This document is part of the Journal of Historical Review periodical.
Use this menu to find more documents that are part of this periodical.
Recently I gave a batch of copies of Roger Garaudy's Founding Myths of Modern Israel to a friend, who has been passing them around. He gave one to an old friend, a retired Catholic priest who, as a young man, had been deeply impressed with Garaudy's views on Marxism and Catholicism. This priest's doctoral dissertation has been based on Garaudy's writing. After reading a few chapters of Founding Myths, he concluded that Garaudy is right in his analysis of the Holocaust and its relationship with Zionism.
This story alone makes me feel justified in having purchased a box of Garaudy's book for distribution. Tip O'Neill, I believe, called this "retail politics."
Seattle [by e-mail}
Only Hard Facts Will Win
In the struggle for a truthful view of history, the only thing that will win out against the prevailing tyranny is hard facts. Revisionists are simply not in any position to win the PR war, because they don't have the media resources. We have to settle for what's do-able. Facts are do-able.
In my view, the most effective strategy in the long run is to quietly carry out research work and then publish the findings, including on the Internet. There is no way revisionists can hope to prevail in battle against adversaries who have vastly greater political and media resources. So there's no point in squandering money and time in a manifestly unequal fight.
Hard facts do not come free, of course. Unearthing and publicizing them takes perseverance and a lot of time, money and effort.
And even then, it's not at all clear that most people have the ability to distinguish between facts and propaganda, or even care to.
Santa Fe Springs, Calif.
Long-Time Stoddard Reader
I read with interest Ted O'Keefe's review of the book by Lothrop Stoddard, Into the Darkness (March-April 2000 Journal, pp. 69-70).
It was about 1931, when I was a Gymnasium student, that I first encountered Stoddard through a booklet of excerpts from his book The Revolt Against Civilization. Later, with help of friends in America, I obtained a copy of the book itself, as well as another work, Racial Realities, by Madison Grant, who also wrote The Passing of the Great Race. With these books I began my study of the race question.
[JHR Editorial Advisory Comm.]
Courage and Intellectual Power
Congratulations on the Jan.-Feb. 2000 Journal, one of the best I've seen. Robert Faurisson's recap of Holocaust revisionism is really outstanding. Also, the writings by Kevin MacDonald and Joseph Sobran are invaluable. Keep on publishing their stuffl I do not cease to marvel at the utter courage and intellectual power with which revisionists face the Molochracy.
History and Propaganda
In his article, "For a Balanced History of the American Indian" (March-April 1999 Journal), Zoltan Bruckner suggests that The True History of the Conquest of New Spain by Bernal Diaz del Castillo is a biased work of only limited reliability. I disagree. In my opinion, The True History must be considered the most basic and authentic work for any examination of Cortes' expedition against the Aztecs. Harry Elmer Barnes did not hesitate to call del Castillo "a competent historian." The True History, wrote Barnes, is "not only a graphic account of the actual conquest, but rich in acute observations concerning the new world and its inhabitants." For the highly respected Mexican historian Carltos Pereyra, The True History "is the history book par excellence, the only history book of that period that deserves to live; it is history in an etymological sense, the testimony of the facts."
Friar Bartolome de Las Casas, on the other hand, is a very matter. According to Lewis Hanke, Las Casas' "Brief Account of the Destruction of the Indians" marked "the beginnings of propaganda in our epoch." For Dale Van Every, it was "the most flagrant and successful propaganda feat of all time." From it came the figure of some 20 million Indians killed by the Castilians during the conquest. Las Casas accused the Spanish of killing more than three million on the island of Hispaniola alone, an area that could not have supported, with a preColombian economy, any approximation of that number.
Philip Wayne Powell is right on the mark in writing – in Tree of Hate – that the bitter blasts of Las Casas began to spread in Europe precisely during the period of 1560-90 when the British were beginning to challenge Iberian monopolies in the New World, and the Dutch and English were embarking on long periods of conflict with Spain. "The harsh coloring of the Las Casas indictment of Spaniards," says Prof. Powell, "was made to order for propaganda designed to show that the Spaniards, because of cruelties and greed, were unfit to retain title to New World territories."
