The short, but bizarre, post published last week on MacDonald’s Occidental Observer begins with a confirmation that he has been a guest on David Duke’s radio show for some time, despite it being a “difficult decision at first.” MacDonald then defends Duke, attacking the mainstream media for labeling Duke an “ex-Klansman” – saying that this “is nothing more than the usual guilt by association argument.” (There is no question that Duke was once a Klansman.)
MacDonald then shifts to lauding Duke, noting that he agrees with the “vast majority” of Duke’s statements before concluding. “We have to understand that David Duke is a talented politician whose greatest achievements may lie ahead,” MacDonald wrote.
It is unclear what prompted MacDonald to pal-up to Duke, especially considering that the two were once at loggerheads over Duke’s unabashed plagiarism of MacDonald’s work, down to the placement of brackets, dates and periods.
A 2009 Hatewatch analysis of the citations in Duke’s books found overlap with MacDonald’s trilogy. Duke cites around 200 academic works in Jewish Supremacism, of which 130 match sources cited by MacDonald. The footnotes reflect a similar overlap. In all, 232 of Duke’s footnotes are exactly or nearly the same as references cited in MacDonald’s works.
More than 80% of the last 50 footnotes in Duke’s book directly match citations from MacDonald’s books, down to the specific reference volume and page numbers. In another instance, on just one page of Duke’s book, there are five citations that all match verbatim citations found on four pages in MacDonald’s Separation and Its Discontents. In that case, Duke’s book, using MacDonald’s sources, takes an argument MacDonald made in four pages and shortens it down to one.
Duke has made an entire career out of conning people, including being caught on camera attempting to sell his Klan mailing list to a rival faction, and pleading guilty to tax evasion and mail fraud.
It appears MacDonald, like so many others, are willfully ignoring Dukes sordid history for an opportunity to share his limelight. But, the question still remains: why stump for Duke at all?