web analytics

Category: Holocaust

Categories
Free speech / association Holocaust

Future historian

I own the Holocaust Handbooks series on DVDs: the Holocaust deniers’ point of view.

On the other hand it is true what I said in previous posts: I also own a seminal treatise of almost fifteen hundred pages that represents, among others, the orthodox view in academia that the Holocaust was historical.

True, I have skimmed both versions, but obviously I won’t read all the material on either side!

To do so I would have to be fifty years younger and, moreover, an institution would have to pay for such research, whereas a fair hearing of the ‘deniers’ and ‘affirmers’ would take many years.

To give just one example. Some affirmers rely on German documents and testimonies of the alleged victims while some deniers physically analyse, say, the rooms where Zyklon-B was allegedly spread in Auschwitz’s gas chambers. A denier may rationalise away the evidence of documents and testimonies. At the same time, an affirmer may not answer the scientific analysis that a denier did in the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

Parallel universes are thus created in which there is no communication between the two groups.

Trying to break that from a neutral point of view requires not only youth, but also funds for research. It is not enough, one denier would say, that Mark Weber and David Irving—who starred in the denialist movement some decades ago—, have in their later years come closer to the position of the affirmers (because of German documents at the time of the Final Solution). The affirmers, it is said, have to refute point by point the deniers’ scientific and statistical analyses (the enormous volume of bodies that are claimed to have been incinerated in the extermination camps).

That can only be done by a neutral team without thoughtcrime laws, and research would take years. Even if I magically took half a century off my shoulders, and an academic institution gave me a grant to study the so-called Holocaust neutrally, I wouldn’t be able to produce convincing results. The claims of some deniers have to be honestly addressed and researched in labs by specialists in chemistry and the logistics of mass corpse cremation.

If the European system’s demand that I must believe the Holocaust as an article of faith or be thrown in jail is irrational, it is also irrational that I have to doubt it simply because there is the collection of denier books pictured above!

As I said, it would take not only decades but also a great deal of dedication from several historians and scientists to undertake teamwork and delve into this topic at an expert level.

I hope that, after the coming dollar collapse (and thus of the euro and all fiat currencies), the West will be liberated to such a degree that future generations of historians will be able to study the so-called Holocaust rationally.

Categories
Final solution Holocaust

2 Holocausts

People in power put in jail those who question the Holocaust in Europe. In the country of the First Amendment they don’t jail them, but it happened that President Bush deported a Holocaust denier to Europe to let the authorities jail him there!

The Holocaust is a topic that is not usually touched upon in American white nationalist forums either. Unlike the position of Greg Johnson, who believes that the subject should be abandoned—and I refer to what he discussed years ago with Hadding Scott on The Occidental Observer—, I think that the subject of the Holocaust is paramount for the Aryan to reclaim his mental health. It is a very thorny issue and no wonder no one on the racial right wants to address the very core, the ethical part. (The articles Ron Unz publishes on his webzine about the Holocaust and get thousands of hits, and hundreds of comments, fail to address the ethical issue.) So let’s try to address it from my POV, ‘Eliminate all unnecessary suffering’.

First of all, for Hitler’s willing executioners the suffering the Holocaust caused wasn’t unnecessary but necessary. When I was a new-born, one of them even tried to justify himself with these words to those who had any moral qualms:

Menschenkinder, verflucht noch mal eine Generation muss dies halt durchstehen, damit es unsere Kinder besser haben! (Damn it!: A generation has to go through this so that our children will fare better.) [1]

Against Hollywood and even Russian film propaganda (see for example this scene from the Russian movie Come and See where some Belorussian Jews were holocausted in their own village), when one begins to familiarise oneself with the historical literature one is struck by how difficult it was, psychologically, for many Germans to commit genocides. Himmler himself lowered his eyes when he witnessed one of the typical open-air machine-gunning massacres: one of those that so often occurred in the conquered territories. (Much of what is called the Holocaust occurred in the open, relatively far from the villages so as not to frighten the locals.)

