web analytics
Categories
Summer, 1945 (book) Thomas Goodrich

1945 (IX)

Unlike their democratic counterparts, the Soviet Union made little effort to hide from the world the fate of German prisoners in its hands. Toiling and dying by the tens of thousands in the forests, bogs and mines of Siberia, the captives were slaves pure and simple and no attempt was made to disguise the fact. For the enslaved Germans, male and female, the odds of surviving the Soviet gulags were even worse than escaping the American or French prison camps and a trip to Siberia was tantamount to a death sentence. What little food the slaves received was intended merely to maintain their strength so that the last ounce of energy could be drained from them.

And so, with the once mighty Wehrmacht now disarmed and enslaved, and with their leaders either dead or awaiting trial for war crimes, the old men, women and children who remained in the dismembered Reich found themselves utterly at the mercy of the victors. Unfortunately for these survivors, never in the history of the world was mercy in shorter supply.

* * *

While disarmed and helpless German soldiers were dying by the hundreds of thousands in American death camps, helpless German civilians were likewise dying of deliberate starvation in their uncounted thousands. Indeed, in “peace,” all of Germany itself had become the world’s largest death camp, just as Henry Morgenthau had hoped and planned.

Because Germany’s entire infrastructure had been shattered by the war, it was already assured that thousands would starve to death before roads, rails, canals, and bridges could be restored. Even when much of the damage had been repaired, the deliberate withholding of food from Germany guaranteed that hundreds of thousands more were doomed to a slow death. Continuing the policy of their merciless predecessors, Harry Truman and Clement Attlee allowed the spirit of Morgenthau to dictate their course of action regarding post-war Germany.

No measures were to be undertaken, wrote President Truman to General Eisenhower, “looking toward the economic rehabilitation of Germany or designed to maintain or strengthen the German economy.” In other words, the shattered Germany economy would remain just as it was and the people would simply be allowed to starve.

Not only would food from the outside be denied entry, but US troops were forbidden to “give, sell or trade” supplies to the starving. Additionally, Germany’s already absent ability to feed itself would be stymied even further by withholding seed crop, fertilizer, gas, oil, and parts for farm machinery. Because of the enforced famine, it was estimated that thirty million Germans would soon succumb. Well down the road to starvation even before surrender, those Germans who survived war now struggled to survive peace.

“I trudged home on sore feet, limp with hunger…,” a Berlin woman scribbled in her diary. “It struck me that everyone I passed on the way home stared at me out of sunken, starving eyes. Tomorrow I’ll go in search of nettles again. I examine every bit of green with this in mind.”

“The search for food made all former worries irrelevant,” added Lali Horstmann. “It was the present moment alone that counted.”

While city-dwellers ate weeds, those on the land had food taken from them and were forced to dig roots, pick berries and glean fields. “Old men, women and children,” a witness noted, “may be seen picking up one grain at a time from the ground to be carried home in a sack the size of a housewife’s shopping bag.”

The deadly effects of malnutrition soon became evident. Lamented one anguished observer:

They are emaciated to the bone. Their clothes hang loose on their bodies, the lower extremities are like the bones of a skeleton, their hands shake as though with palsy, the muscles of the arms are withered, the skin lies in folds, and is without elasticity, the joints spring out as though broken. The weight of the women of average height and build has fallen way below 110 pounds. Often women of child-bearing age weigh no more than 65 pounds.

“We were really starving now…,” acknowledged Ilse McKee. “Most of the time we were too weak to do anything. Even queuing up for what little food there was to be distributed sometimes proved too much.”

Orders to the contrary, many Allied soldiers secretly slipped chocolate to children or simply turned their backs while elders stole bread. Others were determined to follow orders implacably. “It was a common sight,” recalled one GI, “to see German women up to their elbows in our garbage cans looking for something edible—that is, if they weren’t chased away.” To prevent starving Germans from grubbing American leftovers, army cooks laced their slop with soap. Tossing crumbs or used chewing gum to scrambling children was another pastime some soldiers found amusing.

For many victims, especially the old and young, even begging and stealing proved too taxing and thousands slipped slowly into the final, fatal apathy preceding death.

“Most children under 10 and people over 60 cannot survive the coming winter,” one American admitted.

“The number of still-born children is approaching the number of those born alive, and an increasing proportion of these die in a few days,” offered another witness to the tragedy. “Even if they come into the world of normal weight, they start immediately to lose weight and die shortly. Very often mothers cannot stand the loss of blood in childbirth and perish. Infant mortality has reached the horrifying height of 90 per cent.”

“Millions of these children must die before there is enough food,” echoed an American clergyman traveling in Germany. “In Frankfurt at a children’s hospital there have been set aside 25 out of 100 children. These will be fed and kept alive. It is better to feed 25 enough to keep them alive and let 75 starve than to feed the 100 for a short while and let them all starve.”

