Posted by Retew on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 13:14 | #

According to the report I read in my paper yesterday, they’re also reluctant to teach the history of the slave trade for fear of alienating white pupils, according to a study carried out by the Historical Association. It’s not all one way traffic.

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 13:29 | #

Is the history of the slave trade true history?  Or is it couched in and coloured by liberal anti-racist morality?

Retew, you are a fool if you think “it’s not all one-way traffic”.  Wake up, for pete’s sake - I can say that to you now, since I know you to be merely one of my sleeping people.

Posted by jonathan on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 14:42 | #

I can’t find a link, but yesterday on the radio, a commentary was prefaced with a comparison to Holocaust Denial. The story went on to describe some new policy in the U.S. concerning the Turkish/Armenian genocide in the early 1900s.

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 14:51 | #

With thanks to Larry Levant from James’ Charles Murray thread we have this <strike>meme</strike> word from Larry:-

Liberalism chases its tail into oblivion

The Nazi genocide of European Jewry was the ultimate crime of history. The nature of this crime was that it consisted of intolerance of a minority. Therefore intolerance of minorities is the ultimate crime. Therefore we must eliminate intolerance of minorities. Therefore, in the name of eliminating intolerance of minorities, we must admit into Europe an unending mass immigration of non-Western peoples, especially Muslims, and once they are here we must accept and accommodate ourselves to their customs and beliefs, even when their customs and beliefs include exterminationist anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial, because to fail to accommodate ourselves to their exterminationist anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial would be … the ultimate crime.

So, we non-liberals must work our little fingers to the bone to save America from mass “non-Western” immigration for ... erm ... the cause of anti-anti-semitism and the Holocaust.  And for Larry, of course.

Hey, while we are about it, is there any way we can save America from philo-semitism and Holocaust-enthusiasm, too?

Whadd’ya think, Larry?

... Larry?

Posted by powertothesheeple on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:55 | #

Mad Mel & Coh. will NOT be pleased about this. All that hard work importing and sanctifying low-IQ ethnics to stop whites attacking the poor Jews again and look: unlike whites, the ethnics won’t roll over and beg when someone says “Remember the Holocaust!”

I’m Jewish. Disagree with Israel and you’re an antisemite. I’m Jewish. Supporters of Arabs are anti-semites. I’m Jewish. My how the suffering of my people adds gravitas to my (frequently absurd) point of view. Did anyone notice I’m Jewish?

No one can accuse you of being original, Daniel. Keep playing the man, forget the ball.

http://shurl.org/PkPMv

Posted by Apartheid Supporter on Tue, 03 Apr 2007 20:34 | #

Regarding Guessedworker’s comments on “Liberalism chases its tail into oblivion”.
Larry Auster is here explaining the insanity of leftist liberal morality and its absurd narrow-minded reductionism.  He is not suggesting that the Holocaust is the “only” crime still less is he supporting the analysis that its nature is the abstraction: “intolerance of a minority”.  He states the mad leftist position - and his heading “Liberalism chases its tail into oblivion” clearly shows what he thinks of this mad leftist position.  He is being critical of this mindset and how it is used to undermine the west - not supporting it.

Posted by Rnl on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 18:32 | #

Liberalism chases its tail into oblivion
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/007584.html

Auster’s analysis is accurate. He regards Muslim hostility to Jewish Holocaust commemoration as a bad effect of Muslim immigration, whereas most of us would regard anything that reduces Holocaust commemoration as good, even if it comes courtesy of Islam. But that’s only placing a different value judgment on the facts.

Holocaust commemoration, like “racism,” privileges minorities and stigmatizes opposition to minority demands. A non-White minority that resists Holocaust instruction is still a privileged minority, and it is empowered by the anti-racialist “lessons of the Holocaust” even when it rejects the Holocaust.

The Jewish Holocaust was initially devised to justify Zionist racialism in Israel, but for over forty years it has also been deployed in the Diaspora to empower racial minorities against their White oppressors. Those two purposes now seem increasingly incompatible. It turns out that anti-racialism can trump anti-Semitism, and in public debates outside the US it is easily more powerful than Zionism, which requires wealth and fear to win. Double the Muslim population in the UK and there will be no contest - white-skinned Jews will start losing regularly, no matter how skillfully they invoke the Holocaust. Teaching non-Jews that “racism” and intolerance for racial minorities are the worst of all crimes isn’t smart educational practice if you’re a Zionist Jew defending your own “racism” in Palestine.

That result now seems as though it should have been predictable. But it certainly didn’t seem predictable around 1965, when the Jewish Holocaust was first invented. The empowering of an anti-Semitic minority was not foreseen, only the good effects of delegitimizing anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, promoting anti-racialism, and getting at whitey.

I would guess that British Jews will win this particular fight publicly, but they’ll lose on the ground. Politicians will express dismay at an assault on the vital anti-racialist lessons taught by Holocaust instruction, but teachers will quietly continue to avoid or minimize that instruction whenever they’re confronted by strong Muslim hostility to it. Muslims are a terrible immigrant population, but on the very small plus side they’re less likely to capitulate to Jews than any other group. They also know propaganda when they see it, and they’re reluctant to subject their children to what they reasonably regard as indoctrination in Zionist martyrology.

