The Hollow Cult: Sins of Omission in the Rhetoric of the Holocaust

Suppose a hungry donkey was placed exactly midway between two identical piles of hay. Could it choose one of the piles to eat or would it hesitate, growing ever weaker, until it starved to death? This was the question posed in the medieval problem of Buridan’s ass.

“And so on…”

It might seem an esoteric situation, but you can sometimes see human beings frozen like Buridan’s ass between two equally compelling alternatives. Here, for example, is the Canadian-born Jewish journalist Barbara Kay writing at Quillette in praise of the recently deceased English philosopher Roger Scruton:

Scruton did eventually get some recognition in his home country. He received a knighthood in 2016. But then in his last year, Scruton fell victim to the scourge of “cancel culture.” A few words, taken out of context in an interview, and then mendaciously twisted by the New Statesman, brought on a mobbing of the kind we are all too familiar with, with accusations flung at this gentleman of harbouring “white supremacist” views.

As the night follows day in this feckless new world, Scruton was stripped of a recent government appointment, and there were demands that he lose his knighthood, too, on account of his homophobia, Islamophobia and so on — all complete fabrications. (Remembering Roger Scruton, Defender of Reason in a World of Postmodern Jackals, Quillette, 14th January 2020)

The strongly pro-Zionist Barbara Kay behaved like Buridan’s ass in the final sentence, when she wrote “and so on.” She had a choice, you see, between being completely honest and being completely dishonest. If she’d chosen to be completely dishonest, she would have written simply “on account of his homophobia and Islamophobia.” If she’d chosen to be completely honest, she’d have written “on account of his homophobia, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism.”

The Board of Deputies is satisfied

As you can see, Barbara couldn’t bring herself either to admit the truth or to entirely suppress it, so she hid the uncomfortable truth beneath “and so on.” Unfortunately for her, she was still being dishonest. As I described in “A Philosopher Falls,” Scruton was accused of anti-Semitism by Luciana Berger, a prominent Jewish MP in Britain, and was removed from a government committee after intervention by the Jewish Board of Deputies, Britain’s most important and powerful Jewish organization. The Board of Deputies then self-importantly announced: “As soon as we saw Roger Scruton’s unacceptable comments we contacted the government to make our concerns heard. We are satisfied the right decision has been made to dismiss him.”

It’s obvious, then, why Barbara Kay felt unable to mention the accusations of anti-Semitism against Scruton, who had criticized the subversive Jewish financier George Soros and mentioned the influence of Jews in Eastern Europe. Like the accusations of homophobia and Islamophobia, these accusations were “complete fabrications” and “mendaciously twisted.” But Zionists like Kay do not want to admit that accusations of anti-Semitism can be fabricated and mendacious. And Zionists like Kay are even less willing to criticize the Zionist Board of Deputies and Zionist MPs like Luciana Berger. The central Jewish role in censorship, identity politics and “cancel culture” is a can of worms that Barbara Kay and Quillette want to leave strictly alone. In other words, they don’t actually want to fight effectively against those pernicious things. Not if that means challenging what is truly important to them: Jewish power and Jewish victimhood.

No hints of a bigger story

But Barbara Kay did at least hint – “and so on” – at something more in the Scruton story. There were no hints of a bigger story in the propaganda issued by the National Holocaust Centre and Museum (NHCM) before this year’s Holocaust Memorial Day in Britain:

Leading football players and managers have taken part in a video to be shown at fourth-round FA Cup matches this weekend urging people to stand up against hatred and discrimination.

The two-minute video, marking Holocaust Memorial Day on 27 January, features Harry Kane, the England men’s captain, Steph Houghton, the England women’s captain, Frank Lampard, the Chelsea manager, Jürgen Klopp, the Liverpool manager, and the Match of the Day presenter Gary Lineker alongside two dozen others.

Close-ups of their faces are cut with images from the Holocaust as they deliver an uncompromising message directed at football fans and others who fail to call out racism and discrimination.

“We remember those who stood by, those who did nothing, those that shook their heads. … We remember those who turned away, who watched the deeds of others but did nothing. We remember the good people, the decent people, all the regular people who didn’t hate but encouraged and supported hatred through the power of their silence,” they say.

Against images of antisemitic graffiti, Islamophobia and a lesbian couple abused on a London bus, they continue: “When we see racism, antisemitism, discrimination or hatred, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant … we mustn’t stand by, we need to stand up, we need to stand together.”

The video – made by the National Holocaust Centre and Museum – will be shared on social media by clubs and players on Holocaust Memorial Day, which this year also marks the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, the Nazi death camp in German-occupied Poland. (Top footballers to mark Holocaust Memorial Day with anti-racism video, 24th January 2020)

Is the message of the video sincere or insincere? Let’s suppose it’s sincere and see where that leads us. The National Holocaust Centre and Museum (NHCM) are telling us that we mustn’t stand by and allow evil to triumph. And in recent years, the United Kingdom has been shaken again and again by scandals about the authorities standing by and allowing evil to triumph, even though they were fully aware that it was taking place. From Rotherham in the north to Oxford in the south, from Manchester in the west to Newcastle in the east, we’ve heard about girls and young women being raped, prostituted, tortured and sometimes murdered by gangs of brutal, misogynist men.

The early stages of genocide

Worse still, the brutal men and their victims come from different racial and religious groups, and the men have often used racially and religiously abusive terms against their victims. The horrible crimes therefore fit neatly into “The Ten Stages of Genocide” laid out by the organization Genocide Watch: “Mass rapes of women have become a characteristic of all modern genocides. Rape is used as a means to genetically alter and destroy the victim group.” Therefore, if the NHCM had been sincere in its message about combating evil, it would have mentioned those horrible stories about misogynist rape-gangs and their many thousands of victims.

But the NHCM didn’t say a word. It found “antisemitic graffiti, Islamophobia and a lesbian couple abused on a London bus” worthy of mention, but not the stabbing and drowning of an abused 17-year-old girl by two men who described her as a “kaffir [i.e., infidel] bitch” or the incineration of an abused 16-year-old girl with her mother and sister by another of the men’s co-religionists. And those are only two examples of the murder, sexual violence and psychological suffering visited for many decades on one racial and religious group in Britain by another racial and religious group. So why did the National Holocaust Centre and Museum not mention any of it?