From Wiesbaden, a correspondent of the Chicago Daily News sat with a mother and watched as her eight-year-old played with her only toys, a doll and carriage. The reporter saw at a glance that the thin, frail child was starving.

“She doesn’t look well,” I said.

“Six years of war,” the mother replied, in that quiet toneless manner so common here now. “She hasn’t had a chance. None of the children have. Her teeth are not good. She catches illness so easily. She laughs and plays—yes; but soon she is tired. She never has known”—and the mother’s eyes filled with tears “what it is not to be hungry.”

“Was it that bad during the war?” I asked.

“Not this bad,” she replied, “but not good at all. And now I am told the bread ration is to be less. What are we to do; all of us? For six years we suffered. We love our country. My husband was killed—his second war. My oldest son is a prisoner somewhere in France. My other boy lost a leg… And now…”

By this time she was weeping. I gave this little girl a Hershey bar and she wept pure joy—as she held it. By this time I wasn’t feeling too chipper myself.

When a scattering of reports such as the above began filtering out to the American and British public, many were shocked, horrified and outraged at the secret slaughter being committed in their name. Already troubled that the US State Department had tried to keep an official report on conditions in Germany from public scrutiny, Senator James Eastland of Mississippi was outraged.

“There appears to be a conspiracy of silence…,” announced Eastland. “Are we following a policy of vindictive hatred, a policy which would not be endorsed by the American people as a whole if they knew true conditions?”

“Yes,” replied a chamber colleague, Senator Homer Capehart of Indiana, no doubt with Henry Morgenthau on his mind:

The fact can no longer be suppressed, namely, the fact that it has been and continues to be, the deliberate policy… of this government to draw and quarter a nation now reduced to abject misery. In this process this clique, like a pack of hyenas struggling over the bloody entrails of a corpse, and inspired by a sadistic and fanatical hatred, are determined to destroy the German nation and the German people, no matter what the consequences… This administration has been carrying on a deliberate policy of mass starvation.

The murderous program was, wrote an equally outraged William Henry Chamberlain, “a positively sadistic desire to inflict maximum suffering on all Germans, irrespective of their responsibility for Nazi crimes.”

Because of these and other critics, Allied officials were forced to respond. Following a fact-finding tour of Germany, Eleanor Roosevelt, wife of the late president, professed to see no suffering beyond what was considered “tolerable.” And General Eisenhower, pointing out that there were food shortages all throughout Europe, noted that Germany suffered no more nor less than its neighbors. “While I and my subordinates believe that stern justice should be meted out to war criminals… we would never condone inhuman or un-American practices upon the helpless,” assuaged the general as helpless Germans died by the tens of thousands in his death camps each month.

Although some nations were indeed suffering shortages, none save Germany was starving. Many countries were actually experiencing surpluses of food, including Denmark on Germany’s north border, a nation only waiting Eisenhower’s nod to send tons of excess beef south.

“England is not starving…,” argued Robert Conway in the New York News. “France is better off than England, and Italy is better off than France.”

When Senator Albert Hawkes of New Jersey pleaded with President Truman to head off catastrophe and allow private relief packages to enter Germany, the American leader offered various excuses, then cut the senator short:

While we have no desire to be unduly cruel to Germany, I cannot feel any great sympathy for those who caused the death of so many human beings by starvation, disease, and outright murder, in addition to all the destruction and death of war…. I think that… no one should be called upon to pay for Germany’s misfortune except Germany itself… Eventually the enemy countries will be given some attention.

In time, Germany did receive “some attention.” Late in 1945, the British allowed Red Cross shipments to enter their zone, followed by the French in theirs. Months later, even the United States grudgingly permitted supplies to cross into its sector. For millions of Germans, however—the old, the young, the injured, the imprisoned—the “attention,” as originally planned, was far too little, far too late.

Had rapes, slavery and starvation been the only trials Germans were forced to endure, it would have been terrible enough. There were other horrors ahead, however—some so sadistic and evil as to stagger the senses. The nightmarish fate that befell thousands of victims locked deep in Allied prisons was enough, moaned one observer, to cause even the devout to ask “if there really were such a thing as a God.”

Categories
Ancient Rome Architecture

Temples!

Reconstructed Temple of the Nymphs at Vindolanda. Just south of Hadrian’s Wall.

Editor’s Note: Below is an excerpt from The Fair Race’s Darkest Hour. Even in a world as extremely anti-Aryan as the present one, attempting this sort of thing probably wouldn’t land us in jail, even in Europe. But what wealthy sponsor could finance such a project with a temple like the one seen above?
 