Given the awfulness of the work that the killing entailed, Himmler loved the idea of setting up group therapy sessions for his executioners: sessions that were filled as much as possible with a homey atmosphere, food and music, though no alcohol; and some men were relieved of the uglier tasks of killing men, women and children so that, as one diary keeper wrote, ‘they could retain their humanity’.

But the central issue is: If the Jews are not the sole cause of Aryan decline, which is my view, how can the Holocaust be justified?

Believe it or not, there came to be some executioners who were neither monocausalists nor ‘bicausalists A’, but approached ‘bicausalism B’ (see my post of the day before yesterday). On September 17, 1941 the Einsatzgruppe, already overwhelmed by the intensity of its genocidal task, suggested that the extermination of the Jews would not solve all the problems:

Even if it were possible to eliminate 100% of the Jews, we would not eliminate the fundamental danger. The Bolshevik work is carried out by Jews, Russians, Georgians, Armenians, Poles, Latvians, and Ukrainians; the Bolshevik apparatus does not coincide completely with the Jewish population. Under such conditions, we would not achieve the goal of political security if we substituted the main task of destroying the Communist machine for the relatively easy task of eliminating the Jews.[2]

The sticky post on this site links to an article that recommends reading the book that recounts the astronomical genocidal atrocities—a true Holocaust—that the Allies committed on the German people even after 1945: something that Westerners are unaware of because the ubiquitous anti-Aryan propaganda only mentions one of the two holocausts. On the other hand, for the Holocaust deniers, the Jewish Holocaust is a hoax, something that didn’t happen: a myth created by the Jews. But what should we do when a Gentile that allegedly witnessed the Holocaust confronts us with his memories?

Few know that a few hundred British prisoners of war were sent to Auschwitz. One of them was Arthur Dodd. I dare not say that Dodd is to be believed in everything he tells, for at times his story sounds like something out of a Hollywood movie script. But neither can we say that what Dodd tells is a Jewish tale, since ethnically he was English. As the Russians approached Auschwitz Dodd recounts that, in desperation, the guards committed a real atrocity:

SS guards were shouting and whipping a number of Jews who were being forced to throw the carcasses of dozens of their dead comrades into a bonfire. The ground on which the fire was built had been hollowed out and so the bodies and materials were being thrown down to the flames.

Suddenly, Arthur was horrified to see small children being brought into the yard. He felt the bile rise in his throat as the children were kicked and booted into the fire… Arthur staggered back to his hut, the screams of the children still ringing in his ears.[3]

Later Michael Evans, the author of the The Times article, writes: ‘Auschwitz is still the first thing he thinks of every morning’.

I clipped this newspaper story when I lived in Manchester. What to make of these memoirs? The most straightforward answer is that, if Arthur Dodd’s account is true, the mainstream media will never mention the equivalent cases of the other Holocaust, the one the Allies committed that year and up to 1947. (Recall, for example, Tom Goodrich’s account in his book of how the Soviets themselves crucified German babies—literally crucified them—in a Prussian village as their Red Army advanced. )

All this horror, on both sides, could have been avoided if Churchill hadn’t declared war on Hitler, since the latter’s original plan implied non-genocidal Jewish deportation to Madagascar, which could have happened if WW2 hadn’t been declared. Pat Buchanan says this in his book Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World.

I am pleased that, in times much more recent than the publication of the Buchanan book, Tucker Carlson has invited a revisionist who sees in Churchill, not Hitler, the real villain of our movie, the West’s darkest hour with its millions of migrants to bastardize the Aryan race. But for our ideology to become more rhetorical for the normie’s Overton window, rather than denying the Jewish Holocaust I think it is more astute the path chosen by Goodrich: to talk about the other Holocaust, the Holocaust that almost nobody talks about.

 
_____________

[1] Ulm court case against Bernhard Fischer-Schweder, August 29, 1958, Ks 2/57.

[2] RSHA IV-A-1, Report on Operations in the USSR, No. 86, NO-3151.

