen,” he [i.e., Adolf Hitler] brought out, “the Jew has been immediately involved. He has demonstrated an uncanny ability to sniff out like a bloodhound anything which was dangerous to him. Having found it, he uses all his cunning to get at it, to divert it, to change its nature, or, at least, to deflect its point from its goal. Schopenhauer called the Jew ‘the dregs of mankind,’ ‘a beast,’ ‘the great master of the lie.’ How does the Jew respond? He establishes a Schopenhauer Society. Likewise, the Kant Society in his work, in spite of the fact that — or, rather, because — Kant summarily declared the Jewish people to be a ‘nation of swindlers.’ The same with the Goethe Society. ‘We tolerate no Jews among us,’ said Goethe. ‘Their religion permits them to rob non-Jews,’ he wrote. ‘This crafty race has one great principle: as long as order prevails, there is nothing to be gained,’ he continued. He categorically emphasized: ‘I refrain from all cooperation with Jews and their accomplices.’ All in vain; the Jewish Goethe Society is still there. It would be there even if he himself had expressly forbidden such knavery.”

    With their characteristic chutzpah, the Jews have appointed themselves as the administrators, judges, and destroyers of the cultural patrimony of our race.

    Sometimes the Jews not only effectively control what can be said, they effectively monopolize what is said. I remember seeing a documentary on the Great Depression in the United States — I believe it was produced by the History Channel, also known as the Holocaust Channel — in which practically all of the commentators were Jews, as if there were no goyim qualified to comment on this chapter of history. More recently, I saw a current affairs program in which several commentators were asked about the economic consequences of Donald Trump’s election, and most of them were Jews. The subtext of such programs — note the word! — seems to be the question: “Is it good for the Jews?”

    I’ve recently browsed through a book by a certain Benjamin Isaac, The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006). The chapter dealing with the Jews is by far the longest chapter devoted to Greco-Roman attitudes towards specific ethnic and national groups: it has 51 pages versus 28 pages for the Phoenicians, Carthaginians, and Syrians, 19 pages for the Egyptians, 20 pages for the Persians, 16 pages for the Gauls, and 13 pages for the Germans. The Jews seem to believe that the world revolves around them. Indeed, the Jews believe the world was created for their exclusive benefit by Yahweh.

    I had to smile when I read this line in Isaac’s book: “Greece is not relevant to us here, for, ‘as far as we know, the Greeks lived happily in their classical age without recognizing the existence of the Jews.’” Life would be much, much happier without the Jews.

    As one would expect, Roman opinions concerning the Jews were overwhelmingly negative.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.