Hello,
I'd like to tell you a little anecdote about Holocaust rumors. I hope that this is the right place for it.
Now this is an anecdote by an "anon". You can think that I made it up. But hopefully you will believe me that this is true. I want to tell this story because for me it was important. It was maybe the main reason why I believed in the Holocaust.
I grew up in North-West Germany. Next to he house where my family lived in, there was a wild field, demarcated by a fence, and as kids we used to play there. This was in the late 60's. It was very exciting playing there, because there were a lot of bomb craters, there was all kinds of stuff laying around that we couldn't make sense off, but looked cool, and there were little pieces of wall sticking out of the ground. It was quite obvious: something used to be there which isn't anymore.
We used to play all kinds of adventurous games there and we loved to build little huts. The land right next to this field used to belong to a family. The woman of the family still lived in a house next to this field, only a few meters away from the fence. The house had been build by her husband. It didn't belong to her anymore, because shortly after the war, her husband had died of a gastric ulcer, and after his death she sold house and land for a lump sum, but she could still stay in that house as a tenant. And one time – I must have been 8 years old - she told us kids in a very serious voice: don't dig too deep on that field, because „this is where they burried all the jews“.
Back then we didn't really know what a jew was, but we understood that there were a lot of dead people in the ground. We still played there regularily, but when it dawned, we would run away, because we were afraid of ghosts. Only a couple of years later did we learn about the context of her story: the Holocaust. For a long time, I believed that I had grown up right next to a Holocaust mass grave.
Over time the field became inaccessible, because the bushes grew wild and at some point you couldn't enter it anymore. For me, the fact that nobody used this piece of land was further confirmation that there must be something in the ground. Something secret. Why is nobody building a house on this land? It must be because of the mass graves there, the thing that nobody but this old woman talks about.
The woman died in 1990. Around the same time I started studying history at the university. And I wanted to find out what exactly had happened there and expose that there was a mass grave of Holocaust victims right in this town.
In fact, before the war, this town used to have a large jewish population. Only very few jews were still living there, and the synagogue had been burned down in the „Kristallnacht“.
I talked to several old people from the vicinity, and I asked them if they knew anything about the mass grave of jews on that plot of land.
One old man simply said, no, that never happened, she must have been joking.
No, she wasn't joking. She was dead serious when she said it.
One old man said that this might be true, he doesn't really know what happened there, but he remembers stories that something like that had happened at the local air port. So: a second Holocaust mass grave in this city?
One old man said that he doesn't know if there are dead jews in the ground, but he knows for sure that at the end of the war the Wehrmacht burried large stocks of weapons there, for the possibility of an insurgency.
I also talked to her son. He said he had never heard of it. But he remarked that his mother wasn't even there when all of this allegedly happened, because even though the family had lived on the land bordering the field, they were evacuated to Austria, where he was born in 1943, and only returned after the war.
This was all the research I did. I always wanted to do more, go into archives, but just didn't find the time or honestly motivation for it. But I though: at some point, I will go and uncover what it is that is hidden beneath this mysterious wilderness.
I didn't have to.
About 10 years ago somebody did buy this land, and he build a house there. I followed this with great interest. Now they will be opening up the ground. Now whatever lays down there will come back to light.
And I was shocked. Because neither did the construction crew find any traces of mass graves, nor any weapons caches. There was simply nothing in the ground but earth and stones. A very anticlimactic end to something which had haunted me for my entire life.
But why did these old people believe in these stories?
All of them are dead now, so I can't ask them anymore. But in my opinion the most logical explanation is: after the war the people in this town were confronted with all of these stories about what had allegedly happened in secret, the jews were in fact all gone, and then they started talking and speculating about it. Did you know that this had happened? Did you notice something?
And as everybody surely knows, a lot of people like to tell either just-so-stories of simply lies to get attention. This is quite frankly the only explanation for all these stories. They were rumors. Either outright lies, or created by the „game of telephone“.
But they believed it.
This woman believed for the rest of her live that in the ground a few meter next to her house were the dead remains of the jews that disappeared.
This is how much „hear-say“ is worth. It is simply worth nothing.
Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
Moderator: Moderator
Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
-
Whodunnit?
- Member
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2023 1:36 pm
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
If there had been a mass grave, you can bet that this would have been exhumed and examined. But most simple-minded folks don't realize this. So they will be prone to pick up a rumor. After all. If there are no-mass graves, were did all the Jews go? That's how the pseudologic goes. Most people actually seem to believe that the 'figures given for extermination' were established after thorough investigation of mass graves and the like. But indeed they were not. They are merely humbucking to say something that is useful for atrocity propaganda. But if propaganda is repeated often enough, it will have some sort of effect. And your parents/grandparents were probably shown the 'death mills' types of short movies over and over again. Otherwise they could not attend a cinema, bear in mind this was before television was general. So people wanted to go to the movies. And they wanted to see 'newsreel' there. After all, who doesn't want to be well informed.
The 'mass grave in the field' story is really cute in some way. Also how that story emerged. And that people took it seriously. It's a post-modern version of the 'haunted house' stories. A real horror fairy tale story.
There will be mass graves in Germany of course. After all, there were six years war, the country was severely bombed, and the economic collapse starved millions of people. Not always to death of course. But those are conditions were death figures go up. And if there are more dead people that can be handled, one option is ditching them in mass graves. And graves are always good for a real spooky horror story, with ghosts that haunt you.
Tell you what Germans, perhaps it isn't the ghosts of the dead Jews that haunt you. Because that story is clearly atrocity propaganda. Perhaps those are the ghosts of people murdered by the Allies in bombing raids, in the murder of civilians, in the mass starvation this all caused and haunted Germans even, when the war was over. People who are daily disparaged and belittled by your media on TV, on the papers, etc. That is the real 'suppressed memory' in Germany. Time to get realistic about your history, perhaps. But it seems many don't want to. Especially those that rose to positions of power after WW2. Got potential to let those people look really bad.
The 'mass grave in the field' story is really cute in some way. Also how that story emerged. And that people took it seriously. It's a post-modern version of the 'haunted house' stories. A real horror fairy tale story.
There will be mass graves in Germany of course. After all, there were six years war, the country was severely bombed, and the economic collapse starved millions of people. Not always to death of course. But those are conditions were death figures go up. And if there are more dead people that can be handled, one option is ditching them in mass graves. And graves are always good for a real spooky horror story, with ghosts that haunt you.