______ 卐 ______

 
But we do not need a new religion, only to be aware of our pre-Christian cultures. We must recover such cultures to educate our children according to the varied heritage that these cultures represent. I think of the Edda, of the Mabinogion; of Homer and Virgil—not to mention our tragedians, our poets, our philosophers… We must extract that immensely rich heritage and moral maxims.

We also need temples, enclosures for re-connection as I call them. An ever-living fire in these areas will suffice. We need places where we can gather and remember our stories: the readings of texts, commentaries, discussion panels and more. Something collective and social—religious and cultural centers where our people may have psychological or spiritual support, or get truthful information about our ancestors, or the incidents of our history.

We need dividing the year with special celebrations related to happy or tragic milestones of our past: the Christianization and the Islamization of our peoples, for example; with our own calendars of saints’ days (our heroes and those most representative). We need to retrieve the Greek, Roman, Celt, German and other first names… That is, to do what we could not do: having our own history because our history was usurped by the Christian clergy.

Categories
Pseudoscience Science

Nerdels

For the 1909 illustration “The Man of La Chapelle-aux-Saints,” artist František Kupka relied on Marcellin Boule’s scientific interpretation of Neanderthal remains found in France.

I have referred to Neanderthals so many thousands of times in my soliloquies over the decades that I have abbreviated the word to “nerdels” (I use my Spanish expression, which doesn’t capitalise the word Neanderthals).

I want to clarify a point: even evidence by normies challenges the debunkers of Vendramini’s Neanderthal Predation Theory.

The book by George Constable and the editors of Time-Life that I finished reading today, despite subscribing to the current POV on Neanderthals, presents data that confirms what I said about the alleged debunkers: those who claim that Neanderthals lived in climates similar to those of present-day Europe.

Constable’s book states that the hominids who lived in Europe were confined by the seas during the Riss glaciation, and bands of these hominids had no easy way to escape to warmer regions. Later, the nerdels themselves were occasionally isolated during certain periods.

He adds that 75,000 years ago, this pressure acted with renewed force on the nerdels when, once again, the glaciers began to grow. This most recent glacial period, called the Wurm, wasn’t severe at first. It began with snowy winters and cold, rainy summers; however, open grasslands spread, and parts of Germany and northern France, once populated by forests, were transformed into tundra or a mixture of forest and tundra in open areas where mosses and lichens alternated with trees.

The nerdels, Constable’s book states, must have been first-rate hunters because the tundra regions offered little plant food to cover the lean days (exactly what Vendramini says). Many pages later, Constable states that even in the middle of summer, the weather remained rather cold, with average temperatures of ten degrees Celsius, and that winter storms would confine the nerdels to their smoky caves.

Although Constable and his editors fall into the fashionable fallacy of saying that the nerdels were human like us, at least they have the honesty to acknowledge that when nerdel and Cro-Magnon fossils are observed side by side, the difference seems enormous, given that the nerdel has a very elongated and low skull, bulging at the sides and with a protruding “bump” at the back of the skull. This creature had a protruding face, a wider nose and a broad jaw with no chin.

The book mentions the Skhul-Qafzehs fossils, which denote hybrids between nerdel and the hominids of the area: once again, this is in line with, and does not contradict, Vendramini’s NP theory. And on the following page, Constable’s editors mention the possibility that the Cro-Magnons exterminated them.

As I said in last month’s posts: we need academia to cleanse itself of its egalitarian psychosis in order to address Vendramini’s theory on its own merits. In the meantime, I find it sad that we only have Vendramini’s book (who is a liberal atheist) and my appropriation of his work in The West’s Darkest Hour.

Categories
Pseudoscience Science

Books

One of the problems when someone doesn’t charge you for a service is that there are risks… For example, yesterday I went to see a friend who had stored thirty boxes of books from my library in his house without charging me anything.

A month ago, there was a terrible storm that flooded the room where my boxes were stored. My friend didn’t tell me about it until yesterday when I visited him on his birthday!

All the books that got soaked, the ones at the bottom of the boxes, are now ruined. But what’s valuable about them isn’t the books themselves, but my countless handwritten footnotes! Yesterday, I realised that among the ruined books was an anthology by Octavio Paz that I treasured; Kubrick’s biography and a traditionally bound copy of the Satyricon (which I have already mentioned on this site). Of course, many other books were ruined too. To boot, all of my Parrish paintings are also ruined (for example, these and these that I had on the walls of the house I used to rent in Yautepec).

I didn’t become upset yesterday with the person who is storing them in his house because he will continue to store the ones that didn’t get wet. But I would like to say a few words about the only book I brought from that house to the small studio that I now rent, where I live.

Since I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the revelation that Vendramini’s work on Neanderthals has represented in my intellectual life, and why our ancestors exterminated them all, the book I brought with me—fortunately, it wasn’tdamaged by the flood—is a Spanish translation of one of those old collectible books published by Time-Life (the English title is The Neanderthals by George Constable).