[3] Michael Evans: ‘An Englishman at Auschwitz’, The Times, 2 November 1998.

Categories
Holocaust

The Id

My arrival in a raggedy town whose name I don’t even want to mention has made me question many things, and has affected the routine of entries I had on this site: not just Deschner’s books.

I have never before, for example, had the experience of not feeling the slightest physical attraction to a single woman I see on the streets—not one! This is due to the ethnic component of the people who live here: something that didn’t happen to me in the country’s capital where one or the other, although rare, was attractive. It is obvious that it was a gigantic mistake to come to this town and that I will return to my hometown as soon as the one-year contract I signed with the house’s owner is over (besides, moving my furniture is far more expensive than I imagined!).

If all goes well with my plans, I will see two of the commenters on this site this year. The three of us are depressed by the lack of joint action: it is impossible to keep our spirits up without seeing our comrades daily. Today, for example, I was watching scenes from the latest film version of The Wannsee Conference, and we could already imagine how impossible it would be to have a single minute of depression with such historic action! But before the dollar collapses my purchasing power to move freely is nil. Only an exponentially hyper-inflated dollar would lift me out of poverty. Thanks, Trump, for pricking the credit bubble! May your house of cards come crashing down quickly…!

I said in my previous post that I have suspended Deschner’s book series. As far as David Irving’s book on Himmler is concerned, I don’t know if I will resume the selected quotes. I suspect that Irving suffered a stroke because, since his family notified his fans of his collapse by email early last year, David hasn’t communicated again on his website (others are running his site).

True Himmler (excerpts here) is a book for the fan of the Reichsführer who wants to know about his childhood and adolescent life. But this first volume doesn’t mention what we all wanted to know: the role Himmler played in the so-called holocaust, written by a pen sympathetic to the German regime, Irving’s. Conveniently, David fell ill before he finished his second volume on Himmler, so we only have Irving’s DVD on the Reichsführer in which he does touch, briefly, on the subject of the so-called holocaust.

So if I want to dig deeper, I have no choice but to consult normie treatises, even Jewish ones like Raul Hilberg’s seminal treatise, which I have been reading in a Spanish hardback translation.

In my library I have other books that Jews and Gentiles have written about the holocaust, such as those by Laurence Rees, Ron Rosenbaum and even Daniel Goldhagen. Although I have read them, they are all propaganda of the purest Manichaeism incapable of mentioning a syllable about the Hellstorm Holocaust that the Allies perpetrated on the German people, women and children included. But as far as I have read, Hilberg’s treatise has impressed me: unlike the others he makes no value judgements; he just uses tons of references and bibliographical notes, over 1455 pages, to support the facts he discusses. His treatise seems to be purely descriptive.

One of the reasons I bought this expensive book is because I am interested in the mentality of the exterminationist (it’s like mine…). This is true even though Hilberg knew nothing of the Jewish problem; for example, what Eduardo Velasco recounts in his essay on Judea and Rome, especially the suspicion that many Christians were subversive Semites who hated the Greco-Roman civilisation.

Real history is much more complex, nuanced and disturbing than the Manichean views we see both in normie authors such as the aforementioned Hitler haters, and in some racialist quarters where all the research in books such as Hilberg’s is simply dismissed as one hundred per cent mythical.

A more mature way to approach treatises like Hilberg’s is to see it from the perspective of one who has transvalued his values, like those who sat around the table at the Wannsee Conference. With this attitude you only inquire into the veracity of the bare facts, and if genocides of men, women and children occurred, you accept the historical facts without condemning Hitler’s willing executioners.

That has been the traditional attitude of contemporary Muslims in dealing with Islam’s incredibly bloody conquest of India, and also the attitude of present-day Mongols who continue to honour the memory of Genghis Khan (it is also the attitude of Jews regarding the genocide of the Palestinians). If we recall what I said in my essay on Augustine and tutti quanti about the ‘ogre of the superego’ that the Aryan of the Christian Era suffers, we will see that in the collective unconscious it would have to be balanced with its counterpart, the Id, if whites are to be saved from self-destruction.

