The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/p//putnam.carleton/putnam-and-jews

From Wed Mar  6 18:44:18 PST 1996
Article: 26369 of alt.revisionism
From: Laura Finsten 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.activism
Subject: Re: Carleton Putnam (was: Here we go 'gain)
Date: 6 Mar 1996 17:06:21 GMT
Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (NewServer)
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <4hkgmd$d6e@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
References: <4hdf7r$fde@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; PPC)
Xref: alt.politics.white-power:21122 alt.discrimination:44211 alt.revisionism:26369 alt.activism:33821

Alexander Baron  wrote:
>In article <4hdf7r$fde@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
>  "Laura Finsten" writes:
>> But Herr Oberunterweiselenfuehrer, I did read your message.  Your message
>> says that this antisemitic businessman, Carleton Putnam, pulled together
>> a bunch of shreds to create his racist diatribe.  
>You dumb fuck. Where has there ever been a shred of evidence that Carlton
>Putnam was an anti-Semite? You people make these things up as you go along.

Your decorum is slipping, and your slipping is showing.
My source for this statement is the following quotation:

"...Race and Reason, written by a prominent businessman named Carleton
Putnam.  The book was an anti-integrationist tract that explicitly
placed the blame for this subversive idea, and the equally subversive 
idea of egalitarianism, upon a conspiracy of communists and Jewish 
anthropologists."  Jonathon Marks, "Human Biodiversity: Genes, Race,
and History", p.57.  Aldine de Gruyter Publ. 1995.
ISBN 0-202-020339-0

That is a shred of evidence.  The key words are "conspiracy" and
"Jewish anthropologists".  I interpret this as an indication of
antisemitism.  There is a very strong link between seeing Jewish 
conspiracies everywhere and antisemitism.

Lest you now suggest that Marks is also a "dumb f***", I have also
gone straight to the horse's mouth.  In Chapter 2, entitled The 
Hidden Issue, of "Race and Reason" (Carleton Putnam, Public Affairs
Press, 1961), Putnam addresses the question of how what was then
"modern anthropology" came to support (empirically, not politically)
desegregation.  I quote from his book:

"I had realized that there had been a broad movement to change man's 
concept of the nature of man.... But I had not even then quite grasped 
how cleverly it had proceeded - infiltrating first the sciences that 
surround anthropology, moving next into the more strictly social sciences, 
enthroning itself at least in the Supreme Court's desegregation order."
Ibid., p.16

He describes what was then the view of modern anthropology as a
"deceptively false ideology". Ibid., p.16

I draw your attention to his use of the words "cleverly", "infiltrated",
"enthroning", and "deceptively false ideology" as very illuminating 
in this context, particularly given what follows.  In his effort to 
understand how modern anthropological claims came about, Putnam says, and 
I quote again from his book "Race and Reason":

"Boas, I knew, was considered the founder of the modern vogue, and I
deliberately began studying his books before learning, from people who
had known him over many years, the facts about Franz Boas himself -
*his minority group background*, his arrival from Germany in 1886, his
association with Columbia in 1896, his earlier nonequalitarian views on
race, his change of heart in the 1920s (the date will have significance
later), *the names of his students - Herskovits, Klineberg, Ashley
Montagu*...." Ibid., p.18 (emphasis added)

Note here that Putnam sees as relevant the fact that Boas and many of
his students were Jewish.  Putnam does not address what he sees as
methodological or empirical problems in any of their work, but instead
focuses on their Jewishness as rendering their research findings
suspect.  This is itself at best highly suspect, and in my opinion,
Jonathon Marks' conclusion is supported by what Putnam himself wrote
in this book.


From Sat Apr 13 10:51:34 PDT 1996
Article: 30793 of alt.revisionism
From: Laura Finsten 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: The idiocy of liberals
Date: 12 Apr 1996 13:25:43 GMT
Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (NewServer)
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <4kllkn$lua@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
References: <4j8h8e$> <4j9732$> <> <4ja7lm$> <4ji079$> <4jjnes$> <> <4jn7i9$> <4jsj8e$> <4k600d$> <4k6reg$> <4ka4rk$> <4kembl$> <4kf1jc$> <4kkkf3$> <4kl62h$>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-URL: news:4kl62h$
Xref: alt.politics.white-power:25121 alt.politics.nationalism.white:17169 alt.discrimination:45479 alt.revisionism:30793 alt.skinheads:18128

bn946@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Les Griswold) wrote:
>Arthur LeBouthillier ( writes:


>> In accordance with at least several definitions of the word "race,"
>> there most definitely *IS* a Chinese Race and a Vietnamese Race.
>> They are not the same race, although they may both belong to a larger
>> abstraction, also called "a race" (i.e. the Mongoloid race). However,
>> in one case the word "race" is in an ethnological context and in the
>> other in an anthropological or biological context. They may not refer
>> to the same thing. In order to avoid this, you must be more specific
>> about the particular connotation you are using (which I *DO* tend to
>> do).


>Arthur, ambiguity allows liberals to have their cake and eat it too.  Just
>look at the recent performances by Laura Finsten, in which she alternately
>submits (totally trivial) facts, and tries to subtly slip in moral
>judgements right along with them.  For example, she argued that Carleton
>Putnam was an "anti-semite" (fact), and that invalidated anything he might
>have said (moral judgement).

Let me see if I can get your position on this straight, Herr Griswold.
Putnam's major criticism of the work by Franz Boas and his students
rests heavily on Putnam's observation the Boas and some of his students
were Jews. (fact)  This, in Putnam's view, automatically discredits
any and all of the research conducted by these anthropologists (moral?
or some kind of weird judgement, clearly not a scholarly one).  This is
in fact the point that I was attempting to make when I discussed the
context and overall tone of Putnam's "Race and Reason.  Now you seem
to have a problem with this sort of reasoning, or so you have said
above.  Trying to have your cake and eat it too, Herr Oberubergruber-

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.