Tell you what Germans, perhaps it isn't the ghosts of the dead Jews that haunt you. Because that story is clearly atrocity propaganda. Perhaps those are the ghosts of people murdered by the Allies in bombing raids, in the murder of civilians, in the mass starvation this all caused and haunted Germans even, when the war was over. People who are daily disparaged and belittled by your media on TV, on the papers, etc. That is the real 'suppressed memory' in Germany. Time to get realistic about your history, perhaps. But it seems many don't want to. Especially those that rose to positions of power after WW2. Got potential to let those people look really bad.
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
Whodunnit? wrote:About 10 years ago somebody did buy this land, and he build a house there. I followed this with great interest. Now they will be opening up the ground. Now whatever lays down there will come back to light.
And I was shocked. Because neither did the construction crew find any traces of mass graves, nor any weapons caches. There was simply nothing in the ground but earth and stones. A very anticlimactic end to something which had haunted me for my entire life.
But why did these old people believe in these stories?
All of them are dead now, so I can't ask them anymore. But in my opinion the most logical explanation is: after the war the people in this town were confronted with all of these stories about what had allegedly happened in secret, the jews were in fact all gone, and then they started talking and speculating about it. Did you know that this had happened? Did you notice something?
And as everybody surely knows, a lot of people like to tell either just-so-stories of simply lies to get attention. This is quite frankly the only explanation for all these stories. They were rumors. Either outright lies, or created by the „game of telephone“.
But they believed it.
The Allies massively "reeducated" the German people with Holohoax tales. And they also used to plant false rumors and get some of them back as "reports." Moreover, memory is far from being as reliable as most people believe. Memory is constantly reshaped and "enriched" with new stories and details (false memories). Tell a group of people enough UFO & alien stories and some of them will soon "remember" flying saucer sightings and alien abductions.
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
-
Whodunnit?
- Member
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2023 1:36 pm
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
Hektor wrote:Tell you what Germans, perhaps it isn't the ghosts of the dead Jews that haunt you. Because that story is clearly atrocity propaganda. Perhaps those are the ghosts of people murdered by the Allies in bombing raids, in the murder of civilians, in the mass starvation this all caused and haunted Germans even, when the war was over. People who are daily disparaged and belittled by your media on TV, on the papers, etc. That is the real 'suppressed memory' in Germany. Time to get realistic about your history, perhaps. But it seems many don't want to. Especially those that rose to positions of power after WW2. Got potential to let those people look really bad.
Hektor wrote:
Tell you what Germans, perhaps it isn't the ghosts of the dead Jews that haunt you. Because that story is clearly atrocity propaganda. Perhaps those are the ghosts of people murdered by the Allies in bombing raids, in the murder of civilians, in the mass starvation this all caused and haunted Germans even, when the war was over. People who are daily disparaged and belittled by your media on TV, on the papers, etc. That is the real 'suppressed memory' in Germany. Time to get realistic about your history, perhaps. But it seems many don't want to. Especially those that rose to positions of power after WW2. Got potential to let those people look really bad.
It is easy to say something like this, or to get upset about how docile the Germans are.
I'm not German by ethnicity, I am the offspring of "guest workers". As such, I could both experience life in Germany, and look at the Germans from an outside perspective.
In school I had to "learn" what the Germans were taught about their history. When I later studied history, I first found out in the uni library that there was a "Germany" in the middle ages. Our school teacher had told us that "Germany" was basically invented in the 19th century, before that nobody in Germany considered himself German, the people only thought of themselves as Bavarians, Swabians or something else, it was a poor region like the balkans, consisting of over 300 different countries with no common identity, and they also couldn't understand each other because of the strong dialects. Then it was conquered by Prussia, and through compulsory schooling a fake German indentity was created. I am not kidding. Besides of that, the medieval history was basically skipped, we only got a crash course about serfdom, the black plague, the crusades. Next came the enlightening, the reformation, the 30y war, the french revolution, and then it was time for you to get tortured with WW1 & WW2-history for years.
In the 80's you still learned that Wilhelm's Kaiserreich was an absolutist tyranny, the Germans there were dumb, subserviant people who couldn't think independently, and one day, the tyrannical Austrian prince Franz Ferdinand was assassinated by a plucky serbian freedom fighter, and the Germans seized the opportunity to unleash a tidal wave of death upon their peaceful democratic neighbors, just because they wanted to rule the world.
Of course, every German kid had grandparents that sometimes talked about their suffering, but in the media these stories were defamed as exaggerated self-pity and an attempt to deflect from their guilt. The young Germans learned to despise their grandparents, because they were the one's who brought all this shame and hostility upon them, hostility that Germans were often confronted with in foreign countries.
They also learned that being a German means being the real "Untermensch". They were taught to admire the victors of WW2 as examples for how to be better people. Germans were taught that they don't have any sense of humor, but the British were the funniest people in the world, so be like them. They were taught that Germans were boring lovers, but the french were the best lovers in the world, so be like them. They were taught that Germans had an almost genetic longing for subserviance and tyranny, but the Americans were naturally indomitable, freedom loving people, so be like them. Every ill in German society or history was the result of a uniquely German defect.
Since I have been "red-pilled", I did a lot of research into the re-engineering of the German society. In my opinion, the allies realized that if you want to rule over a foreign people, you have to take their pride. Only proud people resist. They archived their goal.
They enslaved them, but later granted them the role of the "house negro". And this is what they unfortunately are today. They are the house negros of Europe and America.
It is deeply imprinted in their mind that they are obligated to be nice to everybody. And it worked to some extend. Whenever there's a worldwide poll about which countries are the most popular, Germany always rank very high. The problem is that it doesn't matter how many of the average people like you. The political leadership of the war winners clearly don't.
In my opinion, the reason why the Americans blew up the Nord Stream-pipelines was not to prevent them from importing Russian gas, because the Germans had already made their commitments. This was a message to Germany: you still are our house negro, and this is what happens when the house negro gets uppity.
Revisionism in Germany is a lost cause. Besides the fact that Holocaust revisionism is illegal: even if you try to convince a German that his ancestors weren't pathologically subserviant people, many just reject it, because the perceived inability of their ancestors to think independently exculpates them to some extend from the Holocaust guilt. They didn't really mean to kill all these people. It was just blind obediance. "Kadavergehorsam".
The salvation can only come from the US, the UK and Russia. At least, since the release of "Sleepwalkers", they moved away from the WW1-guilt narrative, and McMeekin's "Stalin's war" is a shot against Russia, but it also takes some guilt off the backs of the Germans.
