A second open letter to Deborah Lipstadt: Does the World’s Most Prominent Opponent of “Holocaust Denial” Harbor a Hypocritical Double Standard on “Racist Nationalism?”

By Paul Grubach

To: [email protected]
Date: Thursday, October 18, 2012, 12:13 AM

Re: Does the World's Most Prominent Opponent of “Holocaust Denial” Harbor a Hypocritical Double Standard on “Racist Nationalism?”

Ms. Lipstadt:

As you may know, I am planning to write another critique of your writings for Inconvenient History (www.inconvenienthistory.com).  In the interests of fairness and truth I am giving you an opportunity to view my arguments and evidence prior to publication on the revisionist web site.

Since you are the world's most prominent academic opponent of “Holocaust denial,” I would like to bring to your attention a hypocritical double standard that appears to plague your thinking and that of the Holocaust Lobby in general.  It pertains to the issue of “racist nationalism.”

In your 1993 book, Denying the Holocaust, you condemned as “racist” British Revisionist Richard Harwood and other “Holocaust deniers” for their opposition to non-White immigration into Britain.  I give you Deborah Lipstadt in her own words (p.106): “Harwood echoed the familiar extremist charge that the Anglo-Saxon world faced the gravest danger in its history: the presence of 'alien races' in its midst.  Linking Holocaust denial and the defense of the 'race,' he argued that unless something was done to halt the immigration and assimilation of non-Caucasians, Anglo-Saxons were certain to experience not only 'biological alteration' but the 'destruction' of their European culture and racial heritage.”  You clearly offer this as an example of “evil racist nationalism.”

Well Ms. Lipstadt, Israel – the state that you have admitted has captivated your undying love and devotion (See History on Trial, pp.4-5) – has in recent years experienced an influx of Black people from Africa.  In response, your fellow Jewish Zionists in Israel have expressed ideas almost identical with those of Harwood.  According to a Jewish Telegraph Agency missive of May 20, 2012, Israeli government reports claim there are more than 50,000 African migrants and asylum seekers in Tel Aviv alone.  In response, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the surge of illegal African migrants into Israel “threatens national security and identity.”  He then added: “”If we do not stop this, 60,000 infiltrators could become 600,000 and possibly even jeopardize Israel's continued existence as a Jewish democracy.” According to a Wall Street Journal article of July 7-8, 2012, Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yishai wants to deport the African migrants in order “to preserve the identity of the Jewish Zionist state [verbatim quote].”  In May of 2012, a legislator from Netanyahu's party called the Black people from Africa “a cancer in our [Israel's] body.”  These sentiments are shared by a large number of Israeli Jews, because according to an Associated Press report of March 25, 2012: “Many Israelis are concerned that large numbers of African migrants could dilute the Jewish character of their state.”

So Ms. Lipstadt, will you now publicly condemn as “racists” Netanyahu, Yishai, and all of the other Jewish-Zionists in Israel that believe the African migrants are a threat to the racial and cultural identity of the Jewish state?  Of course, you may rebut me by saying the situation in Britain cannot be compared to that of Israel.  The non-Whites entered Britain legally while the Africans entered Israel illegally. Even though this is largely true, the fact of the matter still remains is that both Harwood and the Israeli Zionists view the non-Whites as a threat to the racial/cultural identity of their respective states, and in this sense the two examples are both comparable.

With that being said, I do not believe that you would ever condemn as “racists” the Israeli Zionists who believe the Africans are a threat to Israel's identity, because the evidence suggests that you harbor a hypocritical double standard on the issue of “racist nationalism.”  It is even possible that you may secretly agree with the ideas expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and the other Zionists.  Let me provide some documentation.

In your History on Trial (p.5), you expressed pride in the fact that, early in life, you marched in solidarity with those who wanted to implement Black-White integration policies in the United States: “My mother and I marched in Harlem in solidarity with the Birmingham-Salem civil rights protestors. We took a vicarious pride in the fact that Andy Goodman, one of the civil rights workers murdered in Mississippi, had lived down the block from us and we always pointed out this building to visitors.”  Although you worked to achieve racial integration and assimilation between Blacks and Whites in the United States, you appear to have a much different agenda for your Jewish people: the evidence suggests that you oppose the intermarriage and assimilation of Jews with non-Jews.  Herewith.

As Jewish author Ellen Jaffe McClain pointed out in Embracing the Stranger: Intermarriage and the Future of the American Jewish Community, you are flatly opposed to intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews. In McClain’s own words: “Although people like Deborah Lipstadt, the Emory University professor who has written and lectured widely on Holocaust denial, have exhorted Jewish parents to just say no to intermarriage, much the way they expect their children not to take drugs, a large majority of parents (and more than a few rabbis) are unable to lay down opposition to intermarriage [between Jews and non-Jews] as a strict operating principle.”

At the Irving/Lipstadt trial in winter-spring of 2000, historian David Irving was labeled a “racist” because he was accused of opposing the intermarriage between Whites and non-Whites. Even D.D. Guttenplan, an anti-Irving journalist who covered the trial, hinted at the racial double standard at work here. He wrote: “[I]t was hard not to feel queasy listening to Rampton [the defense attorney for Lipstadt] quiz Irving about his attitude to ‘intermarriage between the races’—on behalf of a defendant [Deborah Lipstadt] who has written, ‘We [Lipstadt and her fellow Jews] know what we fight against: anti-Semitism and assimilation [of Jews and non-Jews], intermarriage [between Jews and non-Jews] and Israel-bashing.”  (See The Holocaust on Trial, p.209 )

So let us get this perfectly straight.  You marched in the United States to achieve assimilation and integration between Blacks and Whites; you condemned as “racist” Holocaust Revisionists who were opposed the immigration of non-Whites into Britain; so why won't you publicly condemn Prime Minister Netanyahu and the other Israelis as “racists” for their belief that African Blacks represent a threat to the racial/cultural identity of Israel, just as you condemned Harwood and other “Holocaust deniers” for holding very similar beliefs?  Since you may never provide me with an answer to this question, I will dare to advance one.

The African-American intellectual, the late Harold Cruse, and White American psychologist Kevin MacDonald suggested the reason that so many Jews ardently supported racial integration between Blacks and Whites in the United States is because they wanted to dilute the political power of their potential enemy, White America, by creating a multicultural society.  In a racially integrated culture, Jews are better able to acquire power and achieve their political ends.  Or, to look at this in another way: outside of Israel Jews see themselves as an alien element within predominantly non-Jewish cultures and they want to build racially integrated, multicultural societies that tolerate their long-term policy of non-assimilation and ethnic-racial solidarity.  In such racially integrated, multicultural societies, the Jewish people are much safer and in a better position to gain power and influence.  In summary, a Jewish agenda that promotes the racial integration of Europeans and non-Whites outside of Israel, and simultaneously condemns all manifestations of European solidarity and self-preservation, actually serves the long term interests of Jewish-Zionist racial nationalism and Israel.

So I ask you, Ms. Lipstadt, is this the ulterior agenda that explains why you would publicly condemn Harwood and the other “Holocaust deniers” as “racists,” yet refuse to publicly condemn Netanyahu and the other Israeli Zionists for claiming that the Africans represent a threat to Israel's racial/cultural identity?

If I am wrong about any of this, please correct me and I will retract my statements.

Paul Grubach