Categories
Holocaust William Pierce

Wm. Pierce

on the Holocaust

Thanks to the comments section of yesterday’s post, I discovered an article by William Pierce from 1981. I quote a couple of paragraphs:

Actually, it’s very difficult, if not impossible, to determine the truth of the matter. There are reckless “revisionists” who assert that no Jews were killed, solely for being Jews, by the German government. That is almost certainly not true.

I have spoken with SS men who told me that they shot Jews, and I believe them. They also told me that the claims of mass killings of Jews put forth after the war have been greatly exaggerated, and I believe them on that score also.

Read it all here.

Categories
Holocaust Miscegenation

Lawyer

and prosecutor

I still can’t find a place to move, so I don’t have time to resume my full-time activities for the sacred words. But today, at the bank, and already at home watching a video on how the old left thought (‘How the Left Destroyed Itself’ with Yanis Varoufakis), my mind doesn’t stop its train of thought.

Recall once again the faces of white Mexicans in my recent post ‘Blue pill’. In one of Mexico City’s best-known malls, where I was today because the banks are open there on Saturdays, I saw a huge billboard in the car park showing a Caucasian male with a black couple. I had seen such billboards in London but apparently, they are now catching on in the third world. The West suffers from an endless hatred: an exterminationist hatred of the white race even in countries where, like Mexico, there are very few true whites.

I didn’t take a picture of the huge billboard I saw in the mall with my mobile phone (although as a priest of the holy words I don’t use a mobile phone in a city without friends, for banking matters I have to carry it). But I think we Westerners have seen such billboards in various countries.

On the other hand I must confess that, although I don’t have time to read at the moment, I find fascinating what I have barely read of the 1455-page Spanish translation, which I recently acquired, of the classic book The Destruction of the European Jews. In digital form, I own the revisionist counterpart: the Holocaust Handbooks series (pic of one of them on the left). It would take a lifetime—many years that I no longer have on my horizon—to assess both sides. Hopefully, future priests will follow my method: listen to both the prosecutor and the lawyer before rendering an educated opinion.

In any case, as we can see from my featured post ‘The Wall’, the priest is not affected by the official story as he is a man who has already transvalued his values. As a Swede said on page 83 of my anthology On exterminationism:

What is certain is that the Holocaust would not have produced any debilitating psychological effect on non-Christian whites. (By Christianity I mean ‘Christian morality.’ Most atheists in the West are still Christian, even if they don’t believe in God or Jesus.) Being emotionally affected by the Holocaust presupposes that you think: (1) Victims and losers have intrinsically more moral value than conquerors and winners, (2) Killing is the most horrendous thing a human can do, (3) Killing children and women is even more horrendous and (4) Every human life has the same value.

None of these statements ring true to a man who has rejected Christian morality. Even if the Holocaust happened, I would not pity the victims or sympathise with them. If you told the Vikings that they needed to accept Jews on their lands or give them gold coins because six million of them were exterminated in an obscure war, they would have laughed at you.

Who within the American racial right, which largely subscribes to Christian ethics, thinks like this neo-Nietzschean Hyperborean?

Categories
Holocaust Videos

Mark Weber

It is always a pleasure to listen to Mark Weber, whom I mention in the most important article of this site, ‘The Wall’.

Weber is a revisionist about the official story of the Second World War, Hitler and the Holocaust.

Categories
Autobiography Free speech / association Holocaust

The BBC brainwashed me

As we see in the highlighted posts ‘Myth’ and ‘Throne’ which appear in red letters at the top of this page, it is the story we have been telling ourselves for the last few decades that has produced the darkest hour for the white race. That is why it is so important to assimilate the meaning of the Shakespeare and Faulkner quotes in the post I uploaded a little after midnight today.

