@SecureSignals's banner p


Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine

13 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 06 13:34:27 UTC


User ID: 853


Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine

13 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 06 13:34:27 UTC


No bio...


User ID: 853

Are you white? I don't think it's "just how people react to travelers." In the comments to the video I posted, I saw one black guy who is obviously trying to emulate Kurt's channel ask for feedback on his own videos, and the first thing I saw clicking through this fledging channel was him getting refused service for coffee by stone-faced locals- something I've never seen on many interactions on Kurt's channels. You might say "ok well obviously a black guy is going to be treated a little differently", but really you wouldn't get the same dynamics we see on Kurt's channels with any sort of Indian or Asian tourist as well, at least I've never seen it. I did see videos making the rounds on Twitter last week of Indian tourists being turned away from bar after bar in Tel Aviv.

This isn't to say locals are only ever friendly to White tourists, but it's to say that only a white man could travel like Kurt does and get the reactions he does every single time.

Kurt Caz: The Physiognomy of Colonization

Take up the White Man’s burden—

Send forth the best ye breed—

Go send your sons to exile

To serve your captives' need

I don't follow travel vloggers in general, but there's one who is more anthropologist than tourist, documenting a phenomenon that no modern academics would dare acknowledge in this day in age. Kurt Caz, the Aryan Wanderer, mostly travels alone, sometimes accompanied by a beautiful woman of the local variety. He only visits non-tourist locations, strides the peasant countryside like a colossus, shows up uninvited and unannounced where the locals have likely never seen a tourist, and is instantly treated with respect by the men and admiration by the women. This is a pattern which is perfectly consistent in his videos across all continents and villages he has traveled through.

Once he visited a village in Papua New Guinea, and I'm not sure how to describe what happened other than they started worshipping him, declaring his visit as the fulfillment of some local prophecy of a white man coming to the village.

Kurt is clearly aware of the racial dynamics at play (and drops hints that he's secretly Based), but he leans into them in the best way. He uses his physical presence and charisma to engage with the locals, who immediately show admiration and respect, and Kurt reciprocates with a genuine racial tolerance that is more real, but completely unlike, what passes for it today.

You see, today "racial tolerance" means fixing the dynamics which are obviously at play in Kurt's content. Don't believe your lying eyes, beauty is relative and the engrained reactions we seem to have is a conspiracy of White Supremacy. Body physique is just a trait with an attractiveness that is brainwashed into us by an intolerant culture; the indigenous reaction to a White Man showing up uninvited and unannounced is just an artifact the legacy of colonization.

And to be sure, there are many factors at play here. Conventional wisdom would likely point to these factors exclusively:

  • Kurt's content is just a demonstration of rule #1: Be attractive, and rule #2: Don't be unattractive. He would have a similar reception if he were on the equally "attractive" point of the Belle Curve as an Africa, Asian, or Indian.
  • The local women are attracted in particular because they associate him with Western wealth.
  • The locals have consumed Western media so they are primed to welcome such a person into their homes.
  • The locals are aware of Western cultural customs, so even if Kurt is this physically large stranger they have no fear inviting him into their homes or granting a baseline level of trust.

These factors surely come into play, but they also beg the question. White Colonization could not have happened in the first place without a much smaller number of White Men subjugating a much larger population of indigenous peoples in all cases. India, relative to its population size, was controlled by the British with an extremely small elite pool. Much ado is made about technological supremacy and the violence of colonization, again there's a lot of truth there, but the uglier reality is that the colonization was in many cases more peaceful than existing cultural practices and conflicts if the locals had been left to their own devices.

There's a myth that the Aztecs interpreted the arrival of Spanish Conquistadores as fulfilling a prophecy of the return of the Aztec's gods. That dynamic can be seen as a microcosm in Kurt's interactions throughout his travels. In general, the phenomenon of a race of people regarding another race as divine is much more common than we would expect at first glance. Many people who would laugh at the idea of the Aztecs believing the conquistadores to be emissaries of the Aztec gods also themselves believe in the literal truth of the Jewish covenant, that Jews are a people Chosen by god and they are a race of god-creators vis-a-vis the ancestry of Jesus Christ.

This dynamic also serves an important counterpoint to IQ supremacy. Imagine being a short, weak, ugly nerd with somewhat higher IQ than Kurt. The Rationalists would tend to regard that person as the Superior Being, taking for granted the relativity of Beauty and dismissing the importance of a Noble physiognomy and charisma to civilizational achievement.

This dovetails with @naraburn's post about the Pokemon Go avatar changes being designed, apparently, to challenge conventional beauty standards- especially the sub-question in that thread regarding a conspiracy to promote ugliness. That conspiracy exists, in its declaration that there is no Noble Physiognomy, and our attractions are just manipulated by White Supremacy. Whereas Kurt can just show up and use his physical presence and charisma to exert command, they are trying very hard to engrain - "don't believe your lying eyes, ugliness is beautiful." But in the same way educational interventions constantly fail to close the IQ gaps, these cultural initiatives will also fail because our brains have been tuned to perceive a person's physical attractiveness as a proxy for genetic fitness.

While they will never make Ugly become Beautiful, they absolutely can and will destroy Beauty through Ressentiment. Culture War has fomented a large amount of hostility towards White People from non-white people in the West, but it will never be able to reproduce the racial dynamic that Kurt is able to tap into in his content.

During the Trump admin, I had a job with a really long 1-hour commute and I would keep NPR on. I played a game "is it possible for me to do my commute without NPR doing a story on Russiagate heavily insinuating that Trump colluded with Russia", and there were only 2 or 3 days where that happened. That is my anecdote, remembering how Russiagate took all the oxygen out of political news for a solid 2 years.

Wow. There are no bodies?

Cremation couldn’t have been involved, perhaps?

It's a common misconception that performing a cremation burns the entire corpse to ash. Even a modern crematory furnace leaves behind thousands of identifiable bone fragments. For example, teeth do not cremate to ash, they calcinate and remain perfectly identifiable after a cremation. As Revisionists have pointed out:

And finally, we must note that the teeth of the supposed victims could not have been destroyed by the primitive methods attested to. Even if each of the alleged victims had only 20 of the usual 32 teeth left at the time he or she died, there would have been at least 17.5 million teeth to be disposed of at Treblinka. This means that we should still be able to find some 5 teeth per cubic foot of the 3.53 million cu.ft. of material excavated at the alleged site of the crime.