The common belief that Spain's conquest in America was characterized by uniquely systematic cruelty, rapaciousness, greed and general depravity is simply not borne out by the evidence. Prof. Powell puts it more bluntly: "There is nothing in all Spanish history to prove that Spaniards, then or now, are characteristically more cruel, more greedy, or more depraved than other peoples. I do not believe that any reputable scholar, free of racial and religious prejudices, would contradict that statement."
Overland Park, Kansas
Thank you for your web site and all the work you've done on your publications. Yours is by far the most interesting site I have visited in the last several years.
While we are taught that Hitler and Third Reich Germany's ruling elite were repressive thugs and murderers, almost nothing is said about the freedom and prosperity that ordinary Germans enjoyed, nor, indeed, about the Jews who continued to live and prosper, at least for several years, after Hitler's assumption of power.
It is clear from Germany's conduct of the war that neither Hitler nor the German High Command had any intention of fighting a global conflict, much less any interest in global domination. The historical record clearly shows that the three major Axis powers – Germany, Italy and Japan were regional powers with limited objectives, which, however, conflicted with the only truly global powers at the time – the United States and Great Britain. The conduct of the US and Britain also clearly shows that it was these two, and not the Axis powers, nor indeed even the Soviet Union, that sought, at least initially, a globalization of the conflict.
It was the Allied governments that globalized the conflict, obliterated entire cities in a single night, incinerated hundreds of thousands of people in Hamburg, Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, sought to obliterate the Axis ideology, and today criminalize challenges to their "official" history.
In the wake of the defeat of Third Reich Germany, it was necessary to demonize National Socialism because such an ideology posed, and still poses, a danger for the prevailing powers. A true understanding of history, and notably an understanding of Hitler, Nazism and the root causes of the Second World War, threaten the existing power structure.
Please accept my congratulations on your website. Ever since an unfortunate personal experience while in elementary school, I have been suspicious of the "accepted history" of the victors of World War II. I am all the more so because this "truth" is presented as inviolate.
You do a great service merely by voicing reasoned dissent. I am grateful that your views and research are available to the public.
L. A. E. [by e-mail]
An Ignored Holocaust
It was in May 1996, after reading an article in the San Francisco Examiner entitled "An Ignored Holocaust Killed 2 Million Germans," that I started graduate school. The complicity of the American and British governments in the brutal expulsions of more than twelve million Germans in the aftermath of World War II is seldom talked about. The victorious powers that ran the Nuremberg trials did not permit any treatment of the subject. Nor, by the way, has anyone ever been brought to justice for the infamous 1940 murder of thousands of Polish officers in the Katyn forest.
C. A. L.
Whenever I hear or see too many "Holocaust" stories within too short a time period, my system seems to overload, and I get hit with a rush of what I call "Holocaust anxiety." Over the years, my threshold of tolerance for this seems to be lessening, and now I sometimes find myself feeling numb, wondering when on earth this campaign of victimological promotion will ever subside. Sometimes I even raise my hands and lament "Not again!"
Our media never seems to miss an opportunity to promote Holocaust imagery, eager to make sure that no other tragedy, past or present, is ever permitted to challenge the primacy of Jewish victimology. Jews seem determined to protect at all costs their privileged status as the champion victims, and with it the profitable sympathy of non-Jews. Jewish leaders seem anxious whenever non-Jews are inclined to show too much sympathy for other victims above all, of course, Palestinians. Instead, they desperately want to keep our pity focused on their "unique" victimhood. They encourage concern for other genocides only to the extent that it refocuses attention on Jewish suffering.
Public Relations Setback
David Irving's defeat in his much-publicized London libel s\lit [reported in the March-April 2000 Journal] was not merely a disaster for him, but a severe public relations defeat for – Holocaust revisionism and, indeed, for truthful history in general. He took on a huge task and, to use his words. ended up being covered with a bucket of slime. But it's not a fatal setback, and I'm sure that revisionism will recover.