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
hermod wrote:Whodunnit? wrote:About 10 years ago somebody did buy this land, and he build a house there. I followed this with great interest. Now they will be opening up the ground. Now whatever lays down there will come back to light.
And I was shocked. Because neither did the construction crew find any traces of mass graves, nor any weapons caches. There was simply nothing in the ground but earth and stones. A very anticlimactic end to something which had haunted me for my entire life.
But why did these old people believe in these stories?
All of them are dead now, so I can't ask them anymore. But in my opinion the most logical explanation is: after the war the people in this town were confronted with all of these stories about what had allegedly happened in secret, the jews were in fact all gone, and then they started talking and speculating about it. Did you know that this had happened? Did you notice something?
And as everybody surely knows, a lot of people like to tell either just-so-stories of simply lies to get attention. This is quite frankly the only explanation for all these stories. They were rumors. Either outright lies, or created by the „game of telephone“.
But they believed it.
The Allies massively "reeducated" the German people with Holohoax tales. And they also used to plant false rumors and get some of them back as "reports." Moreover, memory is far from being as reliable as most people believe. Memory is constantly reshaped and "enriched" with new stories and details (false memories). Tell a group of people enough UFO & alien stories and some of them will soon "remember" flying saucer sightings and alien abductions.
....
The Allies also found willing collaborators among the Germans. Those that got a license in the media for example. The large publishing houses in Germany are a consequence thereof.
The phased on reeducation did give a shock of course ("Nazi atrocities"). But I think that many rumors were not direct work of Allied agents. They emerged, because people 'had heard' something or 'had read something'. The Jewish mass grave story could be a thing of this. And as long as it is fed, it will ferment further.
Indeed memory isn't exactly reliable... Especially when it is 'worked upon'. E.g. exposed to media and conversations about a subject. It can easily be 'enriched' and also 'changed'. Meanwhile testimony (which has to be based on memory) is considered the 'most reliable proof' by many, when it is actually not. Well and there are millions of people that will testify that they have been abducted by aliens. I don't even believe that most are lying, but it demonstrates what exposure and obsession with a subject can do to people.
Another factor is the appearance of authority. Meaning that people are more prone to believe something, if 'experts' say that it is true. In the past this commonly was some priesthood. Nowadays it is academics 'that studied the subject'. Authority becomes more powerful, when there is a appearance of 'consensus'. This is when 'all experts seem to agree'. And one notices this even in academic circles. They are reluctant to deviate from a view, when their colleagues seem to agree on it. Although, they may say that 'things aren't that easy' or that 'the matter is more complex' signaling that things aren't so obvious and well-proven as alleged. Disparagement of dissenters is another way to keep people in line, including 'the experts'. An extreme example was the inquisition where dissenters were tried and punished by the authorities about their views. Since majorities go with the apparent strongest, this maintains 'the consensus' on views.
On the other hand, I know quite a number of historians (including Germans) that DO NOT share the orthodox Holocaust narrative. They of course would never say that 'too loud' in public. In private conversation yes, but in public it would somehow be received as if he was engaging in an act of 'blasphemy'.
That's why you can't go on 'surveys' on the matter. Not that they make up the figures, but the fact that people won't say what they think renders them useless.
-
Whodunnit?
- Member
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2023 1:36 pm
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
Hektor wrote:
The Allies also found willing collaborators among the Germans. Those that got a license in the media for example. The large publishing houses in Germany are a consequence thereof.
A couple of years ago I read a good book about this topic, it is called "Charakterwäsche". I don't know if it is available in english. I goes in depth about how journalists were handpicked by the allies, and it also describes how in some of the notoriously harsh POW camps some prisoners, in particular those that had been loyal Nazis, had a "Paul the apostole"-like conversion.
20 years ago when Germany had the green party in her government for the first time, one of the star ministers was Jürgen Trittin, who, at least among those who cared to look deeper into politics, was known for being virulently anti-German. His father was an SS-member. Quote from Wikipedia (auto-translated):
"During the Second World War, his father served from 1941 as a volunteer in the Waffen-SS at the front, most recently at the age of twenty-two with the rank of SS Obersturmfuhrer. He fought until the unconditional surrender in the east on the Hela peninsula in the Bay of Danzig, from which the wounded and refugees were constantly transported west across the Baltic Sea. Klaus Trittin was a Soviet prisoner of war until 1950. According to his son, his past would not let him go. Unlike many of his contemporaries, he spoke openly about it, including to his children. In an interview, Jürgen Trittin reported on a visit to the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, to which he and his brother had been taken by their father at the age of 15. Klaus Trittin said to his sons: “Look at that, we did that. You must never allow something like this to happen again.”"
There were also other cases in Germany of sons and daughters of former national socialists who were driven by an almost psychotic hatred of Germans. Niklas Frank, the son of Hans Frank, a journalist, is one of the worst.
Another topic is the "Odenwaldschule". This was an elite boarding school in Hesse. A lot of it's former students went on to have bog careers in the German media, politics and economy. In the 90's the Odenwaldschule became quite notorious, because several former pupils accused the teachers of the Odenwaldschule of systematic sexual abuse. The media quickly muddied the water and presented a theology teacher as the main culprit and connected it to other cases of child abuse by catholic priests. But a couple of years ago I looked deeper into this case, and the main abusers were neither catholics nor protestant. As the meme goes, "it looked like the cast of Seinfeld". There is a very good documentary about it, unfortunately it's not in English.
In the 60's and 70's there was also a "poet", Ingeborg Bachmann. Her writings were the kind of German post-war feminist and antifascist literature, not something that aged well. She was clearly mentally ill, heavily drug addicted and she died in 1973 by burning herself to death, probably accidentally after having passed out on drugs.
