Thursday, July 06, 2006

New strategy, indeed

In this posting I expressed my opinion that deniers have a new strategy - appealing to racial minorities. Well, whaddaya know, in response to LaShawn Barber's posting, a neo-Nazi related to National Vanguard and a friend of April Gaede, writes:
If a coalition of non-White conservatives really puts some energy into taking the “Hitler blood libel” off of White nationalists, and actually succeeds getting us an “amnesty” into mainstream politics I think you’ll see that we aren’t monsters.
"Hitler blood libel" is, of course, the Holocaust.

PS: Interestingly, it is an old denier strategy to cite fake numbers of Communist/Allied victims to show that Hitler wasn't that bad. This freak writes:
Jews accuse White Gentiles of being “exterminationists,” but there are both ancient and modern examples of Jews committing genocide. Communism was a Jewish movement that murdered 40 million Christian Slavs.
Of course, Bolshevism/Communism wasn't a Jewish movement (even Stalin called Bolsheviks a Russian faction and Mensheviks a Jewish faction, jokingly mentioning a possibility of pogrom; and during Stalin's time, at the height of terror, most leading Jewish Bolsheviks were murdered anyway), and the number is pulled straight from the liar's butt, and, besides, how would he know that all "40 million" of these imaginary Slavs were Christians? But that's Revisionist History for you - minimize the Jewish genocide, invent or embellish other genocides to "balance" the Holocaust out.

PPS: As to LaShawn's taunting instead of accepting that she made a mistake, and her gloating that she rose in ranks - I can only say, the scum also rises.

5 comments:

J.B. said...

"Of course, Bolshevism/Communism wasn't a Jewish movement"


it wasn't 'bad for the jews' to say the least

http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/vol5no3/53-km-slezkine.pdf

Sergey Romanov said...

Don't try to confuse the issues. Better for ethnic (but not religious) Jews than Tsarist regime at first - yes. It was also better than a Nazi regime. It doesn't mean that it was in itself "good" for most Jews.

Even if one were to suppose that at first Bolshevik regime was "Jewish" (contrary to illogical arguments, Jewish overrepresentation does not equal Jewish domination), this is mostly irrelevant, since a Georgian was the biggest mass-murderer in the country (and no, he wasn't Jewish, contrary to a common moonbat meme; and neither was Beria).

Sure, many Jews during the Great Terror did his bidding, so did many Russians and others. So? It was the resut of that initial overrepresentation, not some sort of inborn Jewish cruelty. It's not that during Stalin's terror Jews were standing in lines to apply for NKVD jobs.

That it wasn't Jews who controlled the situation is clear from the fact that during the Great Terror they were massively purged from NKVD leadership (on 01.07.37 32% of leading NKVD cadres were Jews; on 01.09.38 - 21%; on 01.07.39 - 4%). Did they somehow purge themselves? No, obviously, Stalin was in control. And others were his tools, regardless of ethnicity.

---

Also, MacDonald cannot be taken seriously. E.g., look at the preface to CoC:

http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/books-Preface.html

He seriously cites Kahan's "The Wolf of the Kremlin", which is a fabrication from beginning to end. One would think such an "intellectual" would at least notice this. How many more untrustworthy sources does he use?

J.B. said...

SR:
"It's not that during Stalin's terror Jews were standing in lines to apply for NKVD jobs."

it was still one of the most jewish of the USSR's institutions at one time.

Slezkine's and MacDonald's point is that a lot of jews saw communism as something that could be 'good for the jews' and therefore were either not hostile to it or active participants in it and often reaching high positions in the movement. This was not only the case in Russia but in the USA and elsewhere.


SR:
"Did they somehow purge themselves? No, obviously, Stalin was in control."

until a group of people pushed Stalin aside and took control. Within all regimes there are factions so perhaps Stalin's purges were legitimate as were his targets.


SR:
"Also, MacDonald cannot be taken seriously. E.g., look at the preface to CoC:
http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/books-Preface.html
He seriously cites Kahan's "The Wolf of the Kremlin", which is a fabrication from beginning to end. One would think such an "intellectual" would at least notice this. How many more untrustworthy sources does he use?"


With such a logic I could easily dismiss any book that cites Elie Wiesel or Simon Wiesenthal at one point.

There's only one quote/reference to Kahan's TWOTK in The Culture of Critique, in the Preface. I checked the PDF version of CofC to see if Kahan's work was used to assert anything and did not find anything. If the Kahan quote was removed from the Preface it wouldn't strengthen or weaken MacDonald's conclusions.

If Kahan's book is a forgery it's either not a well known fact or a book not important enough to be paid attention to since I only obtained 73 results using Google with the words "Stuart Kahan" + wolf + kremlin + forgery.

The only source for the forgery claim seems to be the letter from Kaganovich's relatives

http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv1n2/kaganfam.htm

Sergey Romanov said...

"it was still one of the most jewish of the USSR's institutions at one time."

Whatever. I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion.

"Slezkine's and MacDonald's point is that a lot of jews saw communism as something that could be 'good for the jews' and therefore were either not hostile to it or active participants in it and often reaching high positions in the movement. This was not only the case in Russia but in the USA and elsewhere."

Again: I don't see how this proves or even indicates the _Jewishness_ of Bolshevik (and later Communist) regime.

"until a group of people pushed Stalin aside and took control."

There is zero credible evidence that Stalin was "pushed aside".

"With such a logic I could easily dismiss any book that cites Elie Wiesel or Simon Wiesenthal at one point."

No. Wiesel and Wiesenthal may have had certain problems with accurate reporting, but it is absurd to compare books with some mistakes, embellishments and maybe even some outright lies, with a wholesale fabrication like Kahan's book.

"There's only one quote/reference to Kahan's TWOTK in The Culture of Critique, in the Preface. I checked the PDF version of CofC to see if Kahan's work was used to assert anything and did not find anything. If the Kahan quote was removed from the Preface it wouldn't strengthen or weaken MacDonald's conclusions."

MacDonald has shown a very bad scholarly judgement in this case. To me this shows that he is not a wholly reliable source. I.e. simply saying "Here, refute this article by MacDonald" doesn't work with me - if you wish to defend some of his theses, re-check his sources and use them in a debate personally.

"If Kahan's book is a forgery it's either not a well known fact"

It is indeed not a very well-known fact, and the book itself doesn't seem to be well-known outside of certain circles. ;-)

jimmychooshoes said...

Everyone loves alexander mcqueen heels,jimmy shoes ,Manolo Blahnik Shoes,discount christian louboutin shoes. On our jimmy choosstore, you can definitely buy any discount christian louboutin shoes, wallets at incredible low prices. So why don't you let your Louis Vuitton handbags dream come true today?