Staircase History and the Subprime Morality of the Nanking Massacre

Colin Liddell


nanjing massacre

The Great Nanjing Massacre, by Zi Jian Li, 1992

The French have a term for it, L’esprit de l’escalier, or “staircase wit.” It means bright and witty sayings thought of too late as one is exiting a party. But history has its own “staircase” element as well, namely events that receive historical attention much later than they should if, as we are supposed to believe, they were so important to begin with.

A perfect example of this is the “Nanking Massacre” of 1937, now a much-contested historical event in the Sino-Japanese War (1937—45). The Chinese claim that the Japanese went on a brutal rampage resulting in 300,000 deaths. The Japanese claim they were responding to irregular troops in civilian clothing using guerrilla tactics, with a much lower death toll.

Even though this is now presented as a pivotal historical event and something that we are all supposed to know, the surprising thing is that, like the Jewish Holocaust from the same era (which began to be used to advance Jewish ethnic interests after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and really only gained traction in the 1970s [here, p. 42ff]), it got off to a rather late start, becoming suddenly very, very important decades after it actually happened.

Not only had Clio the Muse of History descended the staircase before anything of importance had been written about this supposedly groundbreaking event, but she had climbed into her carriage, arrived home, and kicked off her shoes as well. If Nanking was so important surely it should have been broached at the first practical opportunity, say in the immediate post-war period. Of course it wasn’t, not by the Chinese nor by anyone else. As it was, the event had to wait until the publication of Iris Chang’s best seller The Rape of Nanking in 1997 to really get its historical marching boots on — a full 60 years after the event! Some staircase!

Advertisement - Time to SUBSCRIBE now!

James Dao, writing in the New York Times in 1998, called attention to the sudden spurt of interest:

As recently as five years ago, the 1937 Rape of Nanking, in which up to 300,000 Chinese were massacred in six weeks by Japanese troops, was barely a footnote in American popular culture. Since then the event has inspired two novels, a documentary film, a book of photographs, several Internet Web sites and a dozen academic conferences. Another documentary on the Rape of Nanking for the History Channel and one on the Sino-Japanese War for public television are also in production.

As remarkable as this sudden interest was, it was perhaps even more remarkable that Chang’s book became the vehicle for this, as it had serious flaws as a work of history, the main ones being its lack of credible causation for what was supposed to be a particularly violent incident by Japanese troops. Essentially Chang ascribed it to the inherently violent nature of the Japanese, something I have yet to notice in decades spent living here. More importantly for a book that was presented as a serious academic work, she did zero research in Japan, laying her work open to the charge of being extremely one-sided.

Despite this, the book was lionized, with the author getting the full “instant celebrity” treatment of newspaper profiles, talk show appearances, honorary degrees, and invitations to the Clinton White House. No doubt, the racy title in conjunction with a young Chinese female author — she was 29 at the time — played some part in stimulating interest.

This saga reveals once again that history is never just about what happened in such-and-such a place at such-and-such at time. It’s much more about what certain groups choose to focus on and why. Personally, I’m not overly interested in the minutiae of the Nanking Massacre. Trainspotterly hairsplitting about numbers of victims or whether the victims were blameworthy can get boring extremely fast. People died, how many, how, and why, take your pick. What is more interesting is why “Nanking 1937” suddenly jumped to life as “history” in the late 1990s.

To answer this, you first need to understand why it wasn’t considered historically important much nearer to the time in which it happened, in the same way that, say, Dunkirk, Stalingrad, or Hiroshima were.

There are two reasons for this. Firstly, Nanking 1937 wasn’t particularly unique or special. Secondly, it was an event that had no effect on the actual outcome of events at the time. Ironically, the only unique thing about it was how particularly ineffectual it was on outcomes. This is because the whole point of the Japanese advance on the city of Nanking was to force Chang Kai-Chek’s Nationalist government to come to terms, something that the fall of the city signally failed to do.

Beaten at Nanking, the Nationalists just moved their capital to Hankow, and when that city also fell, they moved it again. Like Napoleon in 1812, the Japanese seemed to naively think that they just had to show up at the opposition’s capital to win, possibly because that is exactly what would have forced them to surrender if the boot had been on the other foot.

Also, terrible as it was, the Nanking Massacre was just one of many incidents of a similar nature. I believe this makes it what is sometimes called, a “mere detail” of history. The Sino-Japanese War lasted 8 years and covered most of the heavily populated parts of China. It was so vast and violent, with millions dying, that there are many other examples of horrific butchery/ tragic violence besides Nanking to develop historical narratives with.

Indeed, just a few months before Nanking, the Chinese themselves committed an act demonstrably much worse than the Nanking Massacre — even if we accept the highest estimate of 300,000 deaths — when they deliberately destroyed the Huayuankou Dyke on the south bank of the Yangtze River in a ruthless attempt to halt the Japanese advance. This act of demolition unleashed flood waters across a wide area of Henan, Anhui, and Jiangsu provinces. In order to avoid Japanese counter-measures, the civilian population was not warned, so the flooding resulted in a massive death toll from drowning, estimated at 800,000, with many millions more displaced and made homeless.

In the context of the wider war, we can say that Nanking 1937 was not unique and not decisive, and furthermore that it was dwarfed by the Chinese government’s atrocities against its own people. From this, you can see there was no immediate reason for Nanking to become a significant part of history. Why then was it subsequently presented as such?

The most obvious answer to this is that it proved useful to the Chinese government and to a lesser extent Western elites. Internally Nanking serves as a useful unifying device for the Chinese state, giving the Chinese people an external hate figure — Japan — while also reminding them that they need a strong centralized government to avoid similar outrages. Externally the Chinese use it as a stick to beat Japan with, and keep them on the defensive regarding their historical pride and identity. This serves to weaken their Asian rival, although, overusing the tactic can backfire. It could be argued that this is one factor that has pushed Japan in a more assertively nationalist direction in recent years.

But why did the Chinese wait so long before resorting to this tactic? Iris Chang’s book put it down to the economic weakness and isolation of Communist China, which sought economic benefits from trading with Japan. By the 1960s “Red China” was opposed not just by the West but also by the Soviet Union, with which it had fallen out. It was only with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the success of Deng Xiaoping’s economic reforms that the country felt strong enough to use this stick to beat Japan. Interestingly, by that time, those same economic reforms were creating big inequalities within China that challenged social cohesion. China’s version of Japan bashing arrived at an opportune moment.

But what about Western elites? The benefit of the Nanking Massacre for these people is less obvious, especially as it is occasionally used to undermine Japan, a key Western ally. But maybe this is exactly what is wanted, namely a Japan that is regarded as somehow historically flawed and morally tainted, because this is a Japan that can operate less on its own terms and has an obvious need for a geopolitical intermediary. As Dutch journalist Ian Buruma, writing in the Guardian in 2010 said:

Most Japanese were happy to be pacifists and concentrate on making money. Japanese governments could devote their energy to building up the country’s industrial wealth, while the US took care of security, and by extension much of Japan’s foreign policy. It was an arrangement that suited everyone: the Japanese became rich, the Americans had a compliant anti-communist vassal state, and other Asians, even Communist China, preferred Pax Americana to a revival of Japanese military clout.

But, there could well be less obvious reasons, connected to the strangely moralizing purpose to which history is put these days. Victim narratives are an important part of the “power eco-system” in Western societies, where they are typically used to “de-privilege” the core populations of Western states through White guilt. This is done for a variety of reasons: (1) to facilitate the importation of cheap labor, (2) to create “diversity” as an end in itself, and (3) to justifying the “affirmative action” necessary to maintain social cohesion in societies characterized by very substantial racial differences and divisions. In the case of the Holocaust, Jewish activists have used it as a rationalization for Israel and its policies, to silence critics of immigration and multiculturalism, to portray the relatively wealthy and successful Jewish community as victims, and pad the coffers of Jewish organizations (here, p. lvi ff).

Western elites get benefits from victim narratives that feature Jews, Blacks, and other non-Whites as “victims” of Whites. But, what about a narrative presenting the Chinese as victims of the Japanese? Aside from the geopolitical benefits outlined above, there are two possible additional benefits. The first one emphasizes the Japanese side of the equation and the other the Chinese side.