Quote Wikipedia:
"Bachmann was born in Klagenfurt, in the Austrian state of Carinthia, the daughter of Olga (née Haas) and Matthias Bachmann, a schoolteacher. Her father was an early member of the Austrian National Socialist Party. [...] Bachmann's literary work focuses on themes like personal boundaries, establishment of the truth, and philosophy of language, the latter in the tradition of Wittgenstein. Many of her prose works represent the struggles of women to survive and to find a voice in post-war society. She also addresses the histories of imperialism and fascism, in particular, the persistence of imperialist ideas in the present. Fascism was a recurring theme in her writings. In her novel Der Fall Franza (The Case of Franza) Bachmann argued that fascism had not died in 1945 but had survived in the German speaking world of the 1960s in human relations and particularly in men's oppression of women. In Germany the achievements of the women's rights campaign at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century had been systematically undone by the fascist Nazi regime in the 1930s. Bachmann's engagement with fascism followed that of other women writers who in the immediate post-war period dealt with fascism from a woman's perspective, such as Anna Seghers, Ilse Aichinger, Ingeborg Drewitz and Christa Wolf."
her death:
"On the night of 25 September 1973, her nightgown caught on fire and she was taken to the Sant'Eugenio Hospital at 7:05 A.M. the following morning for treatment of second and third degree burns. Local police concluded that the fire was caused by a cigarette. During her stay, she experienced withdrawal symptoms from barbiturate substance abuse, though the doctors treating her were not aware of the cause. This may have contributed to her subsequent death on 17 October 1973"
There were several other such cases. Who knows what else happened to the children of former nazis.
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
Hektor wrote:The Allies also found willing collaborators among the Germans. Those that got a license in the media for example. The large publishing houses in Germany are a consequence thereof.
After WWII, the Allied occupiers categorized the Germans into 5 classes of enemies and only the Germans I would call "anti-Nazis" ("Exonerated Persons" in Allied terminology) and "politically neutrals" ("Followers" and "Lesser Offenders" in Allied terminology) were allowed to perform a job other than manual labor for a living and to shape Germany's postwar intellectual life. That proved the best way to create a suicidal new culture without a demographic future in "reeducated" Germany. In other words, that was a democratic implementation (social engineering, "manufacture of consent") of Theodore N. Kaufman's 1941 plan and of Earnest Hooton's 1943 plan for the post-WWII extinction of the German people.
Hektor wrote:The phased on reeducation did give a shock of course ("Nazi atrocities"). But I think that many rumors were not direct work of Allied agents. They emerged, because people 'had heard' something or 'had read something'. The Jewish mass grave story could be a thing of this. And as long as it is fed, it will ferment further.
Hard, if not almost impossible, to know where it came from. That's why the British propagandists had devised their rumor-planting method for the creation of atrocity propaganda "reports." During WWI, they had planted the corpse-factory story in a Chinese newspaper and in a Swiss newspaper one month and a half before publicizing it in 2 London newspapers of the Northcliffe Press and in a Belgian newspaper published in London. Thanks to the use of that trick, they were able to blame it on others when the story boomeranged 8 years later. That's how they were able to quickly elminate the big embarrassment caused by the former chief of British intelligence (Brigadier General John Charteris) when he bragged in New York about being the originator of that successful hoax.
Hektor wrote:Indeed memory isn't exactly reliable... Especially when it is 'worked upon'. E.g. exposed to media and conversations about a subject. It can easily be 'enriched' and also 'changed'. Meanwhile testimony (which has to be based on memory) is considered the 'most reliable proof' by many, when it is actually not. Well and there are millions of people that will testify that they have been abducted by aliens. I don't even believe that most are lying, but it demonstrates what exposure and obsession with a subject can do to people.
The antirevisionist judge at the Lipstadt-Irving trial had to concede that cross pollination may have tainted a number of Holocaust testimonies and that "a corpus of false testimony [may have been] built up" regarding the Holocaust. And he was not even talking about the late testimonies, made several decades after the war and made after several decades of 24/7 Holocaust propaganda.
Hektor wrote:Another factor is the appearance of authority. Meaning that people are more prone to believe something, if 'experts' say that it is true. In the past this commonly was some priesthood. Nowadays it is academics 'that studied the subject'. Authority becomes more powerful, when there is a appearance of 'consensus'. This is when 'all experts seem to agree'. And one notices this even in academic circles. They are reluctant to deviate from a view, when their colleagues seem to agree on it. Although, they may say that 'things aren't that easy' or that 'the matter is more complex' signaling that things aren't so obvious and well-proven as alleged. Disparagement of dissenters is another way to keep people in line, including 'the experts'. An extreme example was the inquisition where dissenters were tried and punished by the authorities about their views. Since majorities go with the apparent strongest, this maintains 'the consensus' on views.
On the other hand, I know quite a number of historians (including Germans) that DO NOT share the orthodox Holocaust narrative. They of course would never say that 'too loud' in public. In private conversation yes, but in public it would somehow be received as if he was engaging in an act of 'blasphemy'.
That's why you can't go on 'surveys' on the matter. Not that they make up the figures, but the fact that people won't say what they think renders them useless.
Everything can be turned into a consensus when the careers of dissenters are broken or worse. Most humans are gregarious animals. The brains of normal human beings are wired to prevent them from being ostracized or brutalized by others because of their too divergent ideas and behaviors. Conformity or flying under the radar is a common survival strategy among human beings.
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
-
Whodunnit?
- Member
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2023 1:36 pm
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
A lot of people also don't want to hear anything about the Holocaust.
Take my case as an example: today, I feel embarrassed about having believed this story and having told others about it. Today, I think "how could I have been so stupid. Not even according to mainstream Holocaust "scholars" does anyone claim that the jews were just shot in German cities.".
I did study history, so I was very interested in history. But not in anything WW2. In school we were beaten over the head with it for years, to a point when in the "Oberstufe", 12th grade, we pupils spontaneously protested in front of our history teacher. We told the teacher: we are sick of this topic. We are very interested in history, but we don't learn about anything else, just world war 2 on a continuous loop. It didn't help.
What made me study history was my interest in anything else but world war 2, because there was a lack of knowledge.
The only reason why I cared about this anecdote is that I thought I might make some waves as a rookie historian by uncovering it. But overall, world war 2 as a topic just brought back this memory of feeling stuck in a loop of boredom.
A lot of Germans react in a similar way. Every now and then, some team of TV reporters asks random people about what they think about the newest Holocaust memorial being build in the city, or what they think about some 90y old who was an "SS war criminal" that lives in their village, like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLxQfPhUZME
"The last NS-perpetrators: no punishment, no regret?". It is for the most part about "Karl M", a former SS soldier, who participated in the reprisal against some french villagers after a partisan attack, but was never punished as a war crminal. They ask the inhabitants of that town what they think about an alleged war criminal living in their midst, and you see how weary they are of this topic. One guy says "It's enough. It's been over 70 years ago." and just leaves.
I think the Germans in the post-war years thought that if they "earn back their place in the international community" by just going along, being nice, at some point the allies will stop pushing this atrocity propaganda on them, WW2 will just be treated as any other war in history, and then you can talk more objectively about it.
But with every generation it got worse.