Safeguarding and extending Jewish power

The answer is quite simple. The Holocaust Cult in Britain does not exist to combat evil or defend the vulnerable, but to safeguard and extend Jewish power. It does this by insisting on a series of lies and by suppressing historical facts that contradict those lies. The scandals I mentioned above are, of course, about non-White Muslim men abusing White girls from at least historically Christian backgrounds. This contradicts a central lie of the Holocaust Cult: that the majority is always the aggressor and minorities are always the helpless victims of the majority. It also contradicts another lie of the Holocaust Cult: that it’s always Christians who attack Jews and Muslims, never vice versa. For Jews, Muslims are “natural allies” against the White British, so any evils inflicted by them on the White British or other Christians are simply omitted from their account.

For example, on the website of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust you can find some brief discussion of how “the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire were systematically persecuted, deported from their homes and murdered.” This followed “a period of deterioration in relations between ethnic groups in the Ottoman Empire.” But if you want further details, you won’t get them from the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust. You will not be told that the Armenians were Christian or that their genocidal oppressors were Muslim and possibly also a crypto-Jewish group called the Domneh. That does not fit the propaganda of the Holocaust Cult at all! In the Holocaust Cult, Muslims are like Jews: a saintly minority who must be defended against the hate of the White Christian majority.

Jews as oppressors and mass-murderers

And of course the Holocaust Cult does not even mention communist atrocities, like the genocide committed against the Ukrainian people in 1932–3, which is estimated to have claimed between 7 and 10 million lives. Again, communist atrocities contradict the lie that minorities are always helpless victims. The Ukrainian Holodomor, or “death by hunger,” was directed and enforced by a heavily disproportionate number of Jews, from figures at the top like the little-known Lazar Kaganovich, who oversaw the genocide in Ukraine, to the ordinary, hard-working Jewish police, executioners and torturers who followed his orders. The Soviet communist party as a whole was disproportionately ruled and staffed by minorities like Jews, Georgians and Latvians who held historic grudges against the Russian and Ukrainian majorities. That was at the beginning of the twentieth century, but minority tyranny has not gone away. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, we can see the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, which consists of an Alawite minority elite tyrannizing a Sunni majority after a prolonged period in which they were victimized by the Sunnis.

It is not true that minorities are always victims and that majorities are always victimizers. But the Holocaust Cult can’t admit this glaring historical fact, because the Holocaust Cult is a vehicle for the interests of Jews — the very same minority that supplied so many commissars, executioners and torturers to communist parties in Eastern Europe. And Jews believe that it is in their interests to flood Western nations with Muslims — the very same group that committed the Armenian genocide and another genocide in Bangladesh in the early 1970s. Once Muslims are in the West, the Holocaust Cult simultaneously works to suppress discussion about their predation on the White majority and to incite them to increased hatred of the White majority.

Working for genocide

In other words, the Holocaust Cult is working to promote evil and increase the risk of genocide. The Cult laments the civil war and genocide that took place in the marvellously diverse former Yugoslavia when an authoritarian regime collapsed and separate groups turned on each other. At the same time, the Cult is working to turn all Western nations into new versions of Yugoslavia and new potential sites of civil war and genocide. As Chateau Heartiste has often pointed out: “Diversity + Proximity = War.” But that doesn’t bother the Jewish proprietors of the Holocaust Cult, because they think they can stay on top and avoid harm themselves this time. The impending chaos can be managed from the top, and they will emerge unscathed.

The Holocaust Cult is a Hollow Cult because it isn’t sincere and isn’t interested in truth and historical objectivity. But its hollowness doesn’t render it harmless. The Trojan horse was also hollow and not what it pretended to be on the outside. And the Trojan horse succeeded perfectly in bringing down a great civilization. The Hollow Cult of the Holocaust is trying to do the same to Western civilization.

The Chief Rabbi speaks

Roger Scruton was supposedly a doughty defender of Western civilization. But he never criticized and condemned the Holocaust Cult. That’s one reason I can’t join the Zionist Barbara Kay in singing his praises. Then again, if Scruton had criticized the Holocaust Cult, Barbara Kay would never have sung his praises. Nor would Mark Steyn. Or Douglas Murray. Or any of the countless other admirers of Scruton who turn a stern eye on Muslim claims of Islamophobia and on transgender lunacies while ignoring the central Jewish role in censorship and identity politics. But surprisingly enough, if you do want the truth about that central Jewish role, it was supplied thirteen years ago by Jonathan Sacks, the then Chief Rabbi of Britain:

Multiculturalism promotes segregation, stifles free speech and threatens liberal democracy, Britain’s top Jewish official warned in extracts from [a recently published] book … Jonathan Sacks, Britain’s chief rabbi, defined multiculturalism as an attempt to affirm Britain’s diverse communities and make ethnic and religious minorities more appreciated and respected. But in his book, The Home We Build Together: Recreating Society, he said the movement had run its course. “Multiculturalism has led not to integration but to segregation,” Sacks wrote in his book, an extract of which was published in the Times of London.

“Liberal democracy is in danger,” Sacks said, adding later: “The politics of freedom risks descending into the politics of fear.” Sacks said Britain’s politics had been poisoned by the rise of identity politics, as minorities and aggrieved groups jockeyed first for rights, then for special treatment. The process, he said, began with Jews, before being taken up by blacks, women and gays. He said the effect had been “inexorably divisive.” “A culture of victimhood sets group against group, each claiming that its pain, injury, oppression, humiliation is greater than that of others,” he said. In an interview with the Times, Sacks said he wanted his book to be “politically incorrect in the highest order.” (Sacks: Multiculturalism threatens democracy, The Jerusalem Post, 20th October 2007)

The Holocaust Cult is at the heart of the “culture of victimhood” described so well by Rabbi Sacks. It is being used to drive the West towards tyranny, social collapse and civil war, which leaves us with a simple choice. Either we destroy the Holocaust Cult or it destroys us.