The first possible benefit is that narratives of Japanese guilt play into the wider narrative of White guilt. Japan has often been viewed as “honorary White” nation in the past, and was described by President Theodore Roosevelt as “the only nation in Asia that understands the principles and methods of Western civilization.”

The second possible benefit is that persuading the Chinese to participate in a victim narrative helps to strengthen the institution of victimology itself. In the decades leading up to Chang’s book, victim narratives in general had already been overextended and overused to the extent that they were in danger of losing their value. The obvious analogy here is with currency notes or government bonds, which quickly depreciate if too many are issued.

By 1997, when Chang’s book came out, the global guilt industry had enjoyed its first big spurt and needed a fresh infusion of energy. Getting China to buy into its own victim narrative, not only served specific Chinese and Western elite goals, but it also helped to keep the global guilt market afloat. As with America’s overproduction of fiat currency in the Chimerica years, here too China picked up the slack.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks

74 Comments to "Staircase History and the Subprime Morality of the Nanking Massacre"

  1. Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
    June 2, 2017 - 2:35 pm | Permalink

    An interesting essay, and I wonder if the outsourcing of U.S. jobs to China, 3.2 million since 2001, and their emergence as a global superpower played a role in the promotion of the Rape of Nanking. Playing the victim card may have been seen as a way to ease resentment, victimology being the new sanctuary. Incidentally, I lived in Japan for a few years and I’ve never met a more charming and gracious people.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      June 2, 2017 - 8:24 pm | Permalink

      Valid line of questioning. No one in the KMT seems to have recalled the so-called massacre in the 300 foreign press conferences given after the taking of the city.
      https://tinyurl.com/y73nrde8

    • Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
      June 3, 2017 - 9:48 am | Permalink

      I met a Japanese girl on the street and in her poor English we had a little conversation about a sushi joint down the street. She was asking for directions, I think. She then bowed, so I bowed back (it was kind of automatic on my part, don’t know how this happened) then she bowed even lower. And I’m not yet senior citizen material. LOL!

  2. Rob Bottom's Gravatar Rob Bottom
    June 2, 2017 - 4:18 pm | Permalink

    We are also seeing increasing calls for Japan to “diversify” (using the same arguments as they did in Europe) and to accept hundreds of thousands of immigrants per year, from Jewish authors like Alanna Schubach. Is the Japan-shaming of Nanking and these calls to de-homogenize Japan part of an ethnocentric revenge tactic, aimed at a nation that had allied with Hitler’s Germany?

    Increasingly, Japan is becoming a shining monument to how peaceful, prosperous, and progressive a racially homogeneous nation can be to whites living in increasingly divisive, dangerous, and deteriorating societies. Could it be that the globalists are in a hurry to damage Japan before white European nations point to it as the model society of the 21st century?

    • Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
      June 2, 2017 - 6:04 pm | Permalink

      I think that after having destroyed the white race, the Jews plan to destroy the East Asians too. After all, they are somewhat more intelligent than we are, thus constituting a formidable competitor in their quest for world dominance. The Jews want stupid, brown slaves for their world plantation. Mixing East Asians with Blacks should accomplish that.

      • Tom Rogers's Gravatar Tom Rogers
        June 3, 2017 - 2:02 am | Permalink

        East Asian IQ superiority is a myth. This annoying, anomalously PC strain of Orientophilia (in the context of East Asian) is found among American white nationalists (usually the Judeophilic ones, like Jared Taylor) who need to deflect from, or minimise, accusations of ‘racism’.

        • Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
          June 3, 2017 - 6:08 pm | Permalink

          People like Jared Taylor may use this idea to deflect accusations of “racism”, that doesn’t mean it is not a fact. East Asians score consistently higher in IQ tests than Whites. The East Asian race probably evolved in colder circumstances than Whites, which led to the development of higher intelligence in order to survive. I have no problem in accepting this reality.

          • FranksandBeans's Gravatar FranksandBeans
            June 4, 2017 - 2:35 am | Permalink

            Franklin, you may have no problem accepting this reality, but think why are most Asian countries hell holes and why do they think they have to come to the west if they are more capable of using their intelligence to make a better country for themselves? Why do they need to copy western technology and not come up with their own technology? Why do they come and study at prestigious western universities? I went to grad school in the US and there was rampant copying and cheating by Asians. They may study harder than whites since they are under no pressure to be non racist and hobknob with negroes and other lower races, but they are also considered as minorities and to preserve their culture by the SJWs. They even join these SJWs against so called ‘white racism.’ Even when they Japanese were howling about their internment in WW-2 in the 1980s, the Jews were the ones that supported that they get compensation. So use your head and think instead of going with what other judeophilic people tell us about Asians. Like I said, somethings are true, but think about why it is so. That is called thinking out of the box.

          • June 4, 2017 - 4:40 am | Permalink

            IQ aside, a highly significant difference between Europe and eastern Asia is simple geography: Europe is split up with mountain ranges, snow barriers, sea barriers; whereas vast areas in the east are steppes, and homogeneous areas divided only by rivers. MAYBE therefore Europeans evolved with more security, and less need for defence plus more possibilities of experimentation. Whereas China needed something like Confucianism to reduce internal battles and conflicts. IQ isn’t everything – and it’s Jewish policy to direct psychology research only into channels which don’t mention the Jews.

          • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
            June 11, 2017 - 6:03 am | Permalink

            These East Asian IQ tests relate to the Pacific fringes, not so much to the peasant interior heartlands of the Mongolids. In any event who wants a global Pax Sinica any more than a Pax Judaica. The western peoples must pull their genetic socks up PDQ.

      • Ben Balmer's Gravatar Ben Balmer
        June 3, 2017 - 6:08 am | Permalink

        I’ve heard it said that the Jews like the Chinese. They certainly love Chinese food — it’s a cliché of Jewish humor. Unlike Europeans, the Chinese have no religious bone to pick with the Jews (unless China goes Christian, which might have happened had Chiang Kai-Shek prevailed over the US Fifth Column.) I doubt they have any urgent need to subdue China, which would not be an easy task. I wonder if Chinese are on average more intelligent. The ones who come here may be but they are probably above average. Methodologically it seems that it would be a nightmare to design a neutral test.

        • Mark Aaron's Gravatar Mark Aaron
          June 7, 2017 - 9:12 pm | Permalink

          The Mongols and Manchurians conquered China and ironically were Sinicized at the end. I can see that 1% of 1.5 billion Chinese become Jewish and thus the Jewish population can double to 30 million. I also believe that about 150 million Americans have Jewish values as well.

      • m's Gravatar m
        June 3, 2017 - 8:59 am | Permalink

        @ FR: Jews are natural antagonists to East Asians. Why? Because they are a lot alike in some ways, but very far apart in other ways. My guess is that we will see increasing antagonisms between the Anglo-American-Jewish empire and China, because of it.

        It may be constructive (and kind of fun) to make comparisons. Inasmuch as Japanese are artificially under the American thumb, I’ll use Chinese for the East Asian component.

        Jews successfully play the guilt card over the “Big H.” As the article points out, Chinese have their “Big N.” And in the scheme of Jewish propaganda versus real Chinese history, the death of 6 million (!) can’t trump 60 million or more. Advantage Chinese.

        For whatever reason, Jews are able to get white folk to do their bidding very easily. Chinese can’t. Advantage Jew.

        Jews have been able to infiltrate and subvert Christianity pretty well. How are they going to infiltrate the Three Ways (Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoist folk religion)? Advantage Chinese.

        Jews look like Semites who can pass for white. Chinese look like Chinese. Advantage: Jew.

        Both Jews and Chinese are clever in a linguistic-literary fashion. Jews have their legalistic Talmudic analysis; Chinese have their poetic symbolism. Score: Even.

        Chinese are natural merchants, as are Jews. Score: Even.

        Chinese are family and clan oriented, and quite adaptable within other cultures, living as they do either in self imposed ghettos, or upper middle class neighborhoods. Jews are also clannish, and for their part had Pale of Settlements. And New York City. Chinese have the left coast, and a few big cities in Canada. Score: Even.