One of the advantages of old books is that they mention things that don’t appear in updated books. To understand why our view of Neanderthals has changed so much in recent decades, we must bear in mind that since the 1960s, when attempts were made to integrate Negroes into American society, that zeitgeist contaminated academia including the minds of prehistorians. It is a myth to believe that academia is objective, something like a parallel universe to the vicissitudes of the culture that surrounds it. In reality, academics jump on the latest axiological bandwagon, and this is true not only of historians but also of prehistorians.

Vendramini, for example, seems radical to us when he suggests that our ancestors saw Neanderthals as bipedal gorillas with spears. But quite a few 19th-century palaeontologists believed something similar.

Let us recall the quotes from Pierce and Walsh in the featured article: since 1945, the zeitgeist of white men has been sliding more and more towards Christian ethics, especially among those we call neochristian atheists.

Well, in this book, which survived the flood that caused such calamity to my beloved belongings, we can see this 19th-century reconstruction of what Neanderthals looked like. It is impressive because I now discover that Vendramini has not been alone: it is only the political correctness that reigns in academia that causes his work to be ignored (just as the racial right ignores mine for the reason I told Benjamin today).

What’s more, George Constable, who wrote his book in the early 1970s and already sides with this mania of anthropomorphising Neanderthals, at least had the honesty to publish this image:

And in the note next to the image, Constable wonders whether the version of the Neanderthal face that is currently accepted is accurate, given that the same skull can lead the person reconstructing the face to create either a human or an ape-like face.

In the past academia was dominated by a view of prehistory based on the book of Genesis, which is why some scientists were irritated by the discovery of pre-human fossils. Scientists today may not be Christians, but neochristians are as religious as humanity has always been, even though their secular religion is now the dogma of equality among all wingless bipeds.

Returning to Vendramini’s thesis. In Constable’s book, I learned yesterday that Thomas Huxley himself, upon examining a Neanderthal skull, said it was the most monkey-like he had ever seen. And William King, professor of anatomy, wrote that the Neanderthal skull was so distinctly ape-like that, he surmised, Neanderthal behaviour would be like that of an animal. In the 19th century a spade was called a spade, especially that Neanderthals must have been stocky, short in stature with elongated low heads, very pronounced brow ridges, and bulky faces projecting forward; powerful jaws and receding chins.

In fact, Marcellin Boule (1861-1942) was ahead of Vendramini in a way. He published the first analysis of Neanderthals and characterised them as beastly bipeds. In an illustration he made Neanderthals looked like hairy gorillas, and he determined that there wasn’t enough room for frontal lobes, as we have them, in the front part of the Neanderthal brain. (Although the Neanderthal brain was larger than ours, it wasn’t used as much for abstract thinking. The very elongated occipital part of their skulls hosted huge brains, yes: but that side of the brain served another purpose: their superb night vision.) Boule placed Neanderthals between apes and modern humans, but closer to the former, and he despised the beastly appearance of their muscular bodies, whose skulls with strong jaws revealed, according to him, the predominance of a beastly nature.

Boule was not the only one who considered Neanderthals to be gorilla-like in appearance. Even in the 20th century, but obviously before the great reversal of values that began in 1945, Elliot Smith, a London anthropologist working in the 1920s, said that the Neanderthal’s nose wasn’t clearly differentiated from the face, but was fused into: what in another animal we might call a snout. He also pointed out that Neanderthals not only had a coarse face, but probably had a hairy covering over most of their bodies.

H.G. Wells himself said that Neanderthals were hairy or grim-looking, with large mask-like faces, large brow ridges and no forehead, wielding huge flint tools and running like baboons, with their heads forward and not like men with their heads held high. Ahead of Vendramini, Wells speculated that their appearance must have been frightening to our ancestors when they encountered them.

It is curious that, despite its great political correctness, Constable’s book has at least one passage in which he says that, 40,000 years ago, true human beings jumped onto the evolutionary scene by killing the “beast-men” (on the previous page he had talked about our Skhul-Qafzehs ancestors).

By the end of the 1950s, the decade after the fateful 1945, the stain of simianism that had been placed on Neanderthals began to be removed, and neochristian “science” accommodated this new point of view by repudiating the earlier approach. Present-day scientists have even christened Neanderthals as Homo sapiens neanderthalensis.

This information is so pivotal that, when I finish reading Constable’s book, I will add another appendix to my very recent PDF on the extermination of the Neanderthals.

Categories
Correspondence

Mail

by Benjamin

“The silence of the site frustrates me too. You’ve put up consistently excellent material recently (and indeed from over the last year) and it’s all been ignored. It’s agony for me to process that, unfathomable disappointment. I think the reason it disappoints me so much is that I know the threat we’re under, and thus, knowing there aren’t any good people gives me less hope of a solid Aryan pushback”.