And there would have been orders of magnitude more identifiable bone fragments for each victim than teeth for that matter. If what is claimed actually happened, even if all the victims were cremated, there would be metric tons of physical evidence which could be easily found within a single afternoon of digging.

Even in a murder case, when there is a suspected cremation of the victim involved, it's equally important for investigators to excavate the remains of a murder victim. In no case would investigators say "oh well witnesses say the victim was cremated and buried there, so I guess there's no point in doing a dig to prove that's actually what happened."

Like, it’s remarkable you bring up the apparently fake Canadian graves, when the same technique was used at Treblinka and they found stuff.

No mass graves have ever been excavated at Treblinka. You say "they found stuff", whatever that means, but no mass grave has ever been excavated from the site.

Try to at least be aware of evidence you claim doesn’t exist:

I am well aware of the studies by Caroline Sturdy-Colls, I've read through her papers. You should be aware of the evidence you are citing:

"...We knew where the mass graves were and we weren’t going there,” Sturdy Colls says. These initial assurances, she adds, helped the rabbis feel comfortable letting the team excavate around the gas chambers, as they were not located on top of a mass-grave site. “Because of the way these technologies respected the religious law, they actually facilitated the investigation.”

"The techniques respected the religious law" is referring to the "technique" of purely using GPR to identify a mass grave with no subsequent excavation to actually prove what the ground disturbance was. She did not find any mass graves, she did exactly what they did at the Kamloops site.

You can even see the clip on the TV special covering that investigation, where the Jewish Chief Rabbi of Poland (with a New York accent) forbids her from excavating any mass graves.

The methods used by Caroline Colls to identify the "possible mass graves" were the exact same as the Kamloops hoax: GPR results were used to call ground disturbances "mass graves" and then they were forbidden from excavating the ground disturbances based on claims of cultural sensitivity.

She did, though, excavate human remains about 1km from the site of the alleged Treblinka mass graves. She went to a marked Christian graveyard, found a few bones, and then cried on camera. No problem disturbing those graves!

The most dramatic piece of evidence uncovered at the Treblinka extermination camp was not any mass grave, it was a clay tile which Caroline Colls misidentifies as showing a Jewish Star of David whereas in reality it was the brand mark of a porcelain factory in Poland.

Imagine you bring in the TV cameras with an archaeological team to investigate a crime scene where 900,000 were murdered. You don't find any mass graves, but you find a terracotta tile and immediately jump to the conclusion that the tile featured a Star of David to lure Jews inside the gas chamber, whereas in reality it was a manufacturer's branding. But nobody watching the TV show is going to learn the truth about that tile, or wonder why they are making much ado about a terracotta tile instead of investigating the enormous amounts of physical evidence that would be right beneath them, if what is claimed actually happened.

The reality is Caroline Colls did the exact same thing as the Kamloops archaeologists: use GPR to claim to have found mass graves, but don't excavate any of the disturbances you are claiming contain mass graves. It should also be pointed out the GPR results themselves run completely contrary to witness testimony regarding the size, shape, and locations of the mass graves. The GPR results do not prove any mass graves at Treblinka, but they disprove witness testimony about them. If they actually did a scientific investigation of the site and excavated them, it would immediately disprove the story.

Like I said, there has never been a single excavation of a mass grave on this site because Jewish authorities forbid it using the exact same claims as the perpetrators of the Kamloops mass grave hoax.

Edit: Here's an update on the Kamloops situation, if anybody is wondering, from a couple of weeks ago:

The Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc band is not close to excavating the site of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School, where it says it found signs of graves nearly three years ago.

In May of 2021, the band announced it had found signs of 200 probable graves on grounds of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School through a ground-penetrating radar survey.

During a press conference announcing a sacred covenant between the band and the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Vancouver, reporters asked Kúkpi7 Rosanne Casimir if there was an update on the identification of the unmarked graves anomalies, if any excavation of the site had been completed to date and, if not, whether there were any plans to do so in 2024.

“We have not started excavation,” Casmir said.

Tk’emlúps spokesperson Racelle Kooy told reporters the band is still at a point of doing archival research in its investigation.

“We’re still at the oral tellings with the truth telling part of it,” Casimir added.

Casimir said any talk of excavation of the site “is very intrusive” and it is “a very sensitive step moving forward.”

She said taking that step will entail a lot of dialogue, with supports in place for band members and residential school survivors, as well as collaboration with other First Nations impacted by the Kamloops Residential School.

“And we're not at that point yet. We're still very early,” Casimir said.

Casimir said the band intends to provide updates “at key points” in its investigation into the probable graves.

“We will be sure to reach out and share,” Casimir said.

In September of 2021 Kooy told reporters at a press conference the band had done “non-invasive work to date” at the site.

It's literally the exact same script as the Treblinka case. Rely on "oral truth-telling" and refuse to excavate, claiming cultural sensitivity, because you know it would disprove the stories which have gained enormous cultural prominence based on extremely thin physical evidence.

The most damning evidence in the OJ trial (barring DNA which was little understood by juries at the time) wasn’t the glove, or the record of Simpson’s movements, or the police interview. It was the fact that his defense could not provide any alternate account of what happened to Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman whatsoever.

Why was this a big problem? Because the bodies were discovered at the crime scene. Investigators scientifically studied the scene of the crime, documented evidence found at the scene, performed autopsies of the victims in order to scientifically prove the occurrence of a murder at a precise time and location, along with a cause of death.

The physical evidence found at the scene, and immediately investigated by authorities using standard-operating forensic practices, narrowed down the possibility space of "what happened to Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman" by 99.99% compared to the counterfactual of no bodies being found, no forensic investigation of the scene of the crime, no murder weapon, no witness reports during the occurrence of any crime.

In contrast, at Treblinka, we have no bodies, we have no murder weapon, we have no contemporary witnesses, we have no documentary evidence. There has not been a single excavation or forensic study of any mass grave at Treblinka- ever. It has not - even remotely - been proven that approximately 900,000 people were murdered at that site. In fact, there is no evidence at all that even 2% of that number of people were ever at that site at any point in time.