76 replies
  1. Alfred
    Alfred says:

    Solzhenitsyn stated that the group which was the focus of Dr MacDonald’s The Culture of Critique, HOLOCAUSTED sixty-six million Russians. He also said that the reason almost nobody knows about this is due to the mainstream media being under THEIR control.

    I read this book in 1977. Dr Arthur Butz is a brilliant man, I think he is still a Professor of Engineering at Northwest University.

    This is his book, one of many on this topic that he hosts, personally, on his website. No charge, he wants the TRUTH to be known.

    • Luke
      Luke says:

      I’ve both read and heard Professor MacDonald expressing his grave concerns that, unless this jewish death grip on the throat of America is broken – factoring in the literal explosion of anti-White hate that is being spewed and fomented by the jewish controlled media and Hollywood – that jews are setting the stage for another slaughter of 66 million or more Whites here in America.

      This endless and relentless demonization of Whites is very reminiscent of how the jewish Bolsheviks demonized the Russian Kulaks, and worked very successfully at convincing the majority of the USSR population that those nasty Kulaks were responsible for everything that was bad in their lives. Once they had set this notion into the heads of the majority population – they decided to round up these Kulaks and either slaughter them or send them off to be worked to death in Siberian labor camps.

      I agree emphatically with Professor MacDonald’s predictions. That is exactly where we are heading here in America.

      And, the most depressing thing that I must deal with – is when I try to point this out to my historically illiterate, totally worthless, blue pilled ‘boomer’ friends – they look at me like I am some kind of deranged and paranoid lunatic and dismiss my warnings as being nothing more than nonsense.

      • TJ
        TJ says:

        . . .in the literal explosion of anti-White hate. . .


        The Boomers I know believe the left programming from university
        and have no conception that it’s a pack of lies- after all, the purpose of university is to smash thought-control. . .they drank the kool-aid.
        Smart enough to gain admission, not smart enough to throw up the kool-aid.

        An example- my former landlord has a degree in econ from Long Beach State [1967] [my alma mater also]. . .he held his thumbs to forefingers and moved them to cover his eyes. . .”there’s these filters that block the eyes from seeing true reality.”

        Me: “Yeah that was discussed at length in a 1776 book entitled The Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant. Some assert that The Critique is the biggest mind rape in the history of serious philosophy.”

        He could not see the circularity. . .how does he know that the knowledge of these filters itself is accurate. . .that implies that there ARE sources of unbiased truth. If the filter knowledge is correct, it implies that there are no filters. . .Duh! Doh!

        George Berkeley’s philosophy- “that tree you “see” out the window, it does not exist. . .” seems identical [in essentials] to Kant’s. ..leading to the absurdity “no knowledge is possible”. . .aren’t they claiming knowledge when they make that claim?

        So these folks are literally advocating non-sense as a valid approach. . .subjectivism, anything goes. . .[see Paul Feyerabend]
        [but don’t use your eyes, they don’t work anyway]. . .

      • Richard B
        Richard B says:

        “…jews are setting the stage for another slaughter of 66 million or more Whites here in America.”

        Yeah, I’ve had that thought for a long time.

        You’re probably right. Hope not, of course.
        But wouldn’t doubt it.

        “And, the most depressing thing that I must deal with…..”

        It’s such a relief to get past that stage, ie; of being depressed about not being able to reach people.

        But it really is a stage that people who are aware of what’s going on seem to have to pass through.

        “when I try to point this out to my historically illiterate, totally worthless, blue pilled ‘boomer’ friends….”

        To be honest, I think the whole, what I call Boomer Blame, is pretty weak, pretty lame. Especially when you consider that Kevin himself qualifies as a “boomer.”

        In fact, lots of us do. And lots of the ones I know are well aware of what’s going on.

        True, there are many, probably most, that aren’t, or simply don’t care. But that could be said of many of the younger kids who are very susceptiable, or just as susceptible, to the propaganda.

      • Achilles Wannabe
        Achilles Wannabe says:

        “when I try to point this out to my historically illiterate, totally worthless, blue pilled ‘boomer’ friends – they look at me like I am some kind of deranged and paranoid lunatic’

        Oh yes, growing up. we boomers got the blue pill every day – breakfast, lunch, and dinner – without really even particularly noticing that we got it. Jewish innocence was presented by media, schools, entertainment and religion as a simple fact questionable only by idiots and sinners.People who couldn’t agree on Nam. drugs, sex, capitalism could all agree on Jewish innocence.

        . Of course some obvious facts about Jews do have a way of seeping into consciousness. Most of my boomer peers do sort of know that the Jews are the best organized, most ethnically cohesive and by far the richest group in the West. But when I seek to talk about “the Jews” as a subject of analysis, they react as if I am the loon and they are the sane because they reject “the Jews” as an analytic category. My boomer peers are not stupid . They are the victims of one of the most successful ideological manipulations in history. Somebody ought to do a study in detail about how this was done, how it evolved. After all. a hundred years ago “antisemitism” was just considered common sense.

  2. Randy
    Randy says:

    In the middle of the article, there is a reference to “a central lie of the Holocaust Cult: that the majority is always the aggressor and minorities are always the helpless victims of the majority.”

    Actually, that would not be a lie in the cases of South Africa and Zimbabwe. However, the cult doesn’t seem to have much sympathy for the minority victims in those countries.

    • William Gruff
      William Gruff says:

      <<>> is responsible for the white minority being victims of the black majority. The Jews have been particularly destructive in South Africa.

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          Here’s the history as I understand it: Dutch Boers/Afrikaners settled in South Africa in 1649. There were very indigenous inhabitants. Blacks lived much further north. They only came south in large numbers when the country became prosperous and there were jobs available for them.

          When gold and diamonds were discovered, the British (and the Jews who had established themselves as an elite in Britain) tried to colonize South Africa. They defeated the Boers around 1899 and assumed control of the diamond and gold mines.

          South Africa eventually gained independence from Britain, but now the power was in the hands of the Jews and the British who had settled in the country.

          The movement to abolish Apartheid was led by communist Jews. They financially supported the African National Congress.

