The Holocaust as Myth: Betraying the Public Trust

Published: 2007-01-05

As a school of historical research and writing, revisionism has been around probably as long as people have been writing history. The idea is history has importance beyond the simple recording of events. Political interests push to shape the record of what happened to place those in power in the best light. It is therefore possible to deduce who has power by looking at how they are portrayed in popular history. Popular history is not necessarily accurate. The 20th Century industrialist, Henry Ford has been quoted as having said "History is more or less bunk". While before him, Napoleon Bonaparte said "History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon."

So, history is more than an objective record of events. History is myth. In this context, myth doesn’t necessarily mean a fiction. Myth can be true. In fact, it is better that way because the purpose of myth is explain and illustrate a deeper, underlying lesson about the world around us, and our place in it. History can therefore be a used as means for a deeper understanding of the human condition since the laws of nature and human behavior remain constant. History as myth is a tool through which the distillation of universals truths can be achieved.

If the model is false, the lessons from it will also be false. When the recording of events is warped to support political goals, the only lesson to be learned is not to trust either history or those who write it.

This is where historical revisionism makes itself useful. As new facts are discovered and old information is reevaluated, new interpretations replace the old. The idea is revisionist history is more accurate history because research uncovers what was previously lost, hidden, or suppressed. Those served by the old interpretations, therefore, see revisionism as a threat and attack revisionists - branding them as liars with evil motives.

There is no question that the Holocaust is a myth. It is the founding myth of the rogue state of Israel. Oswald Spengler, the German philosopher, believed civilizations are super organisms that form around a central myth. The Nazi writer, Alfred Rosenberg wrote The Myth of the Twentieth Century in the hope it would become the myth for a new Germany. Ironically, Nazi Germany provided a myth for Israel instead. Additionally, Zionists commonly promote the idea that there are lessons to be learned from the Holocaust. So, like other fables, or parables, the Holocaust is supposed to have something to teach those who take time to study it.

The major lesson for Jews is one of a paranoid view of world. The Holocaust has become a metaphor for modern Jewish identity. It is just one in a long list of events where Jewish existence was threatened. It is commonly said that Jewish holidays can be described as "They tried to kill us. They failed. Let’s eat!" This is an attitude that predates Nazi Germany, but is reinforced by the story of the Nazi extermination. Fear is a powerful motivator. Zionists exploit and encourage the belief that Jews are a besieged people in a hostile world while offering the refuge of the Zionist homeland as the only chance for survival. The bogey-man specter of an ascendant anti-Semitism is repeatedly raised to try to get Jews to move to Zionist Israel. There is always another Hitler out there desirous of finishing what the first one failed to do, so the only safe place for Jews is Israel.

The fact that the German image suffers from this situation is purely circumstantial. The Holocaust myth and Jewish identity require an antagonist. Hitler is one who has been preserved on celluloid. He can be to be trotted out, with appropriate narration, any time a particular popular mood needs to be created. For the most part, it is those outside Germany who are being influenced, but Germans too are manipulated by continuous W.W. II agitprop. The libertarian economics writer, Gary North recently observed: "When people feel guilty, they are more likely to let the state tax them and spend the money to make things better . . . for the state." Though he made this statement in another context, it gives us a clue as to what the German state gets out of its enforcement of the Holocaust myth, and perpetual apologizing for twelve years in the last century.

The utility of the Holocaust fable goes beyond Jewish mental conditioning, or Zionist and German state interests. Nazi Germany also plays a prominent role in American domestic politics. Nazi Germany is always the example given for why U.S. foreign policy has to be aggressive. As Anti-War.com columnist Justin Raimondo recently wrote: " The neocons, with their Churchillian pretensions, like to pretend it is 1938 all over again: any negotiation is a reenactment of Munich, and the goal is nothing less than unconditional surrender." Up until December 1941, the American people did not support participation in a foreign war, and especially not after the disaster of World War I. The foreign policy the vast majority of the American people supported was the same as that of President John Q. Adams who in 1821 wrote that America " goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy." Since the end of W.W.II, however, that attitude has been altered by a uniformly pro-war mass media. In repudiation of Adams, Hitler’s Nazi Germany has been made the prototypical monster America needs to go abroad to destroy. Going abroad in search of monsters to destroy is now the American way.

This should be no surprise to anyone. It is the nature of government to gather power to itself at the price of the liberty of those it claims to rule. America is no exception to this behavior. The most common way government does this is by promising security in exchange for its new authority. People don’t need security if there is no threat to their safety. Government, always desirous to steal what others have, will manufacture a threat to encourage acceptance of loss of liberty among the governed. German Reichsmarshall Hermann Goering, while in captivity after the death of Germany as a country stated:

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

Threats that are imaginary, real, and manufactured all serve the same purpose in promoting group cohesion and herd behavior. The group can be ethnic, religious, or political. It doesn’t matter because people behave the same when they believe they are in danger. Belief influences and governs human behavior: It dictates how people behave in the situations they encounter in their lives.

As noted before, the Holocaust is a myth. It is a belief that is used to influence the behavior of Jews and Gentiles alike. The two major emotions it is design to evoke are fear and guilt.