If there were no bodies, no murder weapon, no witnesses, no forensic investigation of any crime scene, then there would never have been a trial in the first place.

But it gets even more bizarre.

Let's say that in the Simpson case there were no bodies ever found or autopsied, or forensic evidence ever presented. Then let's say that some witnesses come forward and say, years or even decades after the fact, that they witnessed the murder and know the precise location where the victims were buried. Can you even fathom that there would be no attempt to excavate the remains of the victims in order to procure the evidence that was so crucial to the case in the first place - the evidence you just flatly take for granted in your comparison? It's beyond the pale to imagine that prosecutors would say "we aren't going to excavate the remains or provide autopsies, because that would be disrespectful to the victims."

Your comparison fails, because in contrast with the Simpson case with Treblinka we have:

  • No bodies.
  • No autopsies.
  • No murder weapon.
  • No proof that the alleged victims were even at the site claimed (i.e. no transport documents establishing those people were ever even brought to that camp, at any point in time, in the first place).
  • No contemporary witness accounts.
  • The prosecution claims to know exactly where the victims are buried, but they forbid excavation or forensic analysis of the alleged mass graves.
  • The case is entirely reliant on witness testimony, with the earliest (and therefore most important) witnesses demonstrated as absolutely unreliable.

In contrast with the case of Treblinka, in which the Mainstream claims that they know exactly where the mass graves of 900,000 are located but have never excavated or proven the existence of a single mass grave of any size at any point in time, there is another case of a mass execution in which sound forensic practices were utilized: the Katyn Forest massacre.

When the Germans discovered the mass graves of the Katyn Forest massacre they:

In spite of the lengths the Germans went to in order to scientifically investigate the scene of the crime, they were still accused of the Katyn Forest massacre by the Soviet Prosecution at Nuremberg, which produced witnesses to attest to the fact the Germans committed the crime. The authors of the Soviet investigation of the Katyn massacre, which falsely blamed the Germans for a crime that they had actually committed, submitted their report as evidence in the Nuremberg trial (USSR-54), and they were the same as the authors of the Soviet report on the investigation of Auschwitz (USSR-8), with the addition of Trofim Lysenko as a signatory to the Auschwitz report.

Soviet investigators denied access to Western observers during their own investigations of these alleged "extermination camps." As mentioned before, initially there were claims of "death factories" with gas chambers in both the camps liberated by the Western Allies and camps liberated by the Soviet Union. But Western observers investigated those claims and proved they were false. The Soviets denied any access to Western observers during their own investigations, and those are the only camps where those claims exist today.

I sincerely hope, at this point, you are genuinely wondering why there has never been a single excavation to even prove the mere existence of a single mass grave at Treblinka. The answer to that question is that Jewish authorities forbid any excavation of any mass graves. They use the exact same excuse as cited by the perpetrators of the Kamloops Mass Grave Hoax. Genocide deniers ask: Where are the bodies of the residential schoolchildren?:

Where is the actual evidence of the 215 bodies discovered at the grounds of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School? ...

Most of us know where the bodies are. The search at the Kamloops site that once was an orchard was prompted because of a discovery of a child’s rib bone. This gruesome find was not a surprise to those whose memories of being woken up in the middle of the night to dig graves were a part of witness testimonials — similar to most testimonials — about the evils that befell Indigenous people.

After Kamloops, dozens of sites called for similar inquiries. This week, a geophysical examination at the former St. Joseph’s Mission Residential School observed 93 “reflections” through ground-penetrating radar.

I wonder if the word “bodies” has now been changed to “reflections” possibly because such findings have been called into question by the aforementioned commentary. In turn, this commentary was most likely spurred by published articles, including one by a university professor, and social media postings that challenge the validity of the evidence.

This kind of questioning is the status quo of what Canada has nurtured for the better part of 200 years — the idea that the Indigenous people’s existence, but mostly their disappearance at the hands of settlers, is something that can be flamboyantly denied.

But. Where. Are. The. Bodies?

They are where they were buried — in those secret or official graves. At this point, nobody is going to be digging up those children to satisfy a bunch of white settlers’ points of view as to what we should be doing with our tragically deceased little ones.

Currently, we don’t have protocols in place yet (that I’m aware of) on how to sensitively deal with the graves. However, we are taking our cultural beliefs into consideration, which go against unsettling rest spaces. This call for bodies is nothing more than a racist rant bordering on genocide denial.

How far will a denier go? When no longer able to refute the absurdly massive physical evidence, Holocaust deniers started to appeal to more “scientific” data. For example, they claimed that the chemical analysis of hydrogen cyanide compounds showed the amounts were not sufficient enough to kill people in gas chambers. Posing as tourists, these “scientists” would gouge chunks of plaster from the walls of gas chambers to send them for analysis.

What happened in residential schools is not about the evidence.

This is the -exact- same reasoning used by Jewish authorities to forbid any scientific investigation of the alleged mass graves of Treblinka. If they excavated the site it would immediately disprove the hoax - in both cases, so they cite cultural sensitivity and denounce anyone who expects a bare minimum-standard of scientific investigation as a "genocide denier."

It's unfortunate I was banned and couldn't respond to you in a timely manner. But your example falls completely on its face for the simple fact that the Simpson case had a crime scene and bodies which were forensically investigated, and there has never been any attempt to forensically investigate any mass graves at Treblinka! There isn't even proof that the alleged victims were even at that location at any point in time. There are no bodies. There is no murder weapon. There are no contemporary witness reports. Jewish authorities forbid scientific investigation of the site using the exact same logic as the perpetrators of the Kamloops hoax, a legal maneuver which would be unconscionable if the reported location of Simpson and Goldman was concluded by prosecutors, but the prosecutors blocked any attempt to scientifically prove that the victims are buried where they are claiming.

You have no grounds to compare the two cases here, only to prove the importance of the body of physical evidence in the Simpson that does not even remotely exist in the Treblinka case.