The Holocaust movies are a central pillar of Holocaust orthodoxy. Spielberg admitted that the reason for why he made Schindler's List was that in the late 80's and early 90's, Holocaust revisionism was gaining acceptance. So they countered with emotions.
Go on youtube, watch a clip from Schindler's List, the Pianist, The Boy in the Striped Pyjama, and read the comments. There are people who write comments like "I've watched this movie at least 10 time now, this scene always makes me cry". Now why would you watch a movie more than once? Because you like it. A lot of people simply love these movies which is why they totally suspend disbelieve. They treat these movies like religious revelations. A couple of years ago a bunch of Antifas invited members of the "far right" AfD to watch Schindler's List at the movie theater for free. As if this movie would cure these politicians of their "far right thinking". Well, maybe it is this movie that made them antifas.
A good Holocaust movie always has the tragic hero, but especially the good German. Every non-jew then wants to be the good German. The good German is special, and of course, everybody thinks of himself as special. Every non-jew imagines himself in the role of Oskar Schindler. He would have done something! But it's too late to fight the Nazis - or isn't it? Maybe we find a bunch of Nazis that we can still fight.
Now with young jews I've noticed that they are sick of the role of the "meekly jew that was led into the gas chambers like a lamb to the slaughter". Since Inglorious Basterds, they want to be the bear jew. On twitter for example, you often see some jew posting the "bear jew"-gif as a reaction to some antisemitic incident.
They are not finished yet either.
And now we have a war between Russia and Ukraine, supported by Nato, and both sides justify their actions by accusing the enemy of being Nazis and literally Hitler. This is how we are circling the drain now. There is a war, officially a continuation of WW2, because new Hitlers just always pop up somewhere. It is anti-intellectual.
Just a few thoughts.
Take my case as an example: today, I feel embarrassed about having believed this story and having told others about it. Today, I think "how could I have been so stupid. Not even according to mainstream Holocaust "scholars" does anyone claim that the jews were just shot in German cities.".
I did study history, so I was very interested in history. But not in anything WW2. In school we were beaten over the head with it for years, to a point when in the "Oberstufe", 12th grade, we pupils spontaneously protested in front of our history teacher. We told the teacher: we are sick of this topic. We are very interested in history, but we don't learn about anything else, just world war 2 on a continuous loop. It didn't help.
What made me study history was my interest in anything else but world war 2, because there was a lack of knowledge.
The only reason why I cared about this anecdote is that I thought I might make some waves as a rookie historian by uncovering it. But overall, world war 2 as a topic just brought back this memory of feeling stuck in a loop of boredom.
A lot of Germans react in a similar way. Every now and then, some team of TV reporters asks random people about what they think about the newest Holocaust memorial being build in the city, or what they think about some 90y old who was an "SS war criminal" that lives in their village, like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLxQfPhUZME
"The last NS-perpetrators: no punishment, no regret?". It is for the most part about "Karl M", a former SS soldier, who participated in the reprisal against some french villagers after a partisan attack, but was never punished as a war crminal. They ask the inhabitants of that town what they think about an alleged war criminal living in their midst, and you see how weary they are of this topic. One guy says "It's enough. It's been over 70 years ago." and just leaves.
I think the Germans in the post-war years thought that if they "earn back their place in the international community" by just going along, being nice, at some point the allies will stop pushing this atrocity propaganda on them, WW2 will just be treated as any other war in history, and then you can talk more objectively about it.
But with every generation it got worse.
The Holocaust movies are a central pillar of Holocaust orthodoxy. Spielberg admitted that the reason for why he made Schindler's List was that in the late 80's and early 90's, Holocaust revisionism was gaining acceptance. So they countered with emotions.
Go on youtube, watch a clip from Schindler's List, the Pianist, The Boy in the Striped Pyjama, and read the comments. There are people who write comments like "I've watched this movie at least 10 time now, this scene always makes me cry". Now why would you watch a movie more than once? Because you like it. A lot of people simply love these movies which is why they totally suspend disbelieve. They treat these movies like religious revelations. A couple of years ago a bunch of Antifas invited members of the "far right" AfD to watch Schindler's List at the movie theater for free. As if this movie would cure these politicians of their "far right thinking". Well, maybe it is this movie that made them antifas.
A good Holocaust movie always has the tragic hero, but especially the good German. Every non-jew then wants to be the good German. The good German is special, and of course, everybody thinks of himself as special. Every non-jew imagines himself in the role of Oskar Schindler. He would have done something! But it's too late to fight the Nazis - or isn't it? Maybe we find a bunch of Nazis that we can still fight.
Now with young jews I've noticed that they are sick of the role of the "meekly jew that was led into the gas chambers like a lamb to the slaughter". Since Inglorious Basterds, they want to be the bear jew. On twitter for example, you often see some jew posting the "bear jew"-gif as a reaction to some antisemitic incident.
They are not finished yet either.
And now we have a war between Russia and Ukraine, supported by Nato, and both sides justify their actions by accusing the enemy of being Nazis and literally Hitler. This is how we are circling the drain now. There is a war, officially a continuation of WW2, because new Hitlers just always pop up somewhere. It is anti-intellectual.
Just a few thoughts.
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
Indeed, people are fed up with the subject. And that now plays in the hands of the camp that muddied the waters for decades now. "The Holocaust" is an "established fact". But it is within the category of the mind. Not interested in that. Question is: Is it part of the category of (historic) reality? And there it doesn't look to good for the thesis (to put it mildly).
In my experience with the Germans, what got me with them was their ignorance. They of course 'knew' what TV and books told them. But they were in virtually none of the cases aware of psychological warfare, atrocity propaganda and the role it played during and after the war in terms of the Reeducation Programs. Meanwhile those involved in sykewar and initial reeducation stated this rather bluntly. So psychological warfare and Reeducation were within the category of provable reality. To simply ignore this is silly and the omission on parts of historians and teachers is "intellectually dishonest". You want to 'teach kids about the Holocaust'. Assume that this would be legitimate (which, it isn't). Then why don't tell the kids first that the Allies had atrocity propaganda as part of their broader strategy. That they had psychological warfare units and that they had a program to reeducate the Germans. At least for that you'd have clear evidence in documentary form.
Also, give some context to the basis of the footage the early propaganda films do show. It isn't given. It's all part of the 'Nazi conspiracy to exterminate the Jews and other undesirables'. Meanwhile some research would demonstrate why those inmates in Belsen were sick and dying. This just wouldn't fit the 'morale of the story'.