A pen pal overseas has informed me that someone, who surely hates me for what I write here, has been impersonating me in the comments section of Occidental Dissent (OD) writing nonsense and using my full name. I haven’t been able to locate the specific threads because the admin of that site has been unwilling to respond to my emails (I guess the admin also hates me for my criticism of his site!). Whoever the guy is who’s posting comments in my name without the OD admin banning him or her, the hatred and contempt that many feel for what I say here might be better understood if I confess that, before, I was exactly like them.

The books I devour, I underline copiously. If you visit my library, you will see that many of my books are marked not only with highlighter pens but with my hand-written footnotes. They are a real treat to open a window on the normie I was in the last century.

In 1999, when I was living in Manchester, I bought and devoured Laurence Rees’s The Nazis: A Warning from History, a BBC book. It is Allied propaganda at its worst, precisely the propaganda exposed in the aforementioned ‘Myth’ article. A couple of decades after I read the book I saw an internet image of Rees standing next to a Negress. Cuck Island Britons like him commit ethnosuicide precisely because they have been telling themselves stories like this one from BBC TV, and then passed on more formally to books.

When I lived on that island, propaganda had infected me about the Third Reich and the Second World War. The things I wrote in the blanks of that book represent a window into my biographical past that sheds light on those who now hate me because they still think as I did last century.

The climactic pages of The Nazis, obviously, are descriptions of the so-called Jewish holocaust. The César I was last century wrote, in the book, things like: ‘By now, there should have already been a plot to kill him [Hitler]’ (about a passage on page 107); ‘Here it is clear: even the British didn’t recognise the danger in Czechoslovakia after the atrocities in Kristallnacht and humiliation of the Austrian Jews’ (about a passage on page 116); ‘Wow: a decent German among monsters’ (about a passage on page 129); ‘This is why I bought the book: just as I think, let’s distribute guilt to all the German people’ (about the introductory passages on pages 10ff); ‘Clear-cut case of folie à nación, Austria’ (about a passage on page 110); ‘Close your heart to compassion. Act brutally, Hitler’ (about a passage on page 122), ‘Now I know why I unconsciously identified myself with Stauffenberg [the ringleader of the bombing of 20 July 1944]’ (about a passage on page 215); ‘One good thing really came out of this trip to England: discovering the BBC’ (when on 14 June 1999 I finished reading The Nazis).

Well, well… If I can have empathy, and even sympathy, for the brainwashed César of the last century, I must now have it for those who haven’t crossed the psychological Rubicon.

What would I say to the César of the last century if I could visit him through a time tunnel?

First of all, I hope that by now visitors have seen my post yesterday linking to a video by David Irving showing what I believe about the historical facts of the so-called holocaust from the viewpoint of what Irving calls ‘real history’. Let’s start from that, and also from what I responded to Jewish Enrique Krauze in The Occidental Observer on the subject. Krauze’s position is the same as the position of Rees in his BBC book, where on page 194 Rees picked up a quote: ‘Nobody can explain why the Germans did it’ when the explanation is so obvious that even the Jew Albert Lindemann laid it out in his scholarly Esau’s Tears.

But there is more to it than that.

The César of the last century had to cross the Rubicon. To move from identifying with Stauffenberg (!) to wanting history to be told before and after Hitler (!), which is what I want now, requires a great metamorphosis.

The first step, I have already confessed on this site, I owe to the fact that on 20 April 2010, Greg Johnson posted in the comments section of OD the full text of an article by Irmin Vinson, if I remember correctly this one, which Johnson then published in the webzine Counter-Currents and eventually in print along with other essays by Vinson.

That was the first stepping stone for me to start crossing the psychological Rubicon.

I don’t want to link here all the other stepping stones I had to step on before I reached the other side of the river because it would overwhelm the reader with countless links. But even the first stone gives an idea of the direction in which I was heading.

I want to say a final word about César in the last century.