Last year I was at a social gathering with an (about 30?) year old, higher-class Indian woman who lamented that her parents refused to find her a match before her older sister. She was also talking about matchmaking sites where all sort of criteria are included, like skin tone. It was problematic that her older sister was darker skinned than she was. Wild stuff.

As far as I know various mainstream Holocaust theories disagree on the degree to which the Holocaust was planned as a total extermination ahead of time as opposed to it just organically evolving over time, becoming more and more murderous... What is outside of the mainstream Overton window is the idea that the Nazis never at any point actually shifted into deliberate genocide mode.

They "disagree" because there is no basis for any of their claims that this is something which actually happened. They all claim that "resettlement" secretly became "extermination" but they cannot say who, when, where, or why the change, or point to any documentary evidence that this is something which actually happened.

The lack of consensus is strong evidence for the Revisionist position that there was never such a change in policy. They can't even formulate a coherent position that they agree on because every position they take is contradicted by a bunch of documentary evidence.

He didn't use "Holocaust" or "Final Solution" or describe gas chambers, and the camp he visited is acknowledged as a "normal" concentration camp by historians, which did not have a homicidal gas chamber. So the brutality he mentioned is simply the terrible conditions in the concentration camps as Germany was being bombed at all sides at the end of the war.

There is no mention of gas chambers or an extermination plan in any of those works. A passing reference to "Nazi brutality" at a concentration camp which nobody claims had gas chambers is the closest thing there is, and it's not even close.

If millions of people were exterminated within gas chambers disguised as shower rooms, this would without a doubt be the most unusual event to happen in WWII. It wouldn't escape mention in any of these memoirs unless they privately dismissed those claims as propaganda which would fall by the wayside like WWI propaganda about "corpse factories."

While it's true the Holocaust theory holds that the camps only killed about 3 million (half if you use 6 million, more than half if you use a lower death toll like some mainstream sources), he is correct that the mainstream claims that there was no plan to resettle the Jews, and that resettlement plan as stated in documents was only a euphemism for their actual, secret plan to kill them all. Let's be clear about what the mainstream alleges.

I don't think your representation of the Revisionist case is very good, I would divide it into these categories:

Census data: Inconclusive, heavily relies on the accuracy and political integrity of very complex measurements, and doing some simple additions and subtractions from many different demographic studies conducted before, during, and after the war in the Russian empire, Poland, and Soviet Union. It heavily relies on a level of precision (how many Polish Jews became "Soviet Citizens" on paper after the war?), accuracy and honesty that simply does not exist. Inaccurate census data also causes problems in estimating the death toll in other atrocities like the Armenian genocide. Census data also does not tell us how many Jews died under Soviet occupation during or shortly after the war. Revisionists suspect a very large number of Jews were deported into and likely died in the Soviet Interior.

Physical evidence: Strongly favors the Revisionist side. Historians claim ~3 million were murdered in these extermination camps, but the remains of approximately 0% have been identified in scientific excavations. This also includes technical arguments around things like burial density or cremation capacity, fuel requirements, etc. Although these arguments are usually not influential to non-Revisionists because they just assume that Revisionists are using math deceptively or not representing the mainstream position accurately.

Documentary evidence: Strongly favors the Revisionist side, as the Revisionist case mostly takes the documents at face value whereas the mainstream narrative claims that there was systematic euphemism and coded language. For example, there are documents where both Himmler and Pohl, head of the concentration camp system, identify Sobibor as a transit camp (Durchgangslager). The Revisionist theory is this camp was what the document says it was, the mainstream theory is that in their own internal secret documents they used coded language to camouflage the extermination camp. There are some documents that Revisionists struggle to explain, which is to be expected given that there are millions and millions of them. There are documents that the mainstream struggles to explain.

But most important of all are the documents that should be there but which are not. For example, you are likely aware that the top-secret communications between Auschwitz and SS headquarters were intercepted and decoded during the height of the Holocaust. The average person has not heard of these decodes because there is no indication in those communications whatsoever of what the mainstream alleges. The communication and death tolls reported in fact corroborate the Revisionist position. If it happened, it would be easy to discern from the decodes, in hindsight. That's only one example of an extremely broad, systematic absence of evidence that ought to be there but which is not. Apparently the Auschwitz Decodes do not even warrant a Wikipedia page.

Witness testimonies: The most strong aspect of the Revisionist case in my opinion. Witnesses are by far the most important part of the body of evidence for the mainstream narrative, so the Revisionist critique of that body of evidence is devastating.

You say Revisionists "poke holes", but that complaint is myopic. Mainstream historians claim that around 900,000 Jews were murdered, cremated and buried in a precisely known location. This is an extremely unusual and extraordinary claim. The documentary and physical evidence for this claim, by my estimation, conclusively disproves it. The reliance on witness testimonies and census data to prove something which could have easily been proven at any point with a scientific investigation points to the correctness of the Revisionist position. The Revisionist criticisms of the alleged cremation operation at these camps is absolutely devastating, and the side representing the mainstream can only really complain about "poking holes" rather than provide a convincing rebuttal. Any time we are, in the news, confronted with the logistical problem of cremating large numbers of corpses, Skeptical Paulie shows up to "Ayy Tone" inquiring how the Germans were able to cremate 6,000 people on open-air pyres every single day in the Polish winter in a small area of a small camp. It's not poking holes, it's a glaring weakness in the mainstream narrative which indicates this could not have possibly happened as they are claiming, and there is no convincing rebuttal to that point.

Eyewitness accounts are well-known to be among the least reliable sources of evidence. The evidentiary value of eyewitness accounts heavily depends on the quality of those accounts. If Yankel Wiernik is not a reliable witness- and the cultural relevance (or lack thereof) of his work speaks to a lack of reliability, it also calls into question other witnesses who recycled claims in his work. There are essentially no contemporaneous accounts, and the "earliest" accounts are extremely unreliable. The accounts made decades after the fact are the ones closest to what is claimed today.

The evidentiary value of witness accounts relies on them being independent and contemporaneous, Soviet Show-Trials and Witch Trials famously relied on eyewitness accounts in lieu of other forms of evidence.

On the other hand, I remember the furor over "race realism" and the 100% confidence in the mainstream that everybody in that camp was pseudoscientific kooks, but in spite of myself I was convinced by the case they presented.