          Today, the Jews control South Africa and own its major assets. They do not have to worry about attacks on whites or discrimination against whites in South Africa. In the meantime, Boer whites are under siege. Farmers are being murdered in the most horrible ways imaginable. Because the Jews control the media in the west, we hear nothing about this.

          A good documentary to watch is “Farmlands” by Lauren Southern. Unfortunately, because she’s Jewish, the role of the Jews is not addressed in that film. Russia Insider, however, has had at least one article that has addressed the subject.

  3. David Ashton
    David Ashton says:

    One could write a book on various complex issues raised by this article (finding a mainstream publisher might be more problematic).
    This scrutiny (no pun) of Scruton re Jewish questions actually resembles the meticulous manner whereby some Jews themselves search for “anti-Semitic” implications in comments (Frederic Raphael is a characteristic example). Our own late professor was so attacked for a passing unfriendly reference to the activities of a Mr Soros in the same way that the POTUS has been attacked for his rare poetic gift in calling a Mr Schiff “shifty”. Yet not all stereotypes lack an objective correlative, and not all “tropes” are tripe.
    It is essential, however, to separate the modern “cult”, its ideopolitical purposes and its array of embellishments, from quite reasonable data-based condemnation of key Nazi policies and grotesque propaganda against Jews, especially between 1938 and 1944. For all the nonsense stories heard recently from elderly survivors, life in a wartime KZ was no fun, far worse than in the US camps for Japanese citizens and no better than in the USSR gulags or Japanese PoW camps. Personally I think the received mortality totals for Germany and Russia are both exaggerated, but horrible nevertheless. Indeed, the “six million men, women and children” cliché has become as unfeelingly automatic as it is statistically counter-productive.
    Truth does not automatically lie between two arbitrary “extremes”, though Carlo Mattogno and Norman Finkelstein might be marked as convenient parameters along a sliding scale. Freedom for informed debate on this, as on anything else in modern history, is essential, whatever its outcome.
    The artificially expanding “cult” itself – of some five decades’ duration – has two main simultaneous purposes: (1) to associate “white” nationalism with terror and atrocity, and (2) to protect Jewish “nationalism” from all criticism. Of course, ethnic groups other than ours have their own horror stories, and do not welcome the observation that their histories “detract” from the “unique” genocide of one particular people considered “unique” by themselves but also by the Nazis. They are allies in non-racial historical comprehension.
    If the Shoah is the new post-Torah Jewish religion, the Holocaust is the new post-NT Western religion. The whole phenomenon requires an objective social-psychological analysis, and astute political action is required to enable it. It is right to keep on the high ground of decency and honesty.

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      “For all the nonsense stories heard recently from elderly survivors, life in a wartime KZ was no fun, far worse than in the US camps for Japanese citizens and no better than in the USSR gulags”

      Not true.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        The practices in the Soviet Union during the 1930’s and 1940’s, as shown in those drawings and descriptive captions, is the basis for the charges against the German Gestapo and SS put forth at the Nuremberg Tribunals and rumored during the war and after. It was Soviet-Russian-Stalinist brutality projected onto Germans who would never lower themselves to do such things. National Socialists were harshly disciplined for far less than that!

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      Carlo Mattogno doesn’t believe in the genocide of 6 million Jews nor the use of gas chambers to that end. Norman Finkelstein does. It’s that simple.

      • David Ashton
        David Ashton says:

        @ Trenchant
        My point exactly: Between rejection of the accusation that millions were gassed and making money from such accusations.
        For Finkelstein’s concern about the factual reliability of much in the received narrative(s), see e.g. Watch watch, “Harry’s Place, Finkelstein & the Holocaust,” January 2012, on line.
        For Mattogno’s concern about Aktion-T4 officials in the wartime camps, see e.g. “Inside the Gas Chambers” (2014).
        I have no desire to enter a debate here about the WW2 Nazi camps, except for 4 obiter dicta: (1) The Auschwitz swimming-pool was too small to be used regularly by the prison population; (2) Nazi ideology & propaganda depicted the Jews as a collective of incorrigibly hereditary criminals responsible for war and a fatal “equality” doctrine, the logic of which required pest-control – total separation from society in controlled confinement, sexual segregation, sterilization, and/or direct extermination if necessary; (3) “survivor stories” nevertheless contain many ridiculous “false memories”, a Yad Vashem director once stating that many oral atrocity “recollections” were made by “witnesses” nowhere near the place they happened; (4) David Irving’s study of Himmler may or may not revise, or clarify, the evidence against him previously gathered by Breitman, Longerich and Wachsmann.

        • Trenchant
          Trenchant says:

          I’m not prepared to concede in full point 2) without any evidence bar semantic gymnastics. In particular, “sterilization, and/or direct extermination if necessary”.

        • Trenchant
          Trenchant says:

          “My point exactly: Between rejection of the accusation that millions were gassed…”

          Actually, that’s not what I said. I contend that Mattogno does not believe 6 million Jews were exterminated nor does he believe any Jews were gassed.

          • David Ashton
            David Ashton says:

            @ Trenchant
            I can’t quite see this alleged difference between us over Carlo Mattogno. I have read only seven of his books in print or online, plus several articles, all of which of course dispute the mass-gassing in purpose-built chambers. He now seems to have conceded the possibility that a small number of mentally disabled Jews were killed, though not by Zyklon-B pellets. Phenol injections in hospitals were also originally accepted by Arthur Butz whom I interviewed personally in London many years ago. It is pretty clear, however, that various survivor anecdotes recently presented were not wholly credible, not for any alleged cruelty but because of other anomalies or absurdities, as also the case with Elie Wiesel (“a preposterous mountebank”, according to Norman Finkelstein), Hugo Gryn, Kitty Hart-Moxon, &c.

          • Trenchant
            Trenchant says:

            Mattogno rejects not only “mass-gassing” but gassing of *any* Jew in *any* gas-chamber, purpose-built or otherwise.

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          The size of the Auschwitz swimming pool has no bearing on whether or not inmates were allowed to use it.

          “Nazi ideology & propaganda…the logic of which required pest-control…and or direct extermination if necessary…” Do you have documentary evidence for this? Or is the “logic” you speak of just your own speculation?