        In general, Chinese have not attempted to subvert their host countries in political, legal, and social ways (although this may be changing in some areas). Advantage Jews (from the standpoint of subversion), who have this down to an art .

        Chinese have demonstrated an ability to create and sustain high culture. Jews have not, being as they are parasitical and necessarily existing within a host country. Advantage Chinese.

        Jews are international revolutionists, and always ally with their host’s indigenous underclass in order to to subvert the majority for their (Jews) own benefit. Chinese have traditionally been rather closed off, and hardly identify with other minorities. From a subversive standpoint the advantage goes to Jews. From the advantage of coexistence, Chinese are up.

        Both Jews and Chinese are racialists. However, generally, Chinese are not happy with negroes, and look down upon Chinese-African miscegenation. While Asian youth may say differently, generally speaking Chinese don’t believe in Jewish inspired equality propaganda. Jews are not happy with blacks, and have built themselves a wall, but encourage negro-white miscegenation. Advantage Chinese (because they are less hypocritical about it).

        When Jews go to Africa (via their proxies in the West) it is ostensibly to “cure Aids,” “save the elephants,” “end apartheid,” or find the next African Einstein.” Chinese don’t care about any of that, and are happy to let Africans be African, all the time exploiting the Dark Continent’s resources (and maybe even buying rhino tusks from poachers in order to make mystic powder). Advantage Chinese.

        Jews control Western (non-Internet) media. Chinese control both their internal media and Internet. It would be highly unlikely that Jewish sourced pornographic (and quasi-pornographic) shows would ever be tolerated by Chinese. The idea of a “magic negro” supersonic scientist seducing Fan Bingbing while simultaneously saving the planet from evil white guys is not something Chinese would ever understand. Advantage: Chinese.

        To sum up, I doubt Jews will ever infiltrate China like they have the West. The cultural gap is too wide. If whites had a Chinese outlook in this regard, Jews would never have gained their hold in the West.

        • Franklin Ryckaert's Gravatar Franklin Ryckaert
          June 3, 2017 - 5:56 pm | Permalink

          The Jews are already busy infiltrating China. To create Chinese-looking Jews, American Jews are adopting Chinese girls. These girls are then groomed as Jews. The plan is to send them to China and marry Chinese men. Their children will be “Jews” though racially 100% Chinese. See : Jews prepare to infiltrate ‘rising superpower’ China – Stormfront – July 15, 2006.

          For Jewish infiltration of China via Israel, see : Jewish-Israeli infiltration strategies versus China – Radio Islam, April 3, 2014
          https://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/jewishp/china/jewisraeli-china-strategies.htm

          • m's Gravatar m
            June 4, 2017 - 3:33 am | Permalink

            @FR: That is risible. Some Jews in China, and even a little intermarraige does not equal infiltration. It’s like saying that the Guangzhou “Chocolate City” means that blacks are taking over southern China. Once you better understand the Chinese mindset, their patriarchy, their religious influences, the language, their customs, along with their thousands year history, you’ll better understand. Big difference between the European Jewish situation and China.

            With Jews around, always keep one eye open. But don’t let the resulting myopia push you over the cliff. Suggestion: keep your eye on property and media ownership in China. See who owns what. Keep your eye on on the boys from Beidaihe–who attends meetings and their decisions. That will tell you all you need to know.

        • FranksandBeans's Gravatar FranksandBeans
          June 4, 2017 - 2:40 am | Permalink

          m, I like your analysis and I agree, but jews are infiltrating china. Look at Mark Zuckerberg. He married a Chinese woman and I bet they will try and look Chinese to infiltrate China just like they did with white Europeans. If they do anything wrong it is the whites that are blamed. They see the same advantage in Asia by looking like them. A good example is that the Jews conducted the slave trade, but whites are blamed. Your guess is as good as mine.

          • m's Gravatar m
            June 4, 2017 - 9:35 am | Permalink

            As I said, I don’t discount the drive for Jewish influence in China. I just don’t think that Westerners or Jews will make great inroads. But your guess is as good as mine. Anent Zuckerberg, he’s going to have an awful time of it competing with WeChat.

          • Poupon Marx's Gravatar Poupon Marx
            June 4, 2017 - 10:34 am | Permalink

            (Mod. Note: “Poupon”, you wrote, regarding “the Chinese”, “Their attention/memory span is longer than 2 weeks, the average for White Caucasians.” Aside from being not true in many ways, your comment above is patently anti-White, and out of step with the mission statement of TOO. You and “m” aren’t the only people who can claim to have “deep” knowledge of China and Chinese Culture. What the body of your now-deleted comment displayed was more than a bit superficial; it was also derogatory and inflammatory. Do a better job of trolling next time.)

      • Lou's Gravatar Lou
        June 6, 2017 - 10:14 pm | Permalink

        they are somewhat more intelligent than we are, –I disagree. You have been spoon fed this. Dont force it on me.

    • Ben Balmer's Gravatar Ben Balmer
      June 3, 2017 - 5:59 am | Permalink

      I agree with your points and would add that just as Japan is seen as more ‘white’ than China, China is still nominally Communist and has huge paintings of Chairman Mao everywhere, which gives it a leg up with liberals. I was taken aback when the Olympic Games broadcast made no mention of the enormous likeness of Mao over the entrance to the Olympic stadium (which reminded me a big of old cartoon ads for Rockaways Playland from my youth, where the tongue of a giant clown-face formed the entrance ramp to the amusement park.) The media and Wall Street would rather we forget who Mao was and the totalitarian policies that continue to characterize the China of today. btw Mao had a Soviet Jewish tutor at his side for most of the duration of his revolutionary struggle.

      • m's Gravatar m
        June 4, 2017 - 3:57 am | Permalink

        Mao had a Soviet Jewish tutor at his side for most of the duration of his revolutionary struggle.

        Here’s the thing: prior to 1949 almost anyone who was anyone in the USSR was Jewish. Remember: the Soviets didn’t trust Mao, and the feeling was mutual. Were Russian “advisors” really advising, or where they Moscow spies? By the mid ’50s Chinese relations with the Soviet Union soured considerably, leading to border attacks. When Lin Biao fled China after his coup attempt, where was he flying? During that time you saw official Chinese posters with captions: “Fully criticize the Chinese Khrushchev (i.e. Liu Shaoqi) from a political, ideological and theoretical perspective…”

        What some people still hold to is a univocal idea of Communism. This is an artifact from the Cold War–residuals of old time American-Anglo-Jewish propaganda. Asian Communists (Chinese and Vietnamese) understood how ridiculous that concept was, and now Chinese regime ideology is officially known as Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. In most ways it is much closer to European fascism than Jewish Bolshevism.

        Look. I’m not saying that Jews wouldn’t want to get their hands on China, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. Just my guess.

        • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
          June 4, 2017 - 9:26 am | Permalink

          Does China have a jew run central bank?

    • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
      June 5, 2017 - 4:09 am | Permalink

      Rob Bottom makes a good point. The left must simply hate Japan for being successful, peaceful and nationalist and for not trying to make themselves multiracial.

      So the left try to demonise them. They could have used to the way the Japanese treated Allied POWs. My art teacher at school survived the camp earlier in his life by drawing portraits of the guards in exchange for eggs. The potential for demonising the Japanese by the way they treated prisoners is immense and well-documented – and in fact deserved, in respect of their cruelty in war.

      But the left cannot take this particular opportunity, even if they do want to demonise the Japanese (which they do). And the reason the left cannot dwell on cruelty to Allied POWs is that this would also create sympathy for the whites and show them as more civilised – by the way whites treat their own prisoners of war. It would show the West as victims, even, which is the last thing the left want to do. So the left cannot go down this obvious route of Japanese cruelty to the Allies in the war, and instead need another way to undermine our alliance with Japan and demonise the Japanese, a way that does not portraying the whites/West in a positive way.