What is interesting about it is that everyone seems to have an argument that make things "click" for them. You can critique Ryan's work, but his argument he always goes back to is a strong one: the Western Allies liberated concentration camps and lied about extermination factories and death showers in the West, and that massively increases the likelihood that the Soviets also lied about death showers in the East. For political reasons the former was abandoned while the latter lives on- for now.

A good example is the US pacification of Iraq.

Iraq is a good example for why this is true, in fact. The US retreated from the first battle of Fallujah due to civilian casualties. If it had done what Israel is doing: ghettoize the population into a very small number of population centers, demolish the rest, and then deport the population into concentration camps with special treatment/scrutiny of military-aged males, then you would have actually seen a pacification of Iraq. But that is not a partisan war the US actually won, ditto for Afghanistan.

The Destruction of the Rafah Ghetto

There has been intense debate between US and Israel on an impending ground operation into Rafah. It appears the operation is starting to take form, and it's going to look a lot like the evacuations from the Warsaw Ghetto on a much larger scale.

This is not going to look like the assault on the Northern Gaza, since the Israelis have already concentrated the Gazans within Rafah. One of the primary points of disagreement between US and Israel seems to be on the timeline of the evacuations, with the US insisting that it's going to take months to evacuate and sift through the civilian population while Israel has proposed a much more aggressive timeline. Here's how it is going to unfold:

  • Israel will establish secure checkpoints and transit facilities around Rafah: registering, delousing, providing medical treatment and food to deportees.
  • There will be some weekly target for the number of civilians to process at these transit camps.
  • Deportees will then be transported to one of the many concentration camps "humanitarian islands", they are calling them, with military-aged males likely being segregated from the rest of the population, or at least highly likely to be detained based on other criteria.
  • Israel will assault Rafah and the city will face a level of demolition similar to but probably not as intense as Northern Gaza.

Historical comparisons are always messy, and you aren't going to see journalists in good-standing noting this, but I can't think of another historical operation that is closer to the impending evacuation of Rafah than the evacuation of the Warsaw Ghetto. The second battle of Fallujah and the evacuation of Phnom Penh provide other examples of civilians evacuating cities by force or military action, but neither of those approximates the circumstances or tactics which will be used in Rafah.

The Brutal Reality of Resettlement and Partisan Wars

There seems to be two camps: on the one hand, Israel is waging a Genocide, a secret desire to kill all the Palestinians. On the other hand, Israel is engaging in a fight for its very existence and doing everything it reasonably can to limit civilian casualties. But the truth lies in the middle, and can be summarized with two points:

  • Israel is fighting a partisan war, which cannot be won without high civilian causalities, in the first place because the militants live among the community but, more importantly, because reprisals against the civilian population are a requirement for winning a partisan war (Israel knows this, the US could never accept that). "Reprisal" provides a better interpretation of the high rate of civilian casualties than either a secret plan to genocide all Palestinians or the absurd notion that Israel is doing everything it can to minimize civilian casualties.
  • Israel wants to resettle the Palestinians outside of its aspirational territory, to enemy territory like Egypt.

The actions of Israel, including the impending evacuation of the Rafah ghetto, can be understood by accepting the above two points. It so happens that the above two points are identical to the position of Holocaust Revisionists, or Holocaust Deniers, regarding the Nazi policies with respect to the Jews. Those policies also resulted in the concentration and mass resettlement of the Jews, culminating most famously in the evacuations of the Warsaw Ghetto, those infamous deportation trains, which took place over many months.

In contrast with the Official Narrative- that the secret policy of the Germans was to kill all the Jews, Revisionists maintain the policy was to resettle the Jews to a territory in Russia, with a Jewish state likely being created after the war in Madagascar or Palestine. The Revisionist position is supported by documents, which all refer to "resettlement" as the policy objective of the deportations. But historians maintain that, in all these documents throughout the sprawling German bureaucracy, everyone was "in" on the conspiracy to use "resettlement" as a codeword for "extermination". Even in internal, top-secret communication which was intercepted or captured after the war. That's why, they say, there are no documents outlining the German policy with respect to the Jews as claimed by historians, but there are very many documents outlining the Resettlement policies as claimed by Revisionists.

Israel's insistence it cannot win the war without evacuating Rafah speaks to a similar motive claimed by Revisionists for the evacuations of the Jewish ghettos. We lionize partisan efforts against the Nazis, including the Underground Resistance operating out of Warsaw, but Israel's calculus provides some evidence for the Revisionist claim that, also, the evacuation of the Jewish ghettos was not motivated by a secret policy to exterminate them all within shower rooms in secret death factories.

A Year in Rafah

Despite the similarities described above, there is obviously one major claim in Mainstream Historiography regarding the evacuation of the Jewish ghettos that is an outlier in all respects, from anything else that has happened in human history. Whereas documents all describe these evacuations being motivated by economic and security concerns, and deportees were told that they were being evacuated to Humanitarian Islands where they would have work, this is what actually happened according to orthodox historians:

The Nazis set a quota for the evacuations of the Warsaw ghetto. Deportees were given food and told they would be resettled to camps where they would have work. The deportation trains brought the deportees to a small, secret camp called Treblinka that was set up as a fake train station, complete with a fake train platform and clock, fake ticket booth and posted train schedules. They were told that they were going to take a shower before being transited onwards. They were given soap and a towel and tricked into entering what they thought was a shower room. Then, the doors were locked and they were poisoned by carbon monoxide exhausted by a captured Soviet tank engine.

More than 5,000 people were said to be killed daily in this secret camp staffed by no more than several dozen German personnel, a larger Ukrainian auxiliary, and Jewish workforce. After being killed, all of the victims were buried onsite in huge mass graves. According to the Standard Work on the Treblinka extermination camp by former director of Yad Vashem, Yitzhak Arad, Himmler visited Treblinka in February or March 1943 and:

Himmler learned from his visit to Treblinka that, in spite of his orders, the corpses of the Jews who had been exterminated in this camp had not been cremated, but buried. Immediately after this visit, the big cremating operation began in the camp. This was the main task imposed on Treblinka during the last months of the camp’s existence...