          Let us suppose that we as a nation (the United States) decided to remove Jews from positions of power and influence. Also, of course, from positions of trust and responsibility. What would we do with them? The only thing to be done — short of killing them — would be either to imprison them without possibility of parole or to completely remove them from the nation.

          Hitler’s policy was to remove them from the nation. But when the war broke out, Germany effectively expanded its jurisdiction to include more Jews than had lived in Germany before the war. They, along with many others who we are inclined to forget about, ended up in camps.

          Just as Hitler expected all Germans to work if they wanted to eat, he expected all camp inmates to work. David Irving has said that Hitler decided to put off final settlement of the Jewish problem — finding a place to send them — until after the war. So they were in the camps and required to work. At the end of the war, conditions were so bad that many inmates died of typhus.

          That is all that the evidence shows. No gas chambers. No fire pits at Auschwitz. No shrunken heads, human lampshades, or human soap.

          The human soap accusation first appeared in WW I — not WW II — as a British propaganda campaign against the Germans.

          “The Buchenwald Report” was put together by the psychological warfare division of SHAEF (Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force), which was entirely staffed and run by Jews.

          I really don’t know why we are arguing about this at TOO.

          • David Ashton
            David Ashton says:

            @ Eric
            Briefly: (1) Agree over shrunken heads, lampshades, soap, &c.
            (2) Pest control: (i) view the propaganda movie, “Der ewige Jude” (1940); (ii) Hitler, “Mein Kampf” (esp. ch “Race & People”); (iii) check relevant references (ignore the comment context) in e.g. Jeffrey Herf, “The Jewish Enemy” (2008); Richard Breitman, “Architect of Genocide” (1992); Peter Longerich, “Holocaust” (2012).

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            “Der ewige Jude” (which can be found on the internet with English subtitles) is an excellent film. It gives an accurate picture of the Jews. And there is nothing in it that calls for gassing or otherwise killing them.

            The film is not likely to inspire charitable feelings towards the Jews — there is no denying that.

            But who is responsible for that? The Jews themselves, due to their bad behavior, which continues to this day.

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      “…life in a wartime KZ was no fun, far worse than in the US camps for Japanese citizens and no better than in the USSR gulags or Japanese POW camps.”

      Well, let’s do some comparing:

      The Japanese were not signatories to the Geneva Convention or any other agreements that required humane treatment of prisoners. American, British, Canadian, Australian and New Zealander POW’s were subjected to torture, slave labor, starvation, and arbitrary executions by the Japanese. Prisoners unlucky enough to end up in Unit 731 were also subjected to human guinea pig experiments.

      After the war, at least one million disarmed German soldiers were placed in the Rhine Meadow camps by General Eisenhower. They were denied shelter and had to dig holes in the ground to escape the cold. They received so little food, water, and medicine that most of them died. Many were sent to France to perform slave labor. The French complained that they were unable to work and were dying like flies.

      I don’t know about the Gulag, so I won’t comment on that.

      The German KZs had recreation facilities for the prisoners — swimming pools, soccer fields, theaters — and other facilities such as post offices, libraries, and infirmaries. Each camp had its own currency. Not a single camp in Germany had a gas chamber. And now we know that there were no gas chambers even at Auschwitz. When Anne Frank fell ill, she was treated in a camp hospital.

      Prisoners did have to work, and corporal punishment was meted out to those who broke the rules. No doubt there was some cruelty. But as with Anne Frank, it is no secret that some SS guards and camp officials were prosecuted by the Nazis for mistreating prisoners. In one case at Buchenwald, prisoners were killed to conceal another crime. The malefactors were caught and punished.

      • Curmudgeon
        Curmudgeon says:

        “Prisoners did have to work, and corporal punishment was meted out to those who broke the rules. No doubt there was some cruelty.”
        Yes, they worked, and were paid for it.
        As for cruelty, that was against the NSDAP rules for guards. Here is a more realistic picture.
        Here is the reality of the system itself;

        • David Ashton
          David Ashton says:

          The administration of the camps in pre-war Germany and their conditions was different from those in the war years. Jews were brought brutally into camps from all over occupied Europe with minimal possessions. Hitler reportedly explained to Horthy that they were made to work and those who did not were killed. Typhus became a major problem. See the interview between Himmler and Masur of the WJC, April 1945.

          • Trenchant
            Trenchant says:

            “Hitler reportedly explained to Horthy that they were made to work and those who did not were killed.”
            Hearsay evidence is inadmissible in criminal proceedings.

            “Jews were brought brutally into camps from all over occupied Europe with minimal possessions.” Proof that force over and above that strictly necessary for the mass internment is missing.

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            What’s your source for Hitler’s alleged explanation to Horthy?

            Other than overcrowding, how were wartime camps different from the pre-war camps?

            How is Himmler’s alleged interview with Masur relevant to the question of conditions in the camps?

      • Trenchant
        Trenchant says:

        Communist prisoners determined who got the best jobs and most food within the Nazi concentration camps.

        • David Ashton
          David Ashton says:

          @ Eric, Trenchant &c

          Hitler & Horthy: David Irving, “Hitler’s War” (1977) p.509, for starters.

          No basis for historiographical debate exists if anything adverse about the Nazis is just ruled out as mere “allegation” or “fabrication”. They never pretended to be liberal democrats or humanitarian pacifists in any case.

  4. Barbara
    Barbara says:

    What is to be made of Jared Taylor and AmRen because there is absolutely no allowing of any mention of the Jews’ role in anything. I stopped following AmRen because blacks are fair game but why pick on them for their low intelligence which they cannot help and then refuse to discuss how the Jews use them against us and the rest of the West? The Civil Rights Acts, welfare, desegregation were all brought about by the Jews and they are the very reasons that blacks are such a problem.

    • David Ashton
      David Ashton says:

      American Renaissance HAS published comments on the role of Jews in promoting immigration in the USA. The relationship between Black people and Jews, and their respective organizations, has changed quite a lot over the years. It needs a balanced, objective and comprehensive study by a scholar preferably neither Black nor Jewish, including the question of miscegenation.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        “American Renaissance HAS published comments on the role of Jews in promoting immigration in the USA.”