      Basically, the left hate the West for being civilised, they hate Japan for being civilised and for being a Western ally, they hate Israel for being civilised, and they seek to demonise all these nations. At the same time they see China as hostile to the West, so therefore they want to re-brand them as ‘goodies’, as all nations and religions hostile to the West are supported by the left and need to be portrayed as the good guys. This is why the eco-fanatical left never berate China for opening coal power stations. They overlook all their faults. Portraying China as victim and Japan as villain is an attempt to draw the West away from western-friendly Japan and closer to a hostile communist country, one whose faults the left overlook.

      Although the left hate Israel as well as the West and Japan, the Jews are too tribal to notice that the West are their friends, and stupidly see them as just another rival and this causes a hostility to the West despite the West helping them, including trying to bring the West down by immigration. They are too tribal to be able to see where their own interests lie – ie in a strong nationalist and civilised West – and this bad gene in their makeup causing tribal hostility is in the long term against their own interests. Kevin MacDonald has referred to the way these characteristics such as tribalism have a genetic base, and this causes tribalism in Jews to be stronger than tribalism in the West. The Jews don’t think ‘maybe this tribalism is bad for us and we should use logic and reason and then be friendly to the West.’ Rather, they are controlled by their genes and this makes them tribal even when it is against their interests. Just as a pitbul cannot help itself attacking other dogs excessively and for no benefit. It is controlled by its wiring.

  3. m's Gravatar m
    June 2, 2017 - 5:14 pm | Permalink

    The Nanking event, however it is taken, is just one aspect of a Sino-Japanese rift, and cannot be discussed in isolation from the totality of late 19th through mid 20th century hostilities between the two nations (hostilities culminating in the defeat of Japan in the Second World War). During the Great Leap Forward and CR years, Japanese were not the focus of the CCP inasmuch as there was not much of a threat from them, anymore. Instead, Mao worried about the Soviets, plus his internal “enemies” represented by patriots Lin Biao, Liu Shaoqi, and, to a lesser degree, Deng Xiaoping. Once Mao died and the Jiang Qing clique was arrested, a sense of social normalcy arose internally, meaning that, externally, Japan became of more political interest.

    Nowadays (to use Carl Schmitt’s terminology), Japan has become China’s existential enemy, one defining the regimes politics to a large degree. No longer is it the KMT or even the US (the latter is a special case discussed below). You can see its effects on Chinese television, and movies (the most famous in the West likely being the Christian Bale movie, Flowers of War–which in Chinese is more or less translated as The 13 Beauties of Jinling, or Nanjing, also an oblique reference to the Chinese Classical novel The Red Chamber Dream).

    Japanese were subservient cousins to Chinese for much of their history, at least up until the Japanese invasion. Could the West be to blame? Actually, the Versailles Treaty soured radical Chinese intellectuals (both on the left, the May Fourth cadres, and the right, the Sino-fascistic KMT inspired New Life Movement) against the West, inasmuch as Western powers allowed Japan a certain territorial hegemony over China. So you can tell how the thread goes back a ways.

    Today Japan is also seen by China as a proxy for American interests, and thus the regime has no interest in downplaying their propaganda. As Spengler noted in Vol 2 of his book, in a real sense the Japanese are not indigenous at all, so they are treated by Chinese as errant scions. However that is, if the Japanese would issue a formal apology, the CCP would let it go, probably. It all works to the American Empire’s benefit, actually. Because if cousins and brothers across a small strip of water ever became united there would be little upside to America’s game in the Pacific.

  4. Peter's Gravatar Peter
    June 2, 2017 - 5:40 pm | Permalink

    She lived in my area. I remember when her book came out. I don’t know if this is relevant, but she committed suicide at the age of 36. Sylvia Plath, the American Pulitzer Prize winning poet (first to receive it posthumously) also committed suicide (placing her head in the oven with the gas on) after writing poetry about Germans making soap and lampshades from Jews. Her parents were German and Swiss. I mention this because I wonder if there was a connection to what they wrote about.

    “it was perhaps even more remarkable that Chang’s book became the vehicle for this, as it had serious flaws as a work of history…..More importantly for a book that was presented as a serious academic work, she did zero research in Japan, laying her work open to the charge of being extremely one-sided.” Does she understand Japanese? Did she interview any Japanese involved? Did she do any research in China? I don’t know how her book can be taken seriously if she worked from the US? Unfortunately, one should say the same thing about Raul Hilberg, but very few people do. Wikipedia and others say he is “considered to be the world’s preeminent scholar of the Holocaust”, despite having spent a day or two at Auschwitz and otherwise doing all of his years of “research” in the USA. When more serious research was done by historians, engineers and scientists, who visited Auschwitz (Robert Faurisson, Fred Leuchter, Germar Rudolf and others), discovered and published the original blueprints of Auschwitz, inspected the supposed gas chambers and ovens and did chemical analysis on the walls, all of which, at the very least cast great doubt on the Auschwitz story and perhaps forced the authorities to drop the claimed death toll by 3 million in the early 1990’s, this only earned the researchers hatred. Merely doubting the story earned them hatred and now its against the law in many European countries.

    This thorough research didn’t make these people famous or earn them any awards. Instead, they became despised for what they found. Some were physically beaten up and others were arrested and put in jail. The same thing happened to the historian David Irving, the only historian that interviewed all the surviving “NAZIS” or their wives and “ransacked” the world’s archives to get to the truth, as one book reviewer said. He is hated for this too. Meanwhile, none of the other historians, including the Germans would have been caught dead interviewing a “NAZI”. And that is why their work is often worthless and Irving’s are priceless.

    • Ben Balmer's Gravatar Ben Balmer
      June 3, 2017 - 6:13 am | Permalink

      Irving is now visiting the US according to his website.

    • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
      June 3, 2017 - 9:53 am | Permalink

      Faurisson’s work began in the late 60s or early 70s, while Leuchter did his work for the 2nd Zundel trial in the late 80s, before the collapse of the USSR. Rudolf did his work after the number had been lowered. That aside, if memory serves me correctly, it was the pesky David Irving, “ransacking” through the opened Soviet archives, that finding the actual Auschwitz – Birkenau camp records that caused the rapid decline in the numbers.

      • Floda's Gravatar Floda
        June 3, 2017 - 9:59 pm | Permalink

        Yes, they were the ‘Sterbebucher’ (Death Books) punctilious German records of each person who died in the Auschwitz KZ Lager. Name, Age, Cause of Death, Occupation, place of Birth, religion, Names of offspring etc, all written by hand in the old Gothic German. From memory, the numbers were around 70,000. Admittedly, the records started in 1941 stopped in December 1944. Make it 4 years and it averages at 17,500 Pa. or nearly 1,500 each month. In late January 1945 the Red Army ‘liberated’ the Camp.

        If the Death records are accurate, then to believe even the revised figure of one and a half million Jews murdered at Auschwitz during the Holocaust, you have to also believe the industrious Germans managed to dispatch 1,430,000 in the last 13 months. That’s a quick 110,000 a month or roughly 3,700 EVERY DAY!

        That is why Jews have seen to it anyone questioning their holocaust swindle is prosecuted by up to 5 years in Prison. If the mythical Gas Chamber broke down for a day, the Nazi schweinhunds would have to bump off 7,400 the next day. Kind of unbelievable, huh?

        In late December 1945 my mother, then aged 24 and six months pregnant with yours truly, was in a small group of Women fleeing West just in front of the advancing army. Late one afternoon they came across the Auschwitz complex. It was freezing cold and snowing, two Nuns among the group approached a Guard and were led inside. Minutes later one of the Nuns came out and beckoned the group to come in where they sheltered and ate for several days.

        I discovered this in 1996 after the younger members of our family asked me to make a record of their Granny’s war-time experiences. She was then age 76 and mentally sharp as a tack, she lived for nearly another 20 years. She was a Ukrainian schoolteacher fluent in Slavic languages and fair German. When the German Army arrived in Eastern Ukraine she went to work for them as an interpreter. Her family had been victims of the collectivization of their huge farm land, so she was very much on side with the Germans.

        Of course I knew much of her ‘trek’ with my father and what remained of a small group of German soldiers from the Poltava region all the way to Upper Silesia. But until my ‘interview’ with her that day in 1996 I never gave the holocaust a second thought.