After Himmler’s visit, the date for closing and liquidating the camps of Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka became dependent on the completion of the cremation of the victims’ corpses and the erasure of all traces of the crimes that had been carried out in these camps. The timetable for carrying out this decision lay mainly in the hands of the camp commanders and in their ability and desire to accomplish the erasure of the crimes as quickly as possible...

In Treblinka, the camp command faced the most difficult task—unearthing over 700,000 corpses and cremating them while at the same time continuing to receive new transports with Jews for extermination. In this camp the entire cremation operation lasted about four months, from April to the end of July 1943. To accomplish the task, the cremating took place simultaneously in a number of sites and the largest number of Jewish prisoner-workers were put to work in the various required stages.

So the 700,000 victims of the evacuation of the Warsaw Ghetto and other deportees were unburied and then cremated over the course of 4 months along with newly-arrived victims. In total, Arad estimated 850,000 victims at Treblinka, meaning that about 6,000 - 7,000 corpses were cremated every single day in this camp during cremation operations. Treblinka was not constructed with any cremation facilities, and so these corpses were cremated on huge outdoor pyres using locally-gathered brushwood although there are no documents or contemporary reports at all describing this process. The cremations were said to take place immediately adjacent to a major civilian rail-line, and adjacent to several Polish villages, and in spite of this there are no wartime contemporaneous accounts of this enormous cremation operation.

Yitzhak Arad heavily relies on an alleged eyewitness called Yankel Wiernik, whose account is by far the most important in the historiography of the camp. Given the complete absence of documentary or physical evidence for any of this- a Soviet excavation of Treblinka in 1945 found no mass graves on the site, and no investigation since then has ever found a single mass grave at Treblinka, Wiernik's eyewitness account is the keystone to the entire Treblinka historical narrative:

He remembered the horrors of the enormous pyres, where "10,000 to 12,000 corpses were cremated at one time." He wrote: "The bodies of women were used for kindling" while Germans "toasted the scene with brandy and with the choicest liqueurs, ate, caroused and had a great time warming themselves by the fire."[6] Wiernik described small children waiting so long in the cold for their turn in the gas chambers that "their feet froze and stuck to the icy ground" and noted one guard who would "frequently snatch a child from the woman's arms and either tear the child in half or grab it by the legs, smash its head against a wall and throw the body away."[7] At other times "children were snatched from their mothers' arms and tossed into the flames alive."

He was also encouraged by occasional scenes of brave resistance.[8] In chapter 8, he describes seeing a naked woman escape the clutches of the guards and leap over a three-metre high barbed wire fence unscathed. When accosted by a Ukrainian guard (Trawniki) on the other side, she wrestled his machine gun out of his grasp, killed the guard, and shot another guard before being killed herself.

You can read the witness account for yourself if you are inclined. In spite of the enormous historiographical importance of Wiernik's work, you cannot purchase it on Amazon in either print or digital form. I only learned about this work from Revisionists, it seems to be something of an embarrassment despite its extremely important position in the historiography of the camp. Excerpts from Wiernik were submitted as evidence by a Soviet Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trial, along with a ~15 minute examination of another Jewish witness, who claimed to have been deported to the camp from Warsaw. That's all the evidence that was presented at Nuremberg, for the murder of 900,000 people- a Soviet excavation of the site uncovered no mass graves and no physical evidence was submitted.

I interpret it as a tacit admission to the weakness of the source, that this work is not required reading in every school across America in contrast with, say, Elie Wiesel's Night or Anne Frank's Diary, both of which have important literary significance to the Holocaust narrative but no historiographical significance. Wiesel, for example, makes no mention of gas chambers in his account, instead opting for extermination by burning people alive, which is not claimed by mainstream historians today. Anne Frank's tragic story likewise provides no historiographical relevance to the "extermination camp" narrative and actually contradicts it. She was deported to an alleged extermination camp, Auschwitz, and then transferred to another camp where she died in a hospital of Typhus.

Needless to say, Revisionists regard A Year in Treblinka as literary fiction. This is supposedly a direct eyewitness to the murder of 850,000 people who organized a prisoner revolt in Treblinka (which also has no documentation whatsoever) and heroically killed a Ukrainian guard with an axe.

Suddenly we heard the signal - a shot fired into the air.

We leaped to our feet. Everyone fell to his prearranged task and performed it with meticulous care. Among the most difficult tasks was to lure the Ukrainians from the watchtowers. Once they began shooting at us from above, we would have no chance of escaping alive. We knew that gold held an immense attraction for them, and they had been doing business with the Jews all the time. So, when the shot rang out, one of the Jews sneaked up to the tower and showed the Ukrainian guard a gold coin. The Ukrainian completely forgot that he was on guard duty. He dropped his machine gun and hastily clambered down to pry the piece of gold from the Jew. They grabbed him, finished him off and took his revolver. The guards in the other towers were also dispatched quickly...

Just as I thought I was safe, running straight ahead as fast as I could, I suddenly heard the command "Halt!" right behind me. By then I was exhausted but I ran faster just the same. The woods were just ahead of me, only a few leaps away. I strained all my will power to keep going. The pursuer was gaining and I could hear him running close behind me.

Then I heard a shot; in the same instant I felt a sharp pain in my left shoulder. I turned around and saw a guard from the Treblinka Penal Camp. He again aimed his pistol at me. I knew something about firearms and I noticed that the weapon had jammed. I took advantage of this and deliberately slowed down. I pulled the ax from my belt. My pursuer - a Ukrainian guard - ran up to me yelling in Ukrainian: "Stop or I'll shoot!" I came up close to him and struck him with my axe across the left side of his chest. He collapsed at my feet with a vile path.

I was free and ran into the woods. After penetrating a little deeper into the thicket, I sat down among the bushes. From the distance I heard a lot of shooting. Believe it or not, the bullet had not really hurt me. It had gone through all of my clothing and stopped at my shoulder, leaving a mark. I was alone. At last, I was able to rest.

