Thanks for your latest article. I was mulling over what you said on your blog a few days ago about shifting the focus onto detailing dysfunctional family dynamics. Has that idea been curtailed now? It didn’t seem to last very long, or gain many responses from people.
I just got thinking today as I read the comment by Sebastian C. on David Irving. In general I can’t disagree, but what stimulated my mind was remembering also that as with William Pierce and his beaten anti-racist son Kelvin, and Stormfront’s Don Black and his ‘transgender’ offspring, David drove his daughter to schizophrenia. That part of his legacy never gets much mention. I feel it would make for a more realistic portrayal, taking the good with the bad autobiographically. It does not negate his bravery or passionate lifelong commitment to the cause, but it gives us pause for thought. There’s a difference after all between lauding the achievements of a great man and frankly kissing his ass come what may, the latter of which generally seems the right’s approach long-term.
What I was going to write about – and I’m sure you’ve had it your entire life with your famous father so can sympathise – is something on my father’s exemplary career, and how it was picked up by others and reported back to me my entire life, including, if you remember from my book, by at least one family therapist figure (there have been other psychiatrists equally impressed), and the effect this effective starry-eyed sycophancy had on me knowing what he was like to me in private, and the subsequent reduced possibility that I would be believed, as, in true Morales fashion, most people do go on credentialism (and their own knee-jerk wishful thinking in building up a persona) over private domestic character when evaluating someone (and how could they know the latter?). I’m not in a great state to be writing at the moment, but I’ll put some thought into it over the next few days.
I think, much as I still recognise his great contribution (and it certainly is great), my view of David Irving has been tarnished slightly by the knowledge that he was cruel (or neglectful) to at least one of his offspring. I am used to his ‘public persona’ as I’ve watched a great many of his presentations also, as with reading a fair few of his books (so far), and it hurts me to know he, as with all people, has a dark side. I hope that if a biography of him is ever written that it covers this fairly (although somehow I doubt it will).
What of his daughter? Is she thrown under the bus in all of this, to make more room for his fame in the limelight? His f**king reputation? I’d imagine it’s what racialists would want. She could have followed in his footsteps as a great historian, or whatever else would be more suited to her as woman (as with Kelvin Pierce, who could have been a profound white nationalist). It just seems a terrible waste. I know my own life has basically been ruined.
As far as I can see, someone can achieve the greatest possible personal glory in life, but if they can’t even protect their own biological heritage – their own family – what was it actually worth? In my eyes they have failed their sole sacred duty. That seems the Himmlerian position.
I know this is a controversial point to raise, and I do not wish it to be glibly rendered a pedantic one, but I just thought I’d run it by you as my brainstorm for the day.
Best regards,
Ben
7 replies on “Hi Cesar,”
Hi Ben,
I suspect that “Sebastian C.” is none other than Dr Morales (the A.I. firewall I put on the software to detect sock puppets didn’t work this time).
Cheers,
César.
I know what you mean about Irving and how he may have mistreated those closest to him. From afar, I get the sense that he may be a bit condescending and not pleasant to be around for more than a short time. Is the daughter you are referring to as schizophrenic the one who killed herself? I have heard he does seem to put his own personal reputation before everything else. I think his biggest regret was testifying at the Zundel trial because his reputation took such a massive hit after that and never fully recovered in mainstream circles. Great books for scholarship, but there are certainly character flaws and they should be acknowledged.
Thanks for your question Thomas. To answer you, I’m not really sure. I know one daughter did commit suicide (for which the family was cruelly hounded by the UK press, I believe, always ones to kick someone when they’re down), but I’m not sure if it’s the same person. I’d have to ask César. Yes, I agree with your observations. Part of me wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, wondering if his harsh treatment by the British media (and the trial) set him on edge, and made him more unpleasant at home, or if his running negative publicity made their lives harder growing up as a secondary shaming impact, but I still do think, as you say, that he’s quite proud over his reputation. One would have to read between the lines in his writing style (the way he read between the lines in Himmler’s journals) to piece together more of his character. I gather he can be quite cold and standoffish. I think I remember reading that he was very brusque with his staff at some point also. Or at least, could be those things… I don’t want to cross a line too far at the moment knowing, as gaedhal correctly (I think) observed, he’s pretty much at death’s door. Basically, I wouldn’t want to upset his children more if he died tomorrow and this site was pointed out to them. Thanks for confirming my speculation though.
Hello Benjamin,,,
Its regrettable that baseless rumours and whispered innuendos concerning David Irving’s personal and family life continue to circulate. Such allegations, particularly those suggesting mistreatment of his daughter, appear to be nothing more than malicious fabrications, unworthy of serious consideration by any discerning mind.
They serve only as a distraction from the true measure of the man: his extraordinary contribution to the honest examination of the most important event of the last century.
A historian of Mr Irving’s calibre and courage should be judged first and foremost by the rigour, archival depth, and intellectual integrity of his work.
His meticulous research into the events of WW2 has illuminated realities long obscured by official narratives and political expediency, establishing him the most formidable and acclaimed chronicler of that era.
Personal matters, especially when reduced to unsubstantiated family gossip, pale into insignificance beside such a substantial and enduring scholarly legacy.
It is both just and proper that precedence be given to Mr Irving’s monumental achievements in revealing historical truth over any supposed domestic difficulties.
In an age too often swayed by sentiment and scandal, let us accord this distinguished historian the respect his life’s work so abundantly merits, rather than permitting idle tittle-tattle to diminish a reputation forged through decades of fearless inquiry.
Sebastian
Editor's interpolated note:Benjamin writes the below comment under the assumption that Sebastian is the cyberstalker Dr Morales.
Fuck off, you talentless whoreson. I know damn well – as well as you do – who you are, and it shouldn’t need spelling out by now. Go milk you mongrel ineptitude somewhere else.
César has already informed as me to the analytics proof of your identity.
If you want to try harder, instead of emailing this site owner all the time with a tirade of sad, stalkerish insults, reminiscent of a serial rapist with their victims, email David Irving’s relatives and ask for yourself. They can damn well speak for themselves, and I find your trolling in extremely poor taste. Don’t get back to me though… I’d hope you’d have the sense at least to not to do that (on either count, really). It’s clear you don’t have the inherent compassion not to, beyond your enervating feminine sycophancy.
I hope you fucking burn, and I’d be glad to toss an extra bundle on that pyre, just in case – I wouldn’t piss you out if someone set you on fire (preferably with kerosene).
P.S. the argument you’re making is, in a nutshell, and taken to full binary extreme:
Joe Bloggs cured cancer.
Joe Bloggs fucked his son, every day, for 25 years.
But so what, Joe Bloggs cured cancer. More praise for Joe Bloggs. So what for his son’s minor suicide. More praise for Joe Bloggs.
What sort of fucking idiot are you not to at least acknowledge the bad, even when it does not negate the historical presence of the good? Have you no solid interest in truth? if so, why read David Irving at all?
What does it say about your own upbringing?
Sebastian,
Although you’re using a UK IP address, my troll detection software says you’re actually in the southernmost capital city of Brazil, where Morales has been trolling according to several racialist forums.
We also have another method to detect that something is wrong with the account you opened to comment here.