        Her memory of that time was good, she said the SS Guards were all polite but OLD men who had served in the First World War, they were old gentlemen, very polite and delighted to have the half a dozen or so NUNS as company so close to Christmas. She remembered sleeping on a blanket on a wooden floor near a bakery, she could smell the bread being baked. She remembered having pea and ham soup, she exchanged a Vienna loaf with an inmate for a fine pair of leather boots.

        When I asked her about the thoughts of the SS Guards and Germany’s defeat she said all the Guards believed there would be an armistice, like in WW1, that floored me. She also said the Guards were very firm in that they could not stay there and warned them about sleeping in Barns near Farm animals where Rats with Lice carried typhus.

        Needless to say she did not see, or hear about any gas chambers. She was with a group of about 25 educated Women and none had any suspicions after three or four days.

        I was born in march of 1945 in Koningshutte, after the war this town was called Chorchov, it is about 10 miles northwest of Auschwitz. My interview with her was around the time the www became serious and I took an interest in the Holocaust which Mr Butz described as the greatest hoax of the 20th Century.

        • Seraphim's Gravatar Seraphim
          June 4, 2017 - 9:26 pm | Permalink

          Thank you.
          I have met in Romania some ‘survivors’ (Hungarian Jews, no Romanian Jew made it to Auschwitz). They were completely ignorant of the ‘gas chambers’.

        • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
          June 6, 2017 - 3:56 am | Permalink

          Very interesting by Floda. Speilberg will not be interviewing you for his research for one of his films.
          Just to clarify – the 6 million was corrected officially to 3 million, yet on the radio and TV and all MSM they keep using the figure 6 million.
          So the official reduction in the figure from 6 to 3 has been accepted then completely ignored? Is this the case? I cannot understand how they can on the one hand accept the correction, and on the other hand still use the wrong figure.
          Is this the case:
          You can go to prison for saying it is less than 1 million as the official figure is 3
          but
          No consequences if you say it is 6 not 3?

        • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
          June 9, 2017 - 6:14 am | Permalink

          @ Floda

          There has also been a substantial downward revision of the presumed death-toll (Dallin, Conquest, Yakovlev) in Soviet concentration camps on the basis of released KGB archives. This is open to public debate, and quite rightly so.

          You can also get books arguing for the Flat Earth and UFO abductions from Amazon.

          No further comment now needed.

    • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
      June 5, 2017 - 5:42 am | Permalink

      “at the very least cast great doubt on the Auschwitz story and perhaps forced the authorities to drop the claimed death toll by 3 million in the early 1990’s,”
      Without wishing to divert the discussion into the details, as this is an area that causes trouble (another is criticising Islam – eg Tommy Robinson’s Twitter is currently suspended for saying we should expel extremists), without going into details, the summary is that the original figure was reduced by 3 million. The first point to make is that in the MSM the figure is still 6 million for some reason. I suppose it would be bad PR to start saying ‘3’ instead of ‘6’. It shows how the actual facts are irrelevant.

      Secondly, the accepted narrative is now as follows:
      1) In WWII all sides told lies – massive lies, but this is okay as it is what you do in war. Eg the Allies saying the Germans sank a passenger ship carrying only passengers, when in fact it was full of munitions and the passengers were therefore human shields put there by the Allies to protect the military cargo. This is an example of a lie that was okay and excused. Even portraying Stalin as Uncle Joe was okay, and not honouring Polish airmen in the victory parade after the war (a war to help Poland supposedly) lest it offended him was okay. This should tell us who really won. All these double standards and lies are okay – it was war after all. Declaring a great success and victory after the war for the Allies was a lie – handing vast territories over to the Soviet Union and not ‘rescuing Poland from invasion’ after all as was the declared aim of the War.
      So to summarise – all these accepted and known lies and double standards were okay as total lying was okay in the name of the War Effort.
      So we all agree – the war was full of massive lies. Hang on – there was one narrative told that was all truthful and that was not part of the lying. This narrative was the Holocaust and the ‘6 million’ Everything else was packed with admitted lies (called propaganda) but this one narrative was the total truth and you go to prison for saying otherwise. In this one respect the Allies were full of truth – in everything else total lying occurred.
      Hang on – one correction – 3 million not 6 – but apart from that everything in this narrative was total truth. Now a new line is drawn, representing new total truth, as the old line had the ‘error’.

  5. Dissident Voice's Gravatar Dissident Voice
    June 2, 2017 - 6:17 pm | Permalink

    In 300 foreign press conferences given in the course of the year that followed the KMT’s taking of the city, no mention was made of any massacre by its International Information Department. I guess they forgot.
    https://tinyurl.com/y73nrde8

  6. Gilbert Huntly's Gravatar Gilbert Huntly
    June 2, 2017 - 8:11 pm | Permalink

    Published history is mostly written in support of a particular cause. The messenger tailors the message.

    • Poupon Marx's Gravatar Poupon Marx
      June 4, 2017 - 10:45 am | Permalink

      That’s why “professional historians” rate Hussein Barry Barack Soetoro Obama No Mama “the 12th greatest American President”, AND a group of 400 academic and practicing psychiatrists and psychologists pronounced Donald Trump mentally ill and deranged, AND 400 law professors gave the opinion that the election of George Pooch, I mean Boosh, was illegal and that Al Gored was the legitimate elected Prez, AND that recounting the ballots and interpreting them creatively should be carried on until the desire result. That would be the Constitutionally Sound Thing To Do.

  7. Les's Gravatar Les
    June 2, 2017 - 11:21 pm | Permalink

    There is a discussion of this subject at the CODOH WW2 forum –
    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=11129

  8. buckle's Gravatar buckle
    June 2, 2017 - 11:34 pm | Permalink

    A minor point to add is that Germany and Japan were allies during WWII. It’s always useful to emphasize guilt by association. Japan’s ability to resist immigration is one for the experts. Who does the dirty jobs in that country?

  9. Ger Tzedek's Gravatar Ger Tzedek
    June 3, 2017 - 7:35 am | Permalink

    Now I think that Jews were God’s pestilence for Russians and Germans, to avenge the partition of Poland.

  10. June 3, 2017 - 7:42 am | Permalink

    Victor Gollancz published (and may have written) on the ‘Rape of Nanking’ and of course it was part of the Jewish promotion of war. I’d advise people to be entirely sceptical of the event, as with the holo****. (There are some online sources on faked photos etc).
    .
    May I just make another point: we are inclined to think of China as Jew-free, but in fact there have been colonies of Jews for centuries. [E.g. cf my big-lies.org/jews/ chronology]. Just as Japan was funded by the Rothschilds to arms and attack Russia in 1902, no doubt China was funded in secret by Jews, who could arrange attacks on them and leave them little obvious alternative to arming.

    • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
      June 11, 2017 - 5:57 am | Permalink

      Gollancz also wrote and published “In Darkest Germany” which drew attention to the postwar starvation and maltreatment of Germans under the Occupation, and later Hannah Arendt’s critique of the Eichmann Trial in Israel. During the Russo-German Pact he had been one of the few people to note that the CPGB was discreetly working for “revolutionary defeatism” in Britain. But of course there will always be those who just see him as yet another cunning old “Jewboy” employed by the Elders of Zion, etc.

  11. JRM's Gravatar JRM
    June 3, 2017 - 8:13 am | Permalink

    This kind of “history in hindsight, and with a goal” is the dominant mode of “doing” history now. If you look into current academic historical publishing, you can see that a great deal of what passes for history is written from a “silenced voices” mode, reframing homosexual, female, and “minority” and “colonized natives” as heroes in a centuries-long war with mostly White male oppressors.

    The Nanking incident is valuable for reframing, even with its dearth of evil White men. For one thing, it tends towards a critique of Nationalism, as the Japanese Empire was exceptionally nationalistic, religiously so.

    In addition, as a growing awareness seems to seeping in that the World isn’t necessarily a better place for the vanquishing of NS Germany (of which the unquestioned good was the foundational argument for war in the latter half of the 20th c.), and as many Whites observe their declining cultures which operate on the reverse of the principles of NS Germany, this Nanking story reinvests WWII with renewed moral justification. Just as destroying the Germans was “crucial”, so, in retrospect, was destroying Imperial Japan. It is a bit of moral preening that a weary West can indulge in for reassurance that they were, and are, just.