Wow! How have you never heard of this guy? If his account is true, this work must be so remarkable as to have nearly biblical significance. But you cannot purchase it on Amazon, and Holocaust Deniers are the only ones who actually talk about this guy, rather than historians who quietly use his account as the most important primary source in the historiography of the camp, but who otherwise do not attempt to attach any cultural significance to the man himself who witnessed these things. It is very suspicious, and it's likely because if you read his account yourself you would not find it believable.

Parallel Interpretations

In case the point of my post isn't clear:

Israel's motive and tactics for dealing with the Gazans generally, but especially the impending Rafah Aktion, mirror the Revisionist interpretation of the resettlement of Jews in Eastern Europe. The part of that history which has no parallel- the allegation that the Germans tricked millions of people into entering a shower room, gassed them with exhaust from a captured Soviet tank engine, buried them, then unburied them, cremated them on open-air pyres and reburied the remains, is the part which has no parallel and is also the part of the story which is contested by so-called Holocaust deniers.

In the several years in which I have studied Revisionism, I have only ever noticed Revisionists really talk about Revisionism. But this seems to be changing, on Twitter from a pretty broad array of Twitter accounts I am noticing people talk about Holocaust Revisionism who are not known for that. It might be going viral and become the next forbidden knowledge now that HBD is being digested by the Twitter intelligentsia. The fact that Israeli conflict with the Palestinians is presenting so many direct parallels: the brutal reality of partisan warfare, the mass resettlement of undesirable populations, the ease with which false propaganda becomes "news", are all contributing to what appears to be a growing skepticism among right-wing Twitter that I have never seen before outside of Revisionist circles.

The growth of Holocaust Denial will likely be another consequence of this war.

Edit: Forgot to mention, One Third of the Holocaust is the most well-known Revisionist video discussing these alleged secret extermination camps, although there are many technical studies done for each of the individual camps by Revisionist scholars.

I repeat: what we have here is an article by a Jew criticising anti-semitism. I have pointed to articles by Asians criticising anti-Asian feeling, by black people criticising anti-black feeling, and, yes, by white people criticising anti-white feeling.

What we don't have is an ethnically Chinese-owned major national newspaper with a Chinese chief editor publishing reports from a Chinese journalist (in fact, a mere Sophomore who only is being published because of his Chinese parents who have connections in the industry), which selectively cites hearsay and reports from Chinese witnesses to "report" on a political conflict involving Chinese nationalism and ethnic Chinese interests on one side, and their political opposition on the other- and trying to pass that off as "objective journalism."

What you are talking about- "an article by a black person criticizing anti-black feelings" is not all comparable to the long-standing pattern of behavior I am identifying- a vertically integrated propaganda apparatus which presents ethnic advocacy as journalism.

As a side note here, I would gently remind you that Theo Baker's article isn't advocating for Jewish nationalism or anything like that either. It is just a straightforward piece against anti-semitism. The thrust of the article is not to advocate for special privileges or carve-outs for Jews - not the way that e.g. black authors openly advocate for reparations and other special privileges - but rather just to say "please stop attacking us". It is purely defensive.

I'm sorry but this is just absurd, Theo Baker's article is advocating for Jewish nationalism by writing propaganda for the benefit of the Jewish nationalist side of the conflict. It is not "purely defensive." It is offensive. They are framing the conflict and using their influence to present one side of that conflict while claiming an objectivity that doesn't exist. @coffee_enjoyer pointed out the ways in which this article is one-sided. This is not defensive this is how they have always sought to wrangle control of public opinion. They are the only ones who operate in this way to this extent in the United States.

You cite "the very long history of Jews presenting their one-sided account of a political conflict as "journalism"" as if it isn't completely normal and expected for anyone's account of a political conflict to favour their own side. Hamza El Boudali's account of the conflict at Stanford is completely one-sided. Political tribalism is a human constant. Jews and Palestinians are no different to, say, pro-life and pro-choice journalists.

I certainly agree that political tribalism is a human constant. How do Jews engage in political tribalism? By exploiting their ownership and connection over sources of information. This is how they operate. This it not how blacks or Arabs operate in the United States, they get patronized in various ways but they don't steer the ship.

If you're interested in white people specifically, here's Reihan Salam (who according to the US census is a white person) criticising anti-white rhetoric.

Yes, let's recap:

I am referring the very long history of largely Jewish-owned newspapers with Jewish-run editorial control publishing articles written by Jews which heavily relies on rumors and hearsay from other Jews to present one-sided on-the-ground accounts and narratives describing salient political conflicts in a way that is intended to boost sympathy for Jews and alert the public to anti-Jewish sentiment. Your response is an article written by this guy (he's white on the census!), and from this guy with 0 actual advocacy for white people, and you apparently don't think you're stretching here.

In contrast with how far you are stretching to attribute this sort of behavior to non-Jewish white people, the pattern of behavior I am referring to stretches back centuries. Take that 1921 news article where Jews are begging America to "save 6,000,000 in Russia", saying "6,000,000 Jews are facing extermination by massacre. As the famine is spreading, the counter-revolutionary movement is gaining and the Soviet's control is waning", (also an interesting statement, for others reasons).

Or the 1936 article, talking about "the European holocaust" well before the war.

Various articles exaggerating conditions - i.e. "6,000,000 facing starvation" in 1920, or "reporting" on the apparent expulsion of "6,000,000 Jewish families" from Russia in the 19th century.

Was there conflict between Jews and Russians or Ukrainians? Absolutely. But in hindsight we can see that this is not journalism, it's Jewish propaganda being presented as journalism. The accounts of conditions on the ground are a combination of truth, exaggeration, and falsehood published to spin a narrative. In hindsight we can acknowledge how stories about 6,000,000 Jews facing extermination in Russia was pure nonsense, but at the time this was the information the public had access to in order to understand the political situation.

Jews especially have the penchant- the means, motives, and opportunity, to relate "their side" of the story as "journalism".

The objection I have is that you take something very obvious and understandable

To me this behavior is very obvious and understandable, but just because a pattern of behavior is understandable doesn't mean I can't adjust my priors and acknowledge what is just another chapter in the very long history of Jews presenting their one-sided account of a political conflict as "journalism."

Can you point me to any article in The Atlantic where a white person is published agitating for his ethnic interests? It is a quintessentially Jewish behavior for them to leverage their connections in the media apparatus to spin a story of their own oppression in order to manipulate public opinion.

