We are trying to understand the nature of Pound's anti-semitism: WHAT he meant when he said things about Jews and usury and international capital and money systems and the decline of nations and European culture and western civilization and barbarians, and WHY he said such things. As I read his postings, Jonathan Morse would have us understand Anti-Semitism as a pervasive historical phenomenon: if we seek to understand Anti-Semitism in all of its manifestations, we'll come to understand where the Poundian variety fits in. Not an unfair representation of his view, I think. Moreover, he seems to hold the view that, if we understand a few basic concepts about the formation of social prejudices and a few others about Abnormal Psychology, we'll come to understand the subconscious fears and impulses that will cause a person, even a individual of the likes of Ezra Pound, to be swept up in the same flood with the hoi polloi. Not an unreasonable view for a sociologist or a student of "social history". However, that sociological/psychological approach must be balanced with a careful analysis of what Pound actually said and did and his _express_ reasons for those words and deeds. Readers interested in Pound must take care to try to distinguish his ideas --to the extent that Pound's writing makes it possible to do so-- from the mass hysterias. To what extent do Pound's published writings make it possible to distinguish his opinions from the unthinking prejudices of the Lumpenproletariat? Though some might consider the effort to find this out an expense of spirit in a waste of shame, it is, anyhow, the question in front of me, for I see that question leading to an even more important one about the survival of the Individual Intellect in the Scientific Age. Tim Romano -- [log in to unmask] www.ot.com/~tim