Whether the myth is historically or factually accurate is beside the point. The Holocaust is used in this manner by both church and state to manipulate people and tie this fable to some of the most powerful human emotions.

This is what Holocaust revisionists find themselves confronting. Often, revisionists are compared to "flat-Earthers" in the corporate media. If such people actually exist, the comparison is only valid in that the belief in the Holocaust is as fundamental to the way the Earth is shaped to many people. The Holocaust is a deeply anchored belief even in people who know very little about it. We can see that not only does disbelief in the Holocaust myth threaten modern Jewish identity as shaped by political Zionism, but for others it brings into question the credibility of those in authority who told everyone it was true: the state, the churches, the schools, and media of every kind. These sources are the same ones people trust and depend on every day for information. If these trusted authorities are wrong about the Holocaust, what else are they wrong about? What other dishonesties are they promoting?

Several people who no longer believe the Holocaust story have told me that when they first discovered revisionist literature they at first felt guilty reading it. This is testimony to the nature of the emotional conditioning nearly everyone in America has undergone in relation to the Holocaust myth. It takes courage to test a belief – particularly one connected to many important, authoritative social, religious, and political institutions – and find it flawed. It is not easy, but - as Robert Frost wrote about the road not taken – it has made all the difference.

What people need to realize is these institutions operate on lies. The Holocaust story is only one example of many. The lie is their stock in trade. They use lies on a credulous public to their advantage. The problem is not who is in power. The problem is systemic. In his 1891 book, Thus Spake Zarathustra, Friedrich Nietzsche wrote:

"A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: 'I, the state, am the people.'"

It is a lie! Creators were they who created peoples, and hung a faith and a love over them: thus they served life.

Destroyers, are they who lay snares for many, and call it the state: they hang a sword and a hundred cravings over them.

Where there is still a people, there the state is not understood, but hated as the evil eye, and as sin against laws and customs.

This sign I give unto you: every people speaketh its language of good and evil: this its neighbour understandeth not. Its language hath it devised for itself in laws and customs.

But the state lieth in all languages of good and evil; and whatever it saith it lieth; and whatever it hath it hath stolen.

False is everything in it; with stolen teeth it biteth, the biting one. False are even its bowels."

Since revisionists have been inept at getting the mass of people to believe the obvious or even test their beliefs by taking the time to examine what revisionists have to say, I feel only pity for those sitting back hoping revisionists free them from the guilt and fear inducing story of the Holocaust which is warping culture, religion, and politics today. Germans do not deserve the destruction heaped upon them during the war or the burden of guilt draped upon them for twelve years of Nazi government. A dozen years in the first half of the last century does not constitute the bulk of German history. Nor does it define the German character. Regrettably, for as long as people find government pronouncements credible despite that institutions long history of lying, Germans will have to suffer. The suffering will continue for as long as there is utility in this lie. In any case, with the long history of failure to make headway in expanding the acceptance of revisionist research, a re-examination of methods and tactics used by revisionists is long overdue. As the saying goes, repetition of actions with the expectation of a different outcome is sign of insanity. Or "If you do what you always did you get what you always got." If they want greater success, revisionist will have do what they do differently.

Holocaust revisionism, for the time being, will have to be a personal vision quest. Each of us will have to take the journey from belief to disbelief alone. Germans, Jews, Americans, everyone! Revisionists are not going to force governments, or anyone dining out on the Holocaust story, to admit the Holocaust is, in most of its particulars, a lie. Salvation from this emotional conditioning - this brain washing – lies not in the power of revisionists, but within yourselves. The roadmap to freedom is on the internet. Revisionist websites are packed with the tools break the mental chains that bind you to liars and thieves who have preyed upon your credulity for so long. Take them up. Freedom beckons.

There is security in servitude, as the fable of the Wolf and the Dog illustrates. So, taking and keeping freedom always involves personal risk. The choice ultimately is a very personal one.

There is no question that the Holocaust is used for political purposes by a wide range of governments and other institutions. It is not simply another historical event like invention of the telephone or the light bulb, or the relocation of the French from Canada to Louisiana. Unlike these events, it is being used to influence behavior. Belief in it is enforced by law in a growing number of countries.

There is also no question that the Holocaust myth, in most of its essential claims, is a fiction. The evidence is piled and heaped on shelves all around me. It inhabits my computer hard drive. The research is scattered in a growing number of places on the Internet and in a growing number of languages. The facts lie in archives, libraries, and in rotting Nazi concentration camps. If you are satisfied with what you believe, then don’t fear testing it with new information. If you are dissatisfied, start reading and build a better model of the world around you.


Originally published in Smith's Report No. 138, May 2007

Additional information about this document

Author(s) John Weir
Title The Holocaust as Myth: Betraying the Public Trust
Sources Smith's Report No. 138, May 2007
Contributions n/a
Dates published: 2007-01-05, first posted on CODOH: May 30, 2007, 7 p.m., last revision: n/a
Comments n/a
Appears In
Mirrors n/a
Download n/a