The vast majority of Germans (in Germany, in South Africa there were plenty of "Holocaust Deniers" - study friend of mine told me his aunt said that the 'gas chambers' were 'rumors') have swallowed the lie. It actually is part of the foundation of their post-modern world view. So if that gets challenged, they will get nervous about the issue. If it was indeed propaganda lies, this would mean that there is something wrong with their 'world view'. It would mean that politicians, teachers, professors, preachers, etc. have told others lies for decades. And not just some point of error. This would discredit the intellectual elites, but also large parts of the functional elites would stand there with their pants down. So rather maintain that 'pious lie' then risk cultural, political and social disruption, because of general knowledge that it is a lie. But bear in mind how much political foolishness was justified with 'the Holocaust'. And it still is.
And yes, 'the Holocaust' was instrumental in fermenting the generational conflict between the 'old school Germans' and the 'progressive' 68ers. It was so useful for them, they'd have to invent it, if it wasn't 'history'.
The effect of the Holocaustianity isn't limited to Germany. It was a 'thing' in the Netherlands, Sweden, the US and a lot of other countries. It wasn't a big thing in South Africa until the late 1980s though. I'd guess only those with an academic slant may have heard about it. Hitler was a bit more famous of course. Also that the 'Union of South Africa' was on the Allied side during world war two. The country - the White population - was however rather divided on the issue, during that period. Jan Smuts, who was the prime minister of South Africa during that period was a controversial figure then. A large portion of the Afrikaner population was rather anti-British in sentiment over what happened during the second Anglo-Boer War. The Brits followed a 'scorched Earth policy' burning down the farms to quell any resistance and they did put the women and children in concentration camps to stop the men from fighting. Many of those women and children died in those concentration camps from diseases and there was a deliberate mistreatment of those whose men kept fighting. That's why many Afrikaners hated the English with a passion afterwards. It also became a political issue during for the parties. The Smuts party (South African Party / United Party ) was pro-British. While the National Party was more Anti British and explicitly Afrikaner Nationalist. The Smuts faction was also more explicitly Anti-German in attitude. During WW1 there were even Anti-German pogroms in Johannesburg and other cities. During WW2 Germans and those opposing the war were put into concentration camps. How much anti-German violence there was I don't recall. The subject is definitely under-investigated. Neither South African academia, nor the e.g. the German embassy showed any interest in the issue up to now. The graveyards at the concentration camps are privately sustained.
And most people do not know about this. I guess it is similar in Germany with e.g. the Rheinwiesenlager or the various torture camps like Bad Nenndorf. The policy seems to be omission in this regards. And when the issue comes up beat people with the Nazi-Club or Holocaust-whip into submission. Claim the Germans deserved it, because they were evil. That's how they make sure that the victim-villain roles are assigned and preserved and it's key to present day politics.
And that must be broken. It ultimately will be, but the earlier that happens the less continued damage it can do.
In my experience with the Germans, what got me with them was their ignorance. They of course 'knew' what TV and books told them. But they were in virtually none of the cases aware of psychological warfare, atrocity propaganda and the role it played during and after the war in terms of the Reeducation Programs. Meanwhile those involved in sykewar and initial reeducation stated this rather bluntly. So psychological warfare and Reeducation were within the category of provable reality. To simply ignore this is silly and the omission on parts of historians and teachers is "intellectually dishonest". You want to 'teach kids about the Holocaust'. Assume that this would be legitimate (which, it isn't). Then why don't tell the kids first that the Allies had atrocity propaganda as part of their broader strategy. That they had psychological warfare units and that they had a program to reeducate the Germans. At least for that you'd have clear evidence in documentary form.
Also, give some context to the basis of the footage the early propaganda films do show. It isn't given. It's all part of the 'Nazi conspiracy to exterminate the Jews and other undesirables'. Meanwhile some research would demonstrate why those inmates in Belsen were sick and dying. This just wouldn't fit the 'morale of the story'.
The vast majority of Germans (in Germany, in South Africa there were plenty of "Holocaust Deniers" - study friend of mine told me his aunt said that the 'gas chambers' were 'rumors') have swallowed the lie. It actually is part of the foundation of their post-modern world view. So if that gets challenged, they will get nervous about the issue. If it was indeed propaganda lies, this would mean that there is something wrong with their 'world view'. It would mean that politicians, teachers, professors, preachers, etc. have told others lies for decades. And not just some point of error. This would discredit the intellectual elites, but also large parts of the functional elites would stand there with their pants down. So rather maintain that 'pious lie' then risk cultural, political and social disruption, because of general knowledge that it is a lie. But bear in mind how much political foolishness was justified with 'the Holocaust'. And it still is.
And yes, 'the Holocaust' was instrumental in fermenting the generational conflict between the 'old school Germans' and the 'progressive' 68ers. It was so useful for them, they'd have to invent it, if it wasn't 'history'.
The effect of the Holocaustianity isn't limited to Germany. It was a 'thing' in the Netherlands, Sweden, the US and a lot of other countries. It wasn't a big thing in South Africa until the late 1980s though. I'd guess only those with an academic slant may have heard about it. Hitler was a bit more famous of course. Also that the 'Union of South Africa' was on the Allied side during world war two. The country - the White population - was however rather divided on the issue, during that period. Jan Smuts, who was the prime minister of South Africa during that period was a controversial figure then. A large portion of the Afrikaner population was rather anti-British in sentiment over what happened during the second Anglo-Boer War. The Brits followed a 'scorched Earth policy' burning down the farms to quell any resistance and they did put the women and children in concentration camps to stop the men from fighting. Many of those women and children died in those concentration camps from diseases and there was a deliberate mistreatment of those whose men kept fighting. That's why many Afrikaners hated the English with a passion afterwards. It also became a political issue during for the parties. The Smuts party (South African Party / United Party ) was pro-British. While the National Party was more Anti British and explicitly Afrikaner Nationalist. The Smuts faction was also more explicitly Anti-German in attitude. During WW1 there were even Anti-German pogroms in Johannesburg and other cities. During WW2 Germans and those opposing the war were put into concentration camps. How much anti-German violence there was I don't recall. The subject is definitely under-investigated. Neither South African academia, nor the e.g. the German embassy showed any interest in the issue up to now. The graveyards at the concentration camps are privately sustained.