    There is probably even some salve in here for the West’s wars in the Middle East, as one of the morals seems to be that it is only after some decades have passed that we can clearly see existential morality plays like Nanking and the Holocaust for the clear struggle of good versus evil that we are told they were.

  12. June 3, 2017 - 11:54 am | Permalink

    The dichotomy presented by this article is the way the Japanese and Germans were treated by post war historians. This dichotomy has always seemed remarkable to me. At the end of WWII the Japanese had exceeded the Germans by far in accounts of horrific atrocities, like the now forgotten Bataan Death March.

    While Troops in the European theater would call a time out in the battle, so the respective forces could pick up their dead and wounded, the Japanese never followed any such agreement, unwritten or otherwise. Allied corpsmen transferred to the South Pacific after VE day were told to paint out the red cross emblem on their helmet as this made them a prime target for Japanese snipers who understood the tactical value in tying up their enemy’s military manpower to rescue their injured and dead.

    After the war, while hatred for Germans steadily increased, the hatred for the Japanese rapidly abated. However, I met a man in the 1980s who still maintained an intense hatred for the Japanese. He refused to buy any Japanese products, especially vehicles. His hatred stemmed from the fact that he survived a torpedo attack against his ship, only to witness the Japanese machine gun his fellow sailors. One did not have to go far in conversation with this gentleman to realize he was not making up the story.

    By contrast, standard Hollywood warfare portrayed the evil U-boat commander who surfaces his U-boot to machine gun survivors. To watch Hollywood war movies, one would have thought machine-gunning helpless survivors was SOP straight from the manual on Nadzee evil. In truth this did in fact occur – once. To German credit, the U-boat commander was tried and executed for his crime. This is much like the concentration camp commandant that was tried for summarily executing three prisoners. He too was tired in a court of law and executed for his crime. What’s surprising is that these evil Nadzees were never inducted into the Yad Vashem’s hall of murderous atrocities admired by Jews.

    There are many examples of German mercy for their enemies. While the incident of U-boat commander’s machine-gunning survivors was made a sneering, demonic, Hollywood staple, this incident was totally overlooked. Note the inversion of the war criminals in this story.

    Here are a few more examples of German mercy for their enemy.

    First is this story about, a Luftwaffe pilot who risked his life to rescue British airman. It is interesting the story is couched in a long disputed question about Luftwaffe colors.

    Here is another story that has now quietly made the rounds among aviation aficionados. Note the following: “He was told not to repeat this to the rest of the unit so as not to build any positive sentiment about enemy pilots. Brown commented, “Someone decided you can’t be human and be flying in a German cockpit.” And to insure one does not overlook the standard demonic Nazi theme, this inclusion is made in the story Stigler said nothing of the incident to his commanding officers, knowing that a German pilot who spared the enemy while in combat risked execution. I have serious doubts about this claim. I would like to see the order stating this to be the case, like the order issued after the Laconia incident forbidding U-boat commanders to pick up survivors.

    On the other front, Japanese soldiers were infused with the concept of Bushidō. By the beginning of the twentieth century, the peaceful Buddhist philosophy had made major inroads in Japan. As Buddhism was insufficiently warlike, a code based on a take-no-prisoners, samurai, mentality was resurrected to supplant the more peaceful Buddhist philosophy. Bushidō gave no quarter to an enemy, especially to those that did not fight to the death. Capture represented a loss of honor so great that an adherent to the code was honor bound to commit ritual suicide rather than be taken prisoner. Thus, there should be no surprise there were so many stories of Japanese atrocities meted out against POW’s.

    “Essentially Chang ascribed it to the inherently violent nature of the Japanese, something I have yet to notice in decades spent living here.”

    Really? It might be instructive were the author to take a look at the Japanese film industry and take a count of the number of Samurai movies that have been made since the war.

    I am fond of Japanese culture. The Japanese have a culture yet imbued with courtesy and honor long lost to westerners. They are also truly great story tellers, as a result I have watched many, many obscure Japanese films (check out Ugetsu Monogatari and Ikiru for real film treats). Even so, after a while one gets the distinct impression if there isn’t a slashing samurai sword somewhere in the movie, it isn’t Japanese.

    Even Hollywood dirtbags like Quintin Tarantino have made hay off the samurai phenomenon. I was about to turn off the Tarantino horror show titled Kill Bill until Lucy Lu walked across the screen in a traditional Japanese kimono. That was it for me, I wound up watching the rest of the movie.

    Of late, I have noted an increase in attempts to exonerate the Japanese for documented wartime atrocities, yet Germans receive no similar treatment. If you have nine hours, here is an excellent movie series making that attempt.

    Thus, while hoary, discredited eyewitless accounts of human-skin lampshades and Jewish soap continue unabated, alongside stories of German atrocities committed by low level SS medical officers, documented evidence for the infamously forgotten “Unit 731” is flushed down the Jew’s memory toilet.

    The primary difference in these stories is that German medical personnel never confessed to any complicity in these alleged medical “crimes.” Of course Jews never gave them any opportunity to do so. Yet, members of Unit 731 openly confessed to the terrible medical/biological experiments the Japanese conducted largely upon Chinese prisoners.

    There is one great tragedy in all this; with the ascension of the cowardly, avaricious, lying, Jew culture, codes of honor and chivalry have died among white culture. While whitemen have long fought honorably in face-to-face, bloody mortal combat, Jews smile in their face, and with drippingly sweet lies, have convinced the white man to purchase the knife Jews now drive into the whiteman’s back as they shake hands on the deal.

    Were a code similar to Bushidō adopted by white western culture, it might stand a chance of survival. In any case such a code for the white race would undoubtedly provide Jews their worst nightmare.

    Ok, I’ll give the Japanese a pass on wartime atrocities. Now how about the Jews doing the same for German wartime atrocities that only occurred in the diseased mind of Jewish propagandist?

    • June 3, 2017 - 12:06 pm | Permalink

      (Mod. Note: “Arch Stanton”, I apprised the TOO tech person of you having editing problems. He replied that it’s working fine for him, but some users who have problems, “…his devices need to be up-to-date on every internet related software and be happy with AJAX code.” Check your stuff?)

      • June 3, 2017 - 3:45 pm | Permalink

        No offence, but you sound a bit naive about propaganda about Japan. Everyone reading this site must surely know that there’s almost literally no item of Jew-promoted information that can be assumed true. The exceptions occur when there’s non-Jewish info on a large scale.
        .
        Let me add one point: it’s now known that pretty much all Japanese towns were fire-bombed, and that they were inflammable: large numbers of Japanese soldiers must have had families burnt to death. Watching Jewish cinema of the Bridge-on-the-River-Kwai type, with its strutting Brits refusing to try talking Japanese, or John Wayne machine-gunning in Pacific Islands, gives me the impression that many atrocity stories were untrue, and that the true ones were natural enough reactions by normal Japanese.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      June 3, 2017 - 9:45 pm | Permalink

      A family member of mine married a survivor of the Burma slave- railway. Up till his death, he never spoke ill of the Japanese, despite being one of the few POWs in his unit to survive the wanton cruelty and neglect. In fact, he never spoke about them at all. Needless to say, he never ate rice again. Everyone was strictly warned against offering any to him or asking why the distaste.

      • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
        June 10, 2017 - 4:42 pm | Permalink

        @ Trenchant
        There have been a number of Burma War veterans and PoWs in Japanese camps in my locality, and I have spoken to Asians also with unhappy experiences under the Japanese in WW2; but on the other hand, I knew an interrogator of an alleged war criminal who was a Christian not Shintoist, with a different story.

        Personally I have a great respect for Japanese civilization and its sense of beauty. This island nation sets an example to my island nation on the other side of the world when it comes to valuing ancestral heritage and opposing alien migration.

        As my old working-class Tory aunt used today, “There’s good and bad in all races, but we prefer our own.” [Unnecessary derogatory comment deleted.]

    • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
      June 5, 2017 - 6:10 am | Permalink

      Arch Stanton. Just to say what an excellent post this is and I also appreciate the link at the part where you say: ” this incident was totally overlooked. Note the inversion of the war criminals in this story.” This is an example of a part of history that will never be made into a film. Not in Germany even, and this shows that after the War the Germans joined in the demonisation of the Germans. This happened due to the left in Germany taking control of the narrative.

    • June 5, 2017 - 9:58 pm | Permalink

      “There are many examples of German mercy for their enemies …” The examples do not include Hans Scholl, Sophie Scholl, Alexander Schmorell, Christoph Probst, Willi Graf, Helmut Hubener …

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      June 6, 2017 - 10:16 am | Permalink

      I am indebted to Arch Stanton for referring to the Laconia incident, which was frequently spoken of by a close Dutch friend of mine, now deceased, who was a teenager during the German occupation of the Netherlands. Earlier generations, extending back centuries, of my friend’s family had had connections with naval and commercial seagoing matters, and he himself often spoke of the high sense of honor and duty among mariners. The Laconia incident represented to him an instance of Anglo-American degeneracy that should have shocked the Christian conscience of the Allies. I recall saying to him in reply that whatever might be said of Hitler and those in his service, there was nothing recognizably Christian to be found in the wartime conduct or objectives of Roosevelt or Churchill.

      This online article reinforces the evidence provided by Mr. Stanton’s link by quoting the Nuremberg judges’ shameless seconding of the prosecution’s shift of blame to the German U-boat commander and the court’s morally repellent condemnation of Admiral Dönitz despite the sworn testimony on his behalf from Chester Nimitz and despite the documentary evidence that the Allies’ own policies from Day 1 far more profoundly contravened international law, particularly the law of the sea.

      • Rosa's Gravatar Rosa
        June 11, 2017 - 1:17 pm | Permalink

        Pierre,
        you certainly know the Latin dictum “Vae victis”. It perfectly summarises all what happened to Germans, Japaneses, Italians. To their lives, properties, history and above all soul.
        It’s not a coincidence that Germans and Japaneses do not reproduce, and now Italians too.

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          June 12, 2017 - 8:58 am | Permalink

          Just so, Rosa. And what our (((masters))) seek is that “vae victis” will soon be intoned for the entirety of the West.

  13. Yorikage Kuroki's Gravatar Yorikage Kuroki
    June 3, 2017 - 5:45 pm | Permalink

    The Nanking Massacre was a political propaganda first by the Chang Kai-Chek Nationalist Party and by the Beijin government in the 1970s. Since the Americans are un able to read Japanese offical documents, they are easily manipulated by China’s intellience bureau and Chinese scholars living in the United States. No one knows the academic research by Dr. Higashinakano, Prof. Fuhioka, and Dr. Watanabe. Iris Chang was a Chinese American agent recruited by China. It is not clear why she committed suicide with a shot gun. Perhaps she might have been expendable like Harry Dexter White. Now many Americans believe her fablication without knowing China’s psychological warfare.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      June 3, 2017 - 9:36 pm | Permalink

      The role played by American “witness”, Miner S. Bates, is significant and contributed to the story’s consecration in the Tokyo Trials as part of the Axis-of-Evil programming.
      http://www2.biglobe.ne.jp/%257Eremnant/nankingm.htm

    • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
      June 4, 2017 - 9:50 am | Permalink

      fablication

      Japanese for fabrication?

      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        June 5, 2017 - 10:41 am | Permalink

        Good one. Perhaps true, too.

        Perhaps, however, it’s a simple slip of the fingers, like “un able,” “offical,” and “intellience” in the same comment. (Or like me, maybe YK hasn’t a clue what the AJAX code required for the new editing mode is and so couldn’t go back to edit his slips out.) Or perhaps, like “guesstimate,” “fablication” is another portmanteau word—”fable” plus “fabrication”—here newly minted to stress (superfluously?) an already inherent and well-established meaning.

  14. gjjd's Gravatar gjjd
    June 3, 2017 - 7:40 pm | Permalink

    Why create this myth of Japanese evil? 1. The Chinese have always hated the Japanese, and were embarrassed by the superiority of the Japanese. 2. Being a victim in our world makes you “good,” and everyone wants to be “good.” So of course the Chinese want their own victim narrative.

  15. PB's Gravatar PB
    June 4, 2017 - 3:24 am | Permalink

    I recall reading about the rape of Nanking in the mid-70s with the death toll then put at around 90-100,000. Like the Holocaust narrative, it would seem that the historical basis for an event can be easily discarded if a future use can be found. All that’s needed is a little makeup and a nip and tuck.

  16. Dale Gribble's Gravatar Dale Gribble
    June 4, 2017 - 5:10 am | Permalink
  17. Stritchplatte's Gravatar Stritchplatte
    June 4, 2017 - 7:34 am | Permalink

    The semite Zuckerberg requested the Chinese “president” name his new born half breed chinese/jewsemite shiksa child. The “president” thought a moment and responded by telling the jew parasite that, “It is too great a responsibility for me to be given the honor to name your son”, or something like that. The Chinese “president” knew perfectly well that the craven little semite sneak was up to, currying favor to get Farcebook some influence. The [redacted slur-term for jew] will never give up trying to destroy any civilization they envy.

    • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
      June 5, 2017 - 6:14 am | Permalink

      it is sickening to think of him smugly sitting in his mansion surrounded by protective walls and armed guards – both of which he disapproves of.

  18. Nice Guy Eddie's Gravatar Nice Guy Eddie
    June 4, 2017 - 10:17 pm | Permalink

    Professor MacDonald, why are ‘Comments Closed’ on the latest Marcus Alethia piece? Is it temporary? I hope so. I would hate to think this site has fallen so far that it not only publishes Jew apologetics but refuses to let it’s readers have their say on it. If that is the case it’s shameful.

    • June 5, 2017 - 11:34 am | Permalink

      I have not been happy with the comments on Alethia’s articles and worry that he won’t write for TOO if they continue. We have to get over the “all Jews are bad” idea. Some are on our side. By posting him, I do not deprive anyone of a chance at an article. No one would be turned down for reasons of space.

      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        June 5, 2017 - 12:28 pm | Permalink

        Dear Kevin (or Moderator): Was something similar behind the comment shutdown on Tobias Langdon’s “Manchester Malady”? That shutdown occurred within twelve hours.
        ——
        (Mod. Note: Pierre, you’re no dummy, so use your noggin and Dr. MacDonald need not reply. On a similar note, a not insignificant aspect of Dr. MacDonald “not being happy with comments on Dr. Alethia’s articles” is because I, this moderator, allowed way too much crudity and hostility to be approved into those comment streams. Mea Culpa. That will not continue.)

        • Poupon Marx's Gravatar Poupon Marx
          June 6, 2017 - 7:43 am | Permalink

          Mod., this bring up a a significant point. In a way, it’s an open question. What criterion(a) should we use for an “acceptable”-to our cause-Jew? For example, would a threshold of, say, that particular person denouncing his fellow ethnics for genocide, crimes against humanity, violation of civil rights, lying, treason, etc, etc, etc? Or would some pieties and stated agreements with us Goys be a ticket to enter the forum?

          I wonder about this because so many “good” Jews such as David Horowitz describe the horrors, wreckage, destruction of The Left, Communists, traitors, etc., but ALWAYS fail to attribute the core and nucleus as being that of Jewry.

          Likewise Dennis Prager. I’ve listened to him often, but he strategically omits the Casus Belli as being his “people”. An example: Dennis said one time “that it was a mistake to import and allow ‘European professors” into high positions in our elite academies.” We ALL know who he was referring to.

          Do we then, Mr. Mod., first assume the worst until proven otherwise, e.g., guilty until proven otherwise, or the inverse. Or is it the converse?

          • June 6, 2017 - 8:49 am | Permalink

            My criterion is if the Jew acknowledges the critical role of Jews in the immigration/multicultural onslaught. Alethia does that.

      • Nice Guy Eddie's Gravatar Nice Guy Eddie
        June 6, 2017 - 6:10 am | Permalink

        Professor MacDonald, I appreciate the fact that you took the time to respond and explain. But I guess you know what I’m going to say, and I think many readers will agree with me.