You are so wrong. All the Auschwitz atrocities are well-documented and proven beyond doubt. There was no need for eyewitnesses because the Allied forces proved everything with photographs and film footage. At any rate, why would Jews or anyone lie or exaggerate? The dead cannot be brought back to life. Anyway, the Jews not only survived, but have prospered, big time, into the 21st century. The Nazi efforts did not work. May you die of jealousy.
You and your colleagues deserve thanks for your tough fight against powerful interests. People are quietly taking note. I'm an example. I first came across your organization several years ago when I was researching some related issues. Holocaust revisionism is pivotal because, in overcoming fabrication with truth, it raises important questions in the mind of the broad public.
Skeptical Baby Boomer
Thanks for your courageous effort to present an alternative interpretation of 20th century history, in spite of the intense international pressures that face anyone who dissents from the "facts" that were supposedly established at Nuremberg.
I am a "baby boomer," born in the aftermath of World War II. For many years I accepted unquestioningly the conventional
Holocaust story. But after examining material on your site and others, and especially after noting the hysterically out-of-proportion reaction by those who object to any questioning of the "Holocaust," I have come to conclude that a huge lie has been presented as truth.
A Great Disservice
I was flabbergasted reading the short item by Oswald Spengler, "The Great Challenge Facing the West," in the July-August 2000 Journal (p. 49). Publishing it is a great disservice to those of us who defend our Western heritage and values against the forces of global enslavement. When Spengler wrote that , the situation was very different – and seemingly not as desperate – as it is today. If, as he believed, our defeat is "already" inevitable and there is no "way out," why not simply give up? Apart from this ''lapsus," your work is admirable and very much appreciated.
No Obsession With the Past
By attempting to present the truth regarding World War II and its aftermath, you are making a real contribution. I enjoy your Journal. Keep up the excellent work.
At the same time, we should not become obsessed with events that are now more than half a century in the past. Doing so keeps us from dealing with today's challenges. We must become politically involved . To do that effectively, we must truly understand the past, but not become mired in it.
A Truer Picture
Congratulations on your excellent Journal and the various IHR publications, which encourage freer and more informed discussion of various aspects of the socalled Holocaust. Thanks to your publications, along with such works as the recently-issued collection Dissecting the Holocaust, a truer picture is managing to seep through the filters of official censorship, permitting a more accurate understanding of those years.
Ireland [by e-mail]
Holding the Fort
As I have for years, I'm still "holding the fort," expending much time and psychic energy sparring with people on the Internet. Why do I do it? Perhaps, even at the age of 72, there's still a bit of schoolboy in my makeup. When some pathetic twerp who thinks he's real clever hurls a "challenge," I feel I must reply lest I be accused of deserting the "field of honor." And it's always fun to feel that I've demolished an adversary's arguments. But they never seem to stay demolished.
Of all those on our side who debate on the Internet, I am surely the most hated. There is good reason for this. It is sad to have to admit that many of those on our side are enraged semi-literates who use foul language, not to occasionally salt the discourse, but as the principal currency of their discourse. The Holocaustniks have no difficulty dismissing them as losers, bigots, neo-Nazis, trailer park trash, and so forth.
But in me they find a very different proposition: a verbal opponent who expresses himself grammatically and logically, and who is Jewish in the bargain.
Sometimes I fall into a fit of despair. Why is it that, with all the facts on our side, we have failed to make a dent in the popular consciousness? Only recently have I come to realize just what an iron grip the mainstream media holds on the American mind.
We welcome letters from readers. We reserve the right to edit for style and space. Write: [... since defunct, don't write; ed.]
Additional information about this document
|Author(s):||Georg Franz-Willing , et al.|
|Sources:||The Journal of Historical Review, vol. 19, no. 5 (September/October 2000), pp. 62-64|
|First posted on CODOH:||April 12, 2013, 7 p.m.|