And most people do not know about this. I guess it is similar in Germany with e.g. the Rheinwiesenlager or the various torture camps like Bad Nenndorf. The policy seems to be omission in this regards. And when the issue comes up beat people with the Nazi-Club or Holocaust-whip into submission. Claim the Germans deserved it, because they were evil. That's how they make sure that the victim-villain roles are assigned and preserved and it's key to present day politics.
And that must be broken. It ultimately will be, but the earlier that happens the less continued damage it can do.
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
Whodunnit? wrote:A lot of people also don't want to hear anything about the Holocaust.
... but base all their moral & political standards on it and furiously bring it up as soon as they find out an interlocutor is an evil heretic.
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
hermod wrote:Whodunnit? wrote:A lot of people also don't want to hear anything about the Holocaust.
... but base all their moral & political standards on it and furiously bring it up as soon as they find out an interlocutor is an evil heretic.
I think 'all' would be a bit of an overstatement.
There were already traditions in place that formed the basis for moral and political standards, before people were indoctrinated with the Holocaust. They are also 'persisting' to some extent. But what happens is they slowly redesign their morality and politics slowly in line with the new powerful dogmata they have learned. This is a bit slower with the folks that are distant from academia, media and cultural production. But those closer to the center will absorb the 'new lore' quicker and they also will redesign their traditional views in line with it.
That's why you will meet the more rabid Holocausters and 'memory cultists' (The term they use in Germany is "Erinnerungskultur") in the academic circles and its immediate surroundings. And make no mistake, it is a thought terminating cliche there, while they generally will dispute that fact. They will employ the whole series of phraseology to defend the Holocaust. Something like: "Best Documented Genocide in Human History". And as soon as National Socialism, Hitler or 'the twelve years' comes up they will condemning and moralizing it big time.
It clearly got the hallmarks of religion. Having replaced the Christian Hegemony in Germany that existed prior to the 1960s (Which was however already in a bad shape then). You can deny the crucifixion of Jesus any time... And nothing happens. But try that with industrial style homicidal gassings in Auschwitz. If it's done on social level, you probably get a few smirks. But if you do that with more potential of publicity, this will alarm the inquisition rather sooner than later. Asking for evidence, they will revert to "obviousness"... point to verdicts of trials, mention that 'the accused did confess their crimes'.... Well, wouldn't we first have to look at the evidence for a crime having happened and investigate this, before we go for 'confessions'?
Attacking the central event of the dogma, may not be the best approach to it. I think one needs to look on how this story was manufactured, spread and utilized first. Then confront people with this. If they can see that those pushing the story were manipulators, they will be more accepting to see the story was made up and is malicious atrocity propaganda.
What I've started doing is to tell people:"Yes there was a conflict between Jews and Germans prior to World War Two". But who was the aggressor in this regard. Was it organized Jewry or was it the Germans? Be prepared to hear a lot of red herrings, then. In fact those are rather old red herrings.. E.g. "Not all Jews" were like that. Well, not all National Socialists were like the caricature that formed in your mind, isn't it?
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
Hektor wrote:hermod wrote:Whodunnit? wrote:A lot of people also don't want to hear anything about the Holocaust.
... but base all their moral & political standards on it and furiously bring it up as soon as they find out an interlocutor is an evil heretic.
I think 'all' would be a bit of an overstatement.
There were already traditions in place that formed the basis for moral and political standards, before people were indoctrinated with the Holocaust. They are also 'persisting' to some extent. But what happens is they slowly redesign their morality and politics slowly in line with the new powerful dogmata they have learned. This is a bit slower with the folks that are distant from academia, media and cultural production. But those closer to the center will absorb the 'new lore' quicker and they also will redesign their traditional views in line with it.
I was talking about the clows of Generation Z. Most of time, THEY are the ones saying they don't want to hear anything about the Holocaust but base 100% of their childish moral standards and offended overreactions on the Holocult.
Hektor wrote:That's why you will meet the more rabid Holocausters and 'memory cultists' (The term they use in Germany is "Erinnerungskultur") in the academic circles and its immediate surroundings. And make no mistake, it is a thought terminating cliche there, while they generally will dispute that fact. They will employ the whole series of phraseology to defend the Holocaust. Something like: "Best Documented Genocide in Human History". And as soon as National Socialism, Hitler or 'the twelve years' comes up they will condemning and moralizing it big time.
It clearly got the hallmarks of religion. Having replaced the Christian Hegemony in Germany that existed prior to the 1960s (Which was however already in a bad shape then). You can deny the crucifixion of Jesus any time... And nothing happens. But try that with industrial style homicidal gassings in Auschwitz. If it's done on social level, you probably get a few smirks. But if you do that with more potential of publicity, this will alarm the inquisition rather sooner than later. Asking for evidence, they will revert to "obviousness"... point to verdicts of trials, mention that 'the accused did confess their crimes'.... Well, wouldn't we first have to look at the evidence for a crime having happened and investigate this, before we go for 'confessions'?
Attacking the central event of the dogma, may not be the best approach to it. I think one needs to look on how this story was manufactured, spread and utilized first. Then confront people with this. If they can see that those pushing the story were manipulators, they will be more accepting to see the story was made up and is malicious atrocity propaganda.
What I've started doing is to tell people:"Yes there was a conflict between Jews and Germans prior to World War Two". But who was the aggressor in this regard. Was it organized Jewry or was it the Germans? Be prepared to hear a lot of red herrings, then. In fact those are rather old red herrings.. E.g. "Not all Jews" were like that. Well, not all National Socialists were like the caricature that formed in your mind, isn't it?
To a memory cultist, so-called confessions, and testimonies in general, are the evidence. Doesn't work for alien abductions and bigfoot sightings. But works (i.e. is probative enough) for the Holocaust. A person's evidentiary standards are negatively correlated with a person's faith in that thing.
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
I think that is a bit unfair to Generation Zyklon.
Their views, ideas, habits, etc. were shaped by previous generations. It's essentially their teachers and parents that 'learned the lessons of the Holocaust' and rearranged political and moral standards and values in accordance with it.
Another Question is also how prevalent this "NEWTHINK" actually is. The trick it appear overwhelmingly is to perpetually put the clowns into the news.
Yes, preconceived ideas have influence on how one does process new information. But that's something we actually know and can readjust about it. You do however also get those that will categorically deny this and claim that what they think or belief about a subject IS the OBJECTIVE TRUTH.
The problem with people that have been tricked usually starts with convincing them that they have been tricked. Admitting that you have been tricked is an admission of ones own fallibility. And that can be rather difficult, since ones idea of oneself is at stake. So rather insist you haven't been tricked, insist that those pointing out the folly are those that are 'biased', etc.