There is something I underlined a quarter of a century ago in that book that I still believe, ‘Despite being widely bought [Mein Kampf] it was not widely read [in Germany]’ (page 90). That’s because, in my humble opinion, the Führer had to divide his message in twain: a message analogous to today’s American white nationalism for the masses, and a more anti-Christian one for his inner circle of friends. The problem wasn’t Hitler’s hypocrisy, but that the masses of Germans were unprepared to receive his full message (He didn’t say anything to them without using a parable; but when he was alone with his own disciples he explained everything…).

This bifurcation of the NS message is now unnecessary. Hitler’s after-dinner conversations, an anthology like The Fair Race or Savitri Devi’s memoirs linked in my featured post explain it so clearly that, unlike Mein Kampf in the 1930s, they would be devoured as highly entertaining novels once the American troops leave Europe and the Germans and Austrians reinstate the freedom of press eliminated since 1945 (again: see what Irving said in yesterday’s post).

Categories
David Irving Holocaust Videos

Real history

‘Talking frankly’ (five videos)

Categories
Holocaust

Interviewing Weber?

What I replied to commenter Alfons yesterday about the so-called Holocaust has given me an idea: Why not ask Mark Weber of Institute of Historical Review (IHR) to give us an interview to find out why he changed his mind from denialist to accepting that perhaps 2 million were executed under the orders of Himmler’s SS?

I wrote to Weber a few years ago and got no reply. (Similarly, a while ago I wanted to purchase a copy of Savitri Devi’s edited book by William Pierce from the National Alliance [NA] and got no reply.)

I guess they don’t respond to me because, unlike David Irving, Mark Weber and the vast majority of white nationalists and even neo-Nazis, I am an exterminationist (cf. my featured post ‘The Wall’). And in general, those on my left don’t want any contact with those who, like me, have transvalued our former Judeo-Christian values to Greco-Roman values. (Remember that in the pagan times of Titus or Hadrian whites didn’t give a damn that Roman legions were genociding Jews in Jerusalem; many even liked it!)

Since I am more or less shunned on the racial right because, unlike them, my Nietzschean transvaluation is genuine, someone else has to do the job of inviting Weber for an interview (I don’t mention Irving because the historian of the Reich’s most notable personalities isn’t in the best of health).

If any of the commenters or visitors to the thread I linked above would care to do that job, I would appreciate it. It’s a discussion that, as far as I know, on serious and notable sites only happened years ago at The Occidental Observer when Greg Johnson argued there with Hadding Scott. I’m referring to an internal discussion about the Holocaust, between people who are more or less sympathetic to the Third Reich (I don’t mean, obviously, discussing the subject with Jews or white traitors).

Incidentally, the discussion between Johnson and Scott in TOO didn’t progress because they both held, in my opinion, irrational positions. Johnson said that the subject of the so-called Holocaust should be abandoned, forgotten completely (something that seems absurd to me, since the System uses the crucified Jew as a psyop to induce feelings of guilt in the Aryan man). Scott, in turn, started from a very peculiar definition of the word ‘Holocaust’, from which he claimed that the victims of the Holocaust had been ‘exactly zero’.

We need to raise the internal discussion to another level. Where are the volunteers? I don’t like to keep sending more emails after IRH or NA didn’t answer me. So it has to be other people: younger people than me who can, with English as their mother tongue, do the right interview.

Categories
David Irving Heinrich Himmler Holocaust

Himmler DVD

Today I got, and watched, David Irving’s ‘The Life and Death of Heinrich Himmler’ (English, 82 mins): a superb lecture that may serve as a prelude to the second volume on Himmler (alas, since Irving recently became ill, we can’t be sure he will finish it).

The central part of the DVD is of paramount importance, so much so that I will link to the first endnote of the featured post, ‘The Wall’, the page promoting the DVD on Irving’s site. So important are Irving’s claims about the so-called Holocaust that I don’t think I should upload any more posts this weekend, to invite visitors to purchase that DVD.

If whites, including white nationalists, are as insane as Marco and Blinken (cf. my other post today), it is because they are not exterminationists like Himmler. Too bad the Allies murdered him.