It would be nice if UK readers would keep the rest of us updated about how this story plays out.

Posted by Scrooby-Doo on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 19:14 | #

How well do Scrooby’s “facts” coincide with reality?  The briefest of internet searches yields links such as:

http://www.jewishmuseum.gr/pages.asp?pageid=88&langid=2
http://www.hri.org/MFA/gpap/2000january/holocaust_speech_26012000.html
http://www.jewishmuseum.gr/pages.asp?pageid=88&langid=2

Posted by Scrooby-Doo on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 19:19 | #

My apologies: I duplicated one link in the previous comment, rather than providing a third, separate link here:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/817994.html

Posted by Rnl on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 19:41 | #

An illuminating story below.

Whether NS Germany was uniquely evil is less significant than the bad effects that the belief in unique nazi evil causes.

***

From The Sunday Times / April 1, 2007

Be a hausfrau for Germany? That’s Nazi talk / Nicola Smith

A former top German television newsreader has been accused of evoking the Nazi era with a campaign to encourage women to choose motherhood instead of emancipation and highflying careers.

Eva Herman, 47, is urging women to leave the workplace and embrace a pre-feminist ideal of home-making, cake-baking and child-rearing to save a country with one of Europe’s lowest birth rates: 1.3 children per woman.

“If we carry on in the same way as we have been, then in 100 years’ time we will no longer exist. Germany and Europe will die out,” she said last week.

According to Herman, mothers should be paid £11,000 to £13,500 as “family managers”. Her views are expounded in a book that she has filled with letters from disillusioned career women who found salvation in motherhood.

Feminists have been incensed. One of the fiercest critics has been Alice Schwarzer, a feminist campaigner and magazine editor, who described Herman’s theories as “gibberish between a Stone Age bat and a Mother’s Cross” - the Nazi medal of honour awarded to mothers of more than three children.

Herman replied that it was dangerous to link the desire for a family with the darkest time in Germany’s history. “During the National Socialist era mothers were separated from their children. It is absurd to make that link,” she said.

Herman, once voted Germany’s most popular newsreader, said her career ambitions began to wane when she became pregnant at 38. Last August she left her job on Tagesschau, Germany’s most prestigious television news programme, to campaign.

In her first book, The Eva Principle, she argued that the failure of women to stay at home was leading to family breakdown and a “soulless society”. Her views struck a raw nerve and more than 100,000 copies of the book were sold in 10 days.

She has failed to convince Werner Herman, her former husband. “Dear Eva,” he wrote. “You were the one who always wanted to pursue a career and you were the one, not I, who did not want to have children. You didn’t do the housework because we had a maid…”

Herman responded: “I had three marriages and one child. One marriage with three children would have been better.”

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 21:58 | #

A picture of Eva Herman is here.  Don’t forget she also evokes the Nazis because she has blonde hair:  that’s something all the jealous duskier races want but don’t have so must try to destroy.  According to the Jews if you have blonde hair and aren’t Jewish you have to show you’re not a Nazi by marrying a Negro.  If you refuse you’ll be smeared.

“Scrooby Doo,” thanks for those interesting links.  (I stand by what I said.)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 23:13 | #

Dennis Mangan commenting on the same news item as the log entry:

“In this country [the U.S.] Jews are prominent among open-borders advocates. Conservatives have said for years that, should Muslims in any but very small numbers be admitted to the West, Jews would feel the heat of a new anti-Semitism. Now it’s happening in Britain (and in France, whence many Jews are emigrating to Florida). But it’s hard to see that very many Jews have changed their minds about their suicidal open-borders liberalism.”

Posted by Scrooby-Doo on Thu, 05 Apr 2007 13:50 | #

“I stand by what I said”

Well, sure, Fred.  Don’t let facts come between you and the “ideas” that flit around your “mind.”

Posted by Rnl on Fri, 06 Apr 2007 00:19 | #

A picture of Eva Herman is here. Don’t forget she also evokes the Nazis because she has blonde hair

She evokes the nazis because she believes that Germany should survive, and she believes that German women should have more children in order to help Germany survive. Those are her nazi views. They would be just as nazi if she were a brunette. If a Bulgarian-American woman said that White Americans should have more children in order to preserve American nationhood, she would be a nazi too.

The propaganda system that elevates nazi crimes into history’s worst crimes characterizes as nazi any attempt to preserve the White population of a Western nation. Hence the nazification of the Serbs. The belief that your people should survive was once so commonsensical that it seldom required defense or elaboration. It is now nazi. Western nations themselves are nazi insofar as they are White and show any inclination to remain so. Those are intended consequences of Holocaust commemoration.

“Nazi” is as “nazi” is used politically; you understand a political slur by the political targets it is commonly directed against. It is telling but unsurprising that a German woman who believes Germany should survive would be faced with the charge that she is a nazi.

“If we carry on in the same way as we have been, then in 100 years’ time we will no longer exist. Germany and Europe will die out,” she said last week.