        You are allowing a Jewish author to write an obvious propaganda piece – ‘They came for us first . . don’t be surprised when they come for you too’ (Oy vey, so subtle!) – for a site supposed to be wise to Jewish ways, yet you won’t allow your own readers to comment because you worry if he gets a negative response he may not write for you again. Really? I’m gobsmacked.

        “By posting him, I do not deny anyone a chance at an article.” No, but you do deny your readers the chance to disagree with what he posts! By all means reject abusive comments but to give him free rein to say what he likes while guaranteeing he won’t be criticised – at a time when Jewish activists are pushing hard for “hate crime” laws to stop criticism of their role in our disastrous pro-Israel foreign policy and our suicidal immigration policy – for me that’s a major kick in the teeth.

        This is, of course, your site and it is your privilege to accept or reject as you see fit, and we are privileged to read the many fine articles that are published here, but I have to say I am hugely disappointed. Maybe I’ll give up and read the Jerusalem Post.

        • June 6, 2017 - 8:54 am | Permalink

          This is not a propaganda piece. Alethia is obviously right that the people going after Weinstein could care less if he is a Jew–the main point of the article. Again, I have not been happy with the comments on Alethia’s articles and may get rid of comments completely if things don’t improve. IMO, it would be great if a significant number of Jews were on board with White interests. Not likely, but why push away the ones who are?

          • Poupon Marx's Gravatar Poupon Marx
            June 6, 2017 - 10:36 am | Permalink

            Professor McDonald, I think this is a necessary dialog of clarification, not a challenge of the way you want to run your site-to me at least. I have read several pieces by Professor Emeritus Robert Weissberg. They are well written, insightful, and contain universal Truths, and incidentally by their virtue, are helpful to White Caucasians (and Asians as well). But he is light and omissive, at times in ascribing culpability to Jews and Israelis. I note that he is married to a Gentile woman. I believe he is sincere. He is not handing out blanket excuses. Like any member of any ethnic or race, he is hesitant and reluctant to utter anything that would cause them trouble, pain, or mortal consequences. Perhaps even deservedly.

            So I am going with you, Professor, in this manner: like a mining endeavor, the motherlode, the valuable commodity has to be worth the volumes of unusable earth and detritus, and the toxic effects of other substances released.

            If a Jew was telling me at a bar that he thinks all Affirmative Action and quotas are immoral, I would buy him a round and shake his hand-just on that alone, implying no other pre-approval or consensus.

      • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
        June 10, 2017 - 2:58 pm | Permalink

        We should judge Jews like anyone else according to what they think, say and do. Whichever way the matzo crumbles in any particular case, and on whatever scale is relevant. Is this so unreasonable or treasonable?

        My only specific caveats are that their responses to real or imagined “antisemitism” are in a different mode than before WW2 and the creation of Israel, and US Zionist lobbies have an unprecedentedly preponderant influence on Jewish affairs and on non-Jewish responses.

        It is probably fair to say that opposition by Jewish intellectuals and on the “Jewish street”, especially in Britain and France, to Muslim immigration is to a large degree “self-centered”, but it is not an unhelpful factor in the mix. The disappearance of the white race on the planet is not “good for the Jews” and many of them are quite bright enough to realize it, and even say so.

  19. m's Gravatar m
    June 5, 2017 - 5:55 am | Permalink

    (Mod. Note: No problem, “m”. I was just noting what another commenter posted. He may have assumed way too much, regarding you and a lot of other things.)

  20. Lou's Gravatar Lou
    June 6, 2017 - 10:29 pm | Permalink
    • Poupon Marx's Gravatar Poupon Marx
      June 7, 2017 - 7:04 am | Permalink

      A very sad incident. Partly to blame, I believe, was her obvious estrangement of her heritage and culture of China and the Orient. She allowed herself to be Other Directed by Western will ‘o the wisp winds of fashion and trendy nonsense.

      An emersion of Buddhism, meditation, and seeking inner peace and meaning would have prevented this tragedy, it is likely. There are other variables and contributing causes, I am sure.

  21. Riki's Gravatar Riki
    June 10, 2017 - 4:26 am | Permalink

    This article by Mr. Colin Liddell pretty much sums up every major aspect of China’s pseudo-historical exhortation machine with Japan as the primary target as well as the aiding and abetting from the mainstream establishment Western academic and media occupied by hateful, Japan-bashing Jewish elements in collusion and coordination with China and moral-posturing, virtue-signalling liberal academicians, both being anxious to perpetually guilt-wire Japan in the same way as Germany and to grant the eternal status of victimhood to China in a similar fashion to Israel.

    The article touches succinctly and trenchantly upon the main factors contributing to the “staircase historical chic” of the Nanking Incident, namely, the internal and external needs of the Chinese regime from 1990s onward, the geopolitical and strategic needs of US political establishment of bridling and thwarting Japan as a military power, and the victim mentality and guilt market deliberately cultivated and applied. In effect, Japan is being hated and smeared and blackmailed by China, Korea and the Western establishment for being a honest and honorable people of proud and lasting traditions and for having fought on the same side of the National Socialist Germany during WWII, while China is being shilled and shielded by the same Western academic and media elites for being a close under-table ally and a useful tool of the international Jewry with the former’s huge market and robotic malleable population in a joint effort to counter, weaken and eventually subdue and subjugate all honorable peoples from the White nations to Japan and vitiate and destroy their fine traditions.

    Iris Chang is an extra-agent and a court writer for the Chinese government. Her writing of the infamous book, in terms of both content and style, is egregiously one-sided, tendentious and sensationalist with many parts bordering on hysteria. No wonder she killed herself, perhaps due to compunction of her conscience in the aftermath of having promoted such a monstrous lie about a non-existent massacre. It is reported that she developed severe sleeping problems after the book’s publication and her lionization at the hand of the leftist media and academia of the West. Those psychological distress obviously taxed and debilitated her to the breaking point and led to her suicide. It’s called karma.

    Last but most, to those who may have an interest, I’d like to introduce a Japanese website established and operated by a group of highly courageous and patriotic civilian intellectuals to counter the disinformation and mudslinging anti-Japanese propaganda campaign of China since the spineless and dastardly Japanese government refuses to do its job of defending Japan’s honor under US pressure and Chinese market lure. The website is the homepage of an organization called 史実を世界に発信する会, translated into English as “Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact”. It is a trove of informative, insightful and refreshingly forthright writings on important historical facts before, during and after WWII involving major wars, conflicts, and big power relationships of early and mid 20th century in which Japan was a part. On all the sensitive and fiercely controversial issues from Nanking Massacre to Comfort Women, from the origin of the Sino-Japanese War to crucial facts behind Pearl Harbor, you can find an abundance of meticulously researched and expertly stated information contained in countless numbers of articles, letters and reports. The only pity or reservation I feel about them is they are not Jew-wise and sometimes postures to ingratiate itself with and caters to the Western mainstream taste of historiography, either out of ignorance or tactfulness I believe. I will provide links of its Japanese language site, English language site and a specific and emphatic document boldly challenging China to the blatant fabrication of Nanking Massacre as follows. The last one actually is part of the online files together with many other interesting and illuminating essays and is introduced here separately for highlight.

    1. Japanese site: http://hassin.org/
    2. English site: http://www.sdh-fact.com/
    3. Open letter questioning China’s claim of moral vantage on the Nanking Incident: http://www.sdh-fact.com/CL02_3/17_S1.pdf

  22. Jan's Gravatar Jan
    June 10, 2017 - 9:33 pm | Permalink

    Though there are more contentious issues I would like to discuss at some length, I would just like to point out that it was the dykes on the Yellow River(Hwang-he) not the Yang-tze that were opened to slow the Japanese advance from the North.At that time, ‘China’s Sorrow’, altered course started flowing south of its former and current course. This was in 1938 and subsequent to the Nanjing massacre when the Japanese troops involved came up-river from Shanghai.
    BTW, Mao apparently never mentioned the Nanjing massacre and privately was thought grateful to the Japanese for their intervention.

Comments are closed.