        When? Where?

        Comments like we have here or actual articles? Which articles?

    • Pierre Simon
      Pierre Simon says:

      I agree 100%. Indeed, there’s something fishy about Jared, although he does blame all visible minorities that are invading our lands, he blacks out Jewish responsibility. In one of his conventions, a guest speaker (probably jewish) compared the Jewish plight against Palestinians with our own plight against alien invaders. He is also at odds with Kevin Macdonald and Davis Duke for obvious reasons. So I think he is basically a national-sionist, or an isreali-compatible nationalist like most nationalists including Lepen, Victor Orban and Salvini. I presume, he’s still on the Youtube because of jewish support.

      • TJ
        TJ says:

        Rabbis have spoken at the biennial conferences. Mr. Taylor admits they he has accepted (((Jewish Money))). A Yale graduate. . .

        • David Ashton
          David Ashton says:

          @ TJ

          JT has indeed drawn attention to books by Jews critical of multi-racialism – Byron Roth, Michael Levin, &c – how terrible! He has also just written a largely favourable review of Kevin MacDonald’s latest book.

          There should be free debate around these issues, but debaters should try to be factually accurate and to judge opinions by their own merits rather than the ancestry or physiognomy of those who express them.

          I had supposed the whole idea of using (((brackets))) was to escape cyber censorship by actually using a word beginning with J but surely a bit pointless to put them around the word itself when printed.

          No hard feelings!

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            Jews can be found on all sides of every issue. Assuming that they are sincere is naïve.

            The only Jews who are on our side are Jews who condemn other Jews: Bobby Fischer, Samuel Roth, Brother Nathanael, etc.

            I consider these attempts to excuse them and give credence to their fairy tales about Hitler and the Holocaust a form of gaslighting.

    • Rob Bottom
      Rob Bottom says:

      The value in Taylor’s work is opening eyes to racial differences. This is more easily accomplished by contrasting white and black IQ and behavior. From there a certain percentage of people will realize they have interests at the racial (group) level and may examine other racial conflicts. This is an important stepping stone that Taylor feels would be undermined if he were to simultaneously address the Jewish Question. He is probably right. The conditioning is such that attacking too many sacred taboos at once will send most people fleeing in the opposite direction. In any case, that is one more reason why we should be thankful for websites like this one.

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          Watching this video, I saw a Jew storm out of the room at the AmRen white nationalist conference while David Duke was speaking.

          We should never forget the Jewish strategy of playing all sides. They will be present even among those who support white nationalism, even among those who criticize Jews.

          Some of them will be sincere. But we can never trust them. Betrayal is in their DNA. History has proven it over and over again.

    • Mark
      Mark says:

      Totally agree, Barbara. Don’t know if it’s true but I’ve read where Jared Taylor’s wife is jewish.

    • Achilles Wannabe
      Achilles Wannabe says:

      Excellent question Barbara. Amren like sites are oh so proud of their “race realism” which allows them to endlessly criticise blacks and browns who, as you say, are what they are. But when it comes to “ethnic realism”, Amren etc are not present in action though surely all their writers know who the Jews are. and what they have been up to.

      So why is Amren, missing on the Jewish Power front ? Amren type writers are high IQ. well educated WHITES. So are the Jews of Jewish Power. Is there a class sympatico at work here? And if there is, what would that mean for a future white nation economically?

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        My guess is that there are some Jews sensible enough to understand that whites are the best friends they’ve ever had — in spite of Jewish lies to the contrary — and that Asians, blacks and Hispanics are not likely to be so simpatico.

        The problem is that these Jews — while not necessarily out to hurt whites — will still see them as second class citizens and act accordingly. Jewish power and Jewish priorities will always come first.

        A second possibility is that Jared Taylor doesn’t want to rock the boat anymore than he is already doing by defending white people.

        I’m sure his thinking is that he might get somewhere defending whites, but he’ll never get anywhere if he brings criticism of Jews into the equation.

        I support him overall. No sense in making the perfect the enemy of the good.

  5. Panadechi
    Panadechi says:

    Everything is defined only by three words for the Jew, power, money and control. Actually it is a bio-psychological-financial war where it is intended to defeat the enemy through demoralization, stigmitization and psychological aggression, that is to defeat the enemy without physical real combat, using the technique of cancellation and suppression of this (the white). The real aggressor is the Jew. He understands that homogeneous ethnocentric nations (vital force) are almost impossible to control, that’s why it is multiculturalism and the cult of minorities. We must design defense strategies, counter-attack and survival techniques, or we will perish in the oblivion of history.

  6. Henry
    Henry says:

    Excellent piece and long overdue given the Jewish weaponization of false history. One thing though: at the time of the Armenian genocide it was openly reported by the leading western newspapers, that Jews and crypto-Jews (especially from Salonika) were a significant force behind the Turkish Muslim slaughter of the Armenian Christians.

  7. Eric
    Eric says:

    Genuflecting to Jews and non-whites is considered good manners in the West.

    Doing the opposite is equivalent to farting in public.

    I find that the best attitude to adopt in dealing with the politically correct is a combination of skepticism and ridicule. A tone of indulgent — if slightly mocking — good humor should be maintained. And very specific questions should be asked.

    What you are confronted with in virtually all of these situations is a litany of entirely baseless complaints.

    So you need to ask your interlocutor to be as specific as possible.

    Try to help him make his non-existent case. Simply doing that will utterly destroy his argument.

    Be generous to him in his defeat. Don’t get into a pointless fight.

    • Chris M
      Chris M says:

      I don’t think they want to be anyone’s “interlocutor.”

      Certainly not ours.

      Anyway, your approach would require that they share your sense of fairness. I think most of us here do.

      But anyone who considers the “genuflecting” to be good manners wouldn’t see any difference between polite mockery and being pepper sprayed and tased.

      They’re just too self-absorbed and melodramatic.

      The question is, Why would I want to engage people who are clearly unhinged and off the rails?

      As another commenter here suggested, as much as it’s possible, it’s best to go No Contact.