How often haven't you heart that because you don't believe in the 'gas chambers', you must be some sort of 'rabid Nazi' that wants to 'insult the memory' of the 'six million victims of the Holocaust'. Meanwhile it is often there own maliciousness that strengthens their 'belief'. I recall cases were those challenged did realize quite well, that there is something fishy with the Holocaust narrative. Still they sticked up for it. And is as if they know it's a lie, but defend it for exactly that reason.
Their views, ideas, habits, etc. were shaped by previous generations. It's essentially their teachers and parents that 'learned the lessons of the Holocaust' and rearranged political and moral standards and values in accordance with it.
Another Question is also how prevalent this "NEWTHINK" actually is. The trick it appear overwhelmingly is to perpetually put the clowns into the news.
Yes, preconceived ideas have influence on how one does process new information. But that's something we actually know and can readjust about it. You do however also get those that will categorically deny this and claim that what they think or belief about a subject IS the OBJECTIVE TRUTH.
The problem with people that have been tricked usually starts with convincing them that they have been tricked. Admitting that you have been tricked is an admission of ones own fallibility. And that can be rather difficult, since ones idea of oneself is at stake. So rather insist you haven't been tricked, insist that those pointing out the folly are those that are 'biased', etc.
How often haven't you heart that because you don't believe in the 'gas chambers', you must be some sort of 'rabid Nazi' that wants to 'insult the memory' of the 'six million victims of the Holocaust'. Meanwhile it is often there own maliciousness that strengthens their 'belief'. I recall cases were those challenged did realize quite well, that there is something fishy with the Holocaust narrative. Still they sticked up for it. And is as if they know it's a lie, but defend it for exactly that reason.
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
Hektor wrote:I think that is a bit unfair to Generation Zyklon.
Their views, ideas, habits, etc. were shaped by previous generations. It's essentially their teachers and parents that 'learned the lessons of the Holocaust' and rearranged political and moral standards and values in accordance with it.
That's why they are Holocultists who believe that their own lives and the Holocaust myth are not connected. They don't see the link, but it is still there. More powerful than ever because they have the faith but not the knowledge on their own mythology. They are like Muslim radicals who pray in Arabic but don't understand the Arabic language.
"[Austen Chamberlain] has done western civilization a great service by refuting at least one of the slanders against the Germans
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
because a civilization which leaves war lies unchallenged in an atmosphere of hatred and does not produce courage in its leaders to refute them
is doomed. "
Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, on the public admission by Britain's Foreign Secretary that the WWI corpse-factory story was false, December 4, 1925
Re: Anecdote: the mass grave of the city jews that had disappeared, and how the truth came to light. A true story.
hermod wrote:Hektor wrote:I think that is a bit unfair to Generation Zyklon.
Their views, ideas, habits, etc. were shaped by previous generations. It's essentially their teachers and parents that 'learned the lessons of the Holocaust' and rearranged political and moral standards and values in accordance with it.
That's why they are Holocultists who believe that their own lives and the Holocaust myth are not connected. They don't see the link, but it is still there. More powerful than ever because they have the faith but not the knowledge on their own mythology. They are like Muslim radicals who pray in Arabic but don't understand the Arabic language.
But Islamists still acknowledge that they are Muslims.
I get the point of course. It is about what people believe to be true a priori. Something that has flown into "common knowledge", because it is repeated and insinuated over and over again. This is indeed what cults do. They tire their targets down to increase probability they will accept teachings, which the targets will grasp as answers to question arising from the confusion. It really isn't that mystical as many people think.
With the Holocaust I'd say that targets got several categories, which again subdivide in other targets:
* Allied country populations and armed forces.
* German population in Germany, but to a lesser degree also elsewhere.
* Jews.
To the Allies the Holocaust or rather the demonization of NS, Hitler and the Germans in general provided a sense of self-righteousness. It's the we are the good guys fighting evil kind of thing. It's a way to shut up critics of the war itself as well.
Bear in mind that both the UK and the US war losses were close to half a million people. If they had stayed out or made peace, this would have been a non-issue, because it didn't happen. So rather spin a story on why you were forced to fight that war. "Tse eewill Dschermans will be rather useful in this". Another issue was of course that lots of Brits for example were prisoners of war in Germany itself... And from those I know, they weren't treated badly at all. If that would have become a debate in Britain, it could have become a problem for the warmongers there. I agree that those are potentialities, but the people pushing the narrative ARE the type that considers potentialities and probabilities very much.
If you want to thought reform the Germans, accusing them of (having supported) monstrous atrocities is actually inevitable.
Jews will increase their own social cohesion in the process. More Jews will support the Zionist cause simply as a matter of self-protection against a 'potential Holocaust'. This is anyway an argument Jewish Zionists frequently use. Being the one nation on earth that was almost exterminated by the Nazis for no reason at all, makes for a good replacement of 'being God's Chosen people'. Observing Jews are a minority... And a majority of Jews is agnostic to atheistic. So more traditional religion loses it's cohesive properties in the post-modern world. You need a narrative acceptable to both theists, agnostics, atheists and even people from other creeds to regain cohesiveness within the group. 'The Holocaust' as National Myth can serve that purpose. They get of course furious, when you call it 'a Myth', because it indicates the religious origin and they'd like to pass it on as 'recorded history' so people will 'take it seriously'. Meanwhile the para-religious character of the Holocaust is almost super-evident. It got core faith statements, it got rituals, relics, martyr stories... Hell Holocaust even sounds like Hell and IS religious terminology. It got some striking resemblance with the 'lake of fire' in the book of revelation as well. Elie Wiesel's story of 'Jews burned in pits' in Auschwitz has definitely this ring to it as well. 'Lake of Fire'... oh yeah... that's actually were the wicked will be thrown in after Christ returns to Earth. And Jesus Christ is the archetype of 'the Nazi' (The Nazarene), of course. Rejection of Christ (and Christians) was once the binding factor among Jews... Replacing this with 'Nazi' is of course very convenient and it sounds far less suspicious to the Goyim as well.
The whole thing can however also become a Nexus Shirt over time. Simply because the initial lie, opens up for more and more lies over time, until this becomes a cancer that destroys social organisms completely. In plain words: It will lead into more and more contradictions until, society disfunctions to such an extent that it will cause it to collapse. That was also the fate of old civilizations... There it was the religion that, while first providing structure and guidance, led into more and more contradictions and insanity that the societies in questions could not function any longer.
Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests
