Ian Franck, M. This thesis is the product of two field seasons and spent in Skagit Valley Provincial Park in the vicinity of the Galene Lakes.
It will also discuss the things Cofnas got right, and then conclude the analysis. Reassessing The Culture of Critique While reading all of the back and forth between Cofnas and MacDonald, I was struck by how tiresome this debate really is.
And this says nothing of all the accusations and insults.
People will instead skim and take what they want to take from it. Mainstream academics will walk away more convinced than ever that MacDonald is a fraud. Dissident Rightists will walk away more convinced than ever that MacDonald is being suppressed. And, most importantly, those in between will remain just as confused as before.
By addressing CofC so contentiously, Cofnas is effectively holding the line against the Right. This was more or less his stated purpose in on page 4 of his paper, and, I must say, he was successful.
But is there something inherent about CofC which makes it vulnerable to such attacks? Was there something MacDonald could have done differently that would have addressed this vulnerability? Is there any way we can reassess CofC in order to prevent the Nathan Cofnases of the world from bashing it with such abandon?
One point to which he keeps returning in his paper and afterwards involves Israel. How can MacDonald claim that a particular Jew or Jewish movement is furthering Jewish evolutionary interests when that particular Jew or Jewish movement is hostile to or critical of Israel?
How often does Cofnas use Israel to undermine CofC? He even gets mileage out of Jews who give or have given merely tepid or qualified support for Israel. Cofnas attests that because Freud refused to sign a document condemning the Arabs for initiating a riot in Hebron in which hundreds were killed, we can doubt that he attempted to pursue Jewish evolutionary interests.
MacDonald responds by saying that it was by when Freud started to become strongly sympathetic to Zionism. How relevant is Israel to the theoretical framework and methodology found in CofC?
I will argue that it is not at all relevant. Sure, people can criticize Israel in the way MacDonald criticizes Jews, but that would require a separate theoretical framework to articulate.
On the contrary, as discussed in several places here, Jewish support for causes like Zionism, radical Leftism, or particular governments have a history—a beginning, a middle, and often an end.
This is how he explains how some Jews support Israel and some oppose it. There are two problems with this. Secondly, if Jews are not monolithic, then perhaps MacDonald should not always refer to them so monolithically.
For example, in the Preface of CofC, MacDonald states the following as one of his goals emphasis mine: Determine whether the Jewish participants in those movements identified as Jews and thought of their involvement in the movement as advancing specific Jewish interests.
Involvement may be unconscious or involve self-deception, but for the most part it was quite easy and straightforward to find evidence for these propositions. If I thought that self-deception was important as in the case of many Jewish radicalsI provided evidence that in fact they did identify as Jews and were deeply concerned about Jewish issues despite surface appearances to the contrary.
Cofnas does exactly that when he brings up Israel, as if the interests of Israeli Jews are the same as those of diaspora Jews. After all, both are still Jews, right? Perhaps it could be useful here, too. They were all politically if not socially liberal.
And they were all part of the diaspora. Boas and Freud died before Israel was formed, and many of the other Jews MacDonald focuses on Marcuse, Adorno, Horkheimer did their most important work during the pre-Israel era. If indeed the Jews in CofC—or at least the ones discussed in the first five chapters—saw Israel as little more than a pleasant fantasy, i.
After all, during the time frame of much of CofC, perhaps ninety-five percent of world Jewry was part of the diaspora, and until there was no guarantee that that was going to change. It is reasonable to assume that men such as Boas and Freud saw Jewish interests and Liberal Diaspora Jewish interests as one and the same.
Israel had little to do with this, and therefore should have little to do with critiques of CofC. Of course, these ideas will need more research to flesh out.xii Acknowledgements I am grateful to numerous local and global “peers” who have contributed towards shaping this thesis.
At the outset, I would like to express my appreciation to Professor David Abramson for his advice. In , Benoist paddled from Grand Gulf, the first viable put-in upriver on the Mississippi side, to the boat ramp below the Under-the-Hill Saloon, which is owned by his girlfriend and her brother.
That solo trip spawned the first Phatwater Challenge, with all of 11 entrants, seven months later. Radio Haïti-Inter was Haiti's first and most prominent independent radio station from the early s until Under the direction of Jean Léopold Dominique and Michèle Montas, Radio Haiti was a voice of social change and democracy, speaking out against oppression and impunity while advocating for human rights and celebrating Haitian culture and heritage.
François Benoist (10 September – 6 May ) was a French organist, composer, and pedagogue.
Benoist was born in Nantes. He studied music at the Conservatoire de Paris and won the Prix de Rome in for his cantata Œnone. Franck's reputation was now widespread enough, through his fame as performer, his membership in the Société, and his smaller but devoted group of students, that when Benoist retired as professor of organ at the reopening of the Paris Conservatoire in , Franck was proposed as successor.
franck benoist thesis food biotech research papers essay on suicide attacks in pakistan format thesis uitm essays in ottoman and turkish history fate vs free will thesis statement essay prompts about the environment formative essay define examples dissertation .