      Otherwise, we’re just asking for it.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        A lot of these people are just repeating what they’ve been told in school, by Hollywood, or by the media.

        They haven’t given it much thought, and they aren’t invested in it.

        These are people we can talk to. And I think we should.

        I agree with you about the fanatical types. Don’t waste your time.

  8. Fredrick Toben
    Fredrick Toben says:

    Although I was quite familiar with Roger Scruton’s blind spots, I was impressed that this Anglo-empiricist mindset managed to title his book on Richard Wagner “The Ring of Truth” – wherein he almost flawlessly transitions from the particular to the general/abstract.
    That in itself is quite an achievement because empiricism on its own is a mere groping from one particular to the next – almost like a brilliant autistic mindset that cannot tolerate an overarching view of things wherein fundamental philosophical problems are aired and, hopefully, addressed.
    A flight into logical positivism, as was the want of Ludwig Wittgenstein, still could not cope with the moral dimension, as Sir Karl Popper so clearly illustrated during one of Wittgenstein’s seminars when he was rebuffed by Wittgenstein waving a fire poker at him exclaiming: ‘There are no moral problems!’ Popper’s response, so Popper advised me personally in 1974, was to address Wittgenstein’s blind spot: ‘What about a host threatening a visitor with a fire poker?’
    Of course Bertrand Russell spelled out that French rationalism, British empiricism and German idealism make up the European mindset, of which Tobias Langdon is a splendid example as exemplified in this essay of his, which clarifies the vexed Jewish problem-mindset so clearly, and the current role matters Holocaust-Shoah play therein: The Hollow Cult: Sins of Omission in the Rhetoric of the Holocaust!
    In his book, “White World Awake: Stopping the Planned Extermination of our Volk” – – Juergen Graf addresses the issue on which the Holocaust-Shoah proponents base their attack on the European peoples – the development of a Eurasian Race, thereby eliminating the European VOLK! Their fighting words are now everywhere: HATER – HOLOCAUST DENIER – CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER – ANTISEMITE – RACIST – NAZI – XENOPHOBE – HOMOPHOBE , et al.

    • bruno
      bruno says:

      Hi Fred, delighted see that you’re alive and kicking. Hope you make past a hundred. Long ago I heard someone say you had expired. BTW decades ago I also met Popper once. His books were translated within the old eastern block. I always thought he was a stuffed bag being promoted by his brethren.

  9. Jerry
    Jerry says:

    The easiest way to understand that the holocaust is nonsense is to read the three histories/memoirs of first Dwight Eisenhauer a dutch jew who wrote the Crusade in Europe, second Winston Churchill, who is of jewish blood by his mother Jennie Jacobson, who wrote a six volume set “Second World War.” Third, Charles DeGaulle who wrote “Memories de
    Guerre.” These three histories contain almost 8,000 pages and not a single word mentions a “holocaust”.

    • Henry
      Henry says:

      Jerry. you’re pedaling rubbish. Churchill’s mother was not Jewish and while Churchill’s ‘Second World War’ volumes never mentioned the term “Holocaust” they certainly did refer to the mass murder of “millions” in the camps through “scientific” means among other references to the “persecution” of Greek and Hungarian Jews. However the sources of these claims were always Jewish ‘intelligences’ never British or other Allied, non-Jewish, sources. As for Dwight D. Eisenhower…Eisenhower was not a “Dutch Jew” but it is claimed that he was a Swedish Jew following a (alleged) West Point yearbook entry in which he is described as the “terrible Swedish Jew” As for his and De Gaulle’s war memoirs? They relate to their personal experiences not their overview of the war on all fronts. For instance, at least one of them, if not both, never mentioned the dropping of the two A-bombs on Japan. So is that evidence to you that the bombs were never dropped on Japan?

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        I would say it is evidence that the main concern of Eisenhower, Churchill and de Gaulle was the European Theater of Operations.

  10. David Ashton
    David Ashton says:

    @ Jerry
    1. Eisenhower sent a letter to General Marshall, dated April 15, 1945, that recorded his horrified visit to a camp near Gotha, also noted in his “Crusade” memoirs. No mention of mass-gassing in these mainly military memoirs (1948).
    2. The allegation that Churchill’s mother Jennie was Jewish, and halachically therefore also Winston, was critically rejected on David Irving’s fpp website in April 2007. Churchill always regarded Jews as “other” people.

  11. jerry
    jerry says:

    Henry, if Eisenhauer was not Dutch then why did General MacArthur comment on Eisenhauer’s “Dutch Temper”? Eisenhauer must have let be known that he was Dutch, of course he never revealed he was jewish, which is a common practice of jewry. As far as the “gassing” , that was trying to control the spread of typhus. It has been proven beyond all doubt that no killing gas was ever used anywhere in any camp. When Churchill gave his “famous speech” in Fulton, Mo concerning the iron curtain, that phrase was stolen from Dr. Goebbels. And to David Aston, I stand by my statement concerning Churchill but you will have to do some digging to get there. All three of the Allied leaders were of jewish blood.

    • Henry
      Henry says:

      Jerry, I didn’t say anything about Eisenhower being Dutch or not. I said the claim that he was a (Swedish) Jew related to a comment in a West Point yearbook. That can be seen online. However notwithstanding MacArthur’s comment you have not shown any evidence that Eisenhower was a Jew of any description. The claim that Churchill was a Jew is easily disproved as a check of the archive proves that his maternal grandfather did not change the family name from Jacobson to Jerome. In fact Leonard Jerome would have needed to persuade all preceding family members to change their names using a time-machine to assist him in that task because the Jerome name predates him by generations while the name Jacobson is nowhere to be found in the records.

  12. Armoric
    Armoric says:

    ” The Ukrainian Holodomor was directed and enforced by a heavily disproportionate number of Jews ”

    It’s useful to make comparisons between the Holocaust and the Holodomor. The Jews won’t say what makes the Holocaust so special:

    • the number of victims? –> The Germans had much more than 6 million casualties.

    • the genocidal intent? –> ZOG is genociding us right know, through race replacement.

    • the barbarity of the gas chamber? –> How is that worse than death by shrapnel, starvation, fire bombing…?

    • German evilness?

    I guess most Germans didn’t have a strong opinion about the Jews. The 25-point program of the Nazi party didn’t mention genociding anyone. During the war, the newspapers didn’t report that the Jews were being decimated. Even after the war, no witness accounts were left by the German guards, not even posthumously. It means that the whole thing, if you believe in it, must have been secretly carried out by a very small team.

    Raul Hilberg was the greatest Jewish Holocaust expert. In the 1960s, he said that Hitler had given orders to exterminate the Jews. Then, in the 1980s, he said there had been no such orders: the Germans were able to operate gas chambers without any written orders or instructions, thanks to “an incredible meeting of the minds”. It worked by telepathy. Here again, it means that is was a super-secret operation, unless telepathic skills were widespread in the country.

    Daniel Goldhagen, the 1996 author of “Hitler’s Willing Executioners” claims that the general population of Germany was heavily involved in slaughtering Jews. But he would have to explain the absence of witness accounts.

    By contrast, accounts of the Bolshevik massacres were given in at least some newspapers. In the 1920s, well before the Holodomor of 1931-32, Hitler wrote about the Bolshevik revolution, and how in Russia, “the Jew killed or starved thirty millions of the people”. Western governments knew about the Holodomor while it was happening. They didn’t need telepathy.

    The Jews keep asking: WHO KNEW? The German population didn’t know anything about gas chambers, or some of them would have written about it. But the violence of the Jewish Bolsheviks was no secret. In France, B.Lecache created the LICRA (League against antisemitism) in 1926 to help the murderer of a Ukrainian politician escape justice. Both Lecache and the murderer were Bolshevik Jews from Ukraine, although Lecache was born in Paris. They knew exactly what was going on in the USSR, and they used their influence in the media and in the French government to hide the truth and support the Bolshevik regime.

    Today, the same LICRA will use the pretext of a swastika graffiti to organize a one week media campaign against “the far-right”, and will get us fined in court for racial incitement if we complain about the rapes, murders and intimidation committed by third-world migrants.

    • David Ashton
      David Ashton says:

      The “telepathy” sarcasm about Raul Hilberg’s words comes from the late Robert Faurisson, whose stubborn courage, and in particular analysis of the Holocaust as a quasi-religion, must be acknowledged. Knowledge among Germans not of events inside the camps so much as reports of mass-executions in the East was documented by e.g. Christopher Browning – who also contributed partially revisionist account of the so-called “Final Solution” (his Wikipedia entry remains quite useful here). Germans had complaints about specific Jewish misbehaviours, but as a whole were not murderous sadists; and the apparent economic, social and international achievements of National Socialism outweighed distaste for Streicher-style excesses.

      Hitler’s estimate of Soviet deaths quoted here from “Mein Kampf” is excessive, but we are still free to engage in, debate or refute “Gulag Denial” without criminal penalties. Some victims are more equal than others.

  13. Camillus
    Camillus says:

    Despite his claims to George C. Marshall, Eisenhower’s reaction to his visit to Ohrdruf was not to document a holocaust, but rather to exploit the corpses he found there for propaganda purposes. Thus, while Ike commanded thousands of German civilians and American GIs to view the alleged atrocities there, he evidently neglected to order a proper forensic investigation of the crime scene–at least none has been made public.

  14. David Ashton
    David Ashton says:

    @ Trenchant & Eric
    I saw “Der ewige Jude” years ago at a BFI presentation of Third Reich films, and since watched it twice online. It has several “errors” such as confusing Emma Goldman with Rosa Luxemburg. It portrays the Jewish people visually and verbally as a swarm of rats who “cannot change their inner nature” as parasitic pests. I live on the edge of a rural part of England, where sometimes rat infestations occur and their control usually includes extermination. What might be the most decisive method to deal with incurable carriers of a deadly plague? The movie ends with a wartime reference back to Hitler’s pre-war threat of the “Vernichtung der juedischen Rasse”.

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      The only error I noticed was the Emma Goldman one. Big deal.

      “Extermination of the Jewish race…” Where did Hitler say that?

      He didn’t as far as I know.

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      Dershowitz himself has warned of “Vernichtung der juedischen Rasse”. It’s a recurring theme of Jewish internal commentary.

      To honor your efforts I will watch “Der ewige Jude” again. Imputing animal identities to other ethnic groups is part of the human condition (“goyim”) and doesn’t constitute per se incitement to genocide. Outside of the Hamelin, most rat problems are solved simply by addressing public hygiene and not by drawing up plans to rid the entire Earth of Rattus Rattus.

    • Henry
      Henry says:

      @David Ashton – the historical record proves that Jews are an invasive and destructive force (see the conversion of Palestine) and shows that when effective disabilities are applied to them they will even resort to feeding off their own; just as rats do when confined to their own kind. For an example of that behaviour simply Google ‘Zwi Migdal Society’.

    • Henry
      Henry says:

      David Ashton said: “The movie [Der ewige Jude] ends with a wartime reference back to Hitler’s pre-war threat of the “Vernichtung der juedischen Rasse”.

      David, I know you are much affected by Hitler’s Jan 30, 1939, speech because you’ve quoted that extract before. I posted a response which pointed out that Hitler had paused at a clause in his speech to turn a page and take in applause but he then went on to say that as Germany (and Italy) now possessed the means to inform the peoples of Europe of Jewish endeavours, it would be through that process that the peoples of Europe would be awakened and defeat Judaism throughout the continent, just as Germany had already done within the reich.

      As for “Der ewige Jude”…I also watched that film many years ago (1975) but the version I saw did not contain the excerpt from the 1939 speech which excites you so much. In fact it is quite obvious that the film has been doctored and you have been had! If you go to IMDB you will see that the film is listed as being 1hr 2min long, but go to Internet Archive where the film that includes the Hitler excerpt can be viewed, and you will see that it has become 1 hr 3min 14sec in length. The Hitler section lasts just over a minute and has clearly been inserted at 1:00:33 of the film. At that point you can see the ‘transition’ (flag waving, cheering people, etc) to the closing scenes which are now delayed until 1:01:33 when the original film is restored….

Comments are closed.