We find it easy to relate systematic behavior regarding black street crime to HBD. It's entirely rational to generalize that analysis to other group behavior. A Jewish journalist writing a journalistic piece about Jewish oppression, particularly in the context of a political hot-button issue, based primarily on hearsay from Jewish witnesses should not be believed unless receipts are provided. It should basically be assumed that they are just trying to manipulate public opinion by spinning the truth, or outright fabricating it. It's the equivalent of crossing the street when you see a hoodlum coming your way.

And de facto you were already well advised to keep your views on the Holocaust to yourself at any university anywhere outside the Islamic world.

Of course, but the idea of this being legally sanctioned by the government would have been far-fetched not too long ago due to First Amendment protections. No longer so.

It’s why a few swastika tattooed prison gang room temp IQ ‘grand dragon’ KKK-LARPers can be pushed to discredit large swathes of the far right with the public

It would be more like the if 'grand dragon' KKK-LARPers that have been used by ADL as a representation of "right-wing extremism" actually ran college campuses and elite institutions.

One of the very first red-pills for me was seeing ADL tout "higher extremism on the Right than the Left" but if you read the white paper, they would actually report things like "this guy murdered a prison guard during an escape, and he has a Swastika tattoo on his mug shot so this counts as right-wing violence." So the strategy was to misrepresent the opposition. But Zionists implementing these speech regulations banning criticisms of themselves and banning Holocaust revisionism are not misrepresenting Zionists, they are actually representing Zionists. It's not a matter of bad apples, it's a matter of them finally gaining ground in banning speech in the US where they have already achieved the same thing throughout Europe.

On a related note, Sweden is slated this month to outlaw Holocaust denial, joining the growing number of European nations. This sort of lawmaking is mostly recent across Europe.

Now if I were a student in Texas I would be liable to be expelled for my conclusions regarding the historicity of the alleged gas chambers, due to the use the "International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance" definition of antisemitism. Meaning Holocaust Revisionism is outlawed on Texas campuses, only formalizing an informal policy. I remember years ago making a post about the IHRA definition of antisemitism and people were skeptical it would be used as a vector for censorship in the United States, for Jews to try to achieve levels of censorship they have in Europe, but here we are.

People tend to overestimate the blowback caused by real censorship. What tends to happen is the outrage dies down, and then the act of censorship really does have a cooling effect that can be hard to measure or understand, and then it becomes "the new normal." It works, the "Streissand effect" is fake.

Why could we not say the Aryans "larp" as heroes when they were just an invading horde?

At the end of the day, Aryans are an invading horde. What are Jews? They are not that. They operate differently and this is actually reflected in their foundational myths. Yes, the Aeneid is an aesthetically sophisticated mythology to reify what is essentially an invading horde on the Italian peninsula. What's Exodus? To this day, Jews very publicly celebrate the myth of their tribal god murdering the first-born, non-Jewish sons of their host civilization.

So as much as you blame the Jews for their control over the narrative, I blame you more than them for making it impossible to honestly question historical details.

Yes, you would blame me wouldn't you. Even if it were to turn out Revisionists are 100% right, you would still blame them and not the people most associated with creating and maintaining those lies, and actually creating and enforcing the laws and rules you are complaining about.

You'd find it more inconvenient to argue that the Jews are an enemy who only ever got what they deserved, but you would still argue that. Am I mistaken?

No, I would not argue that, I would probably just argue "it's in the past so we shouldn't put so much weight on this mythos for the questions of our day", which is an argument that is common enough already on the Right. But I think Revisionists are correct, and I don't think the narrative can survive long-term, it's highly vulnerable. I find the issue interesting because it is such an important mythos, but it is vulnerable at the same time.

The number of Jewish-American soldiers who died in combat is completely irrelevant. Over 99% of the alleged death toll is said to have happened in Eastern Europe.

Very large numbers of Jews were evacuated from Poland and Eastern Europe deep into the Soviet Interior ahead of the German advance. Their fate is not well understood. Any of them, and there were certainly very many although we cannot know how many, were either outright killed by Stalin or died of exposure in gulags in Siberia or in subsequent war/post-war famines, historians count them all as German victims.

Or Ukrainian nationalists in a village who associated Jews with Bolshevism and took revenge against them, that's also counted as victims of Germany.

You can make the argument that historians ought to count things this way, but the point is the mythos obscures the underlying complexity to these issues. "Germans gassed 3 million Jews inside gas chambers disguised as shower rooms and then made the bodies disappear" is the mythological handwaving over the complexities of what actually transpired and why it did.

There's no historical basis for a lot of foundational myths, whether we're talking about Lamanites or Fir Bolg.

Yeah, that wasn't my point. My point was that Aryan foundational myth larps as the descendants of classical heroes, and Jewish foundational myth larps as a slave caste to a foreign civilization, within which they unleash plagues and get expelled.

I have not heard this claim, and like most of your statements, it's hard to parse since I don't know if you're claiming it's something some Jew once said and you're taking it out of context or what. (I mean, every army had some number of Jewish soldiers, some of whom were obviously killed in battle. So obviously the statement cannot literally be true.)

When historians estimate the death toll of the Holocaust - the famous 6 million number, they explicitly include all deaths even of Jews who never fell under German occupation, or who died in combat, owing to German war guilt for starting the war. Assuming some number of Jews, likely very many, died under Stalin during or after the war, those are all tabulated as Holocaust victims of Germany. Or some Ukrainian villages taking revenge against the Bolshevik apparatus- also German Holocaust victims.

According to Court Historians, 100% of Jewish deaths in WWII are German Holocaust victims, and 0 Jews were victims of Stalin.

So you have a basis of truth, Jewish persecution and hardship during WWII, and then it gets exaggerated and mispresented until you have a mythos that bears little resemblance to reality but is a propaganda narrative created by and for the interests of Jews.

I remember Ilforte giving a translated account of an alleged Russian pogrom which was extremely dubious, some Jewish school claiming that Russians had trespassed and trashed the place and threatened to kill them. It was all based off eyewitness testimonies of the Jews, with no leads or suspects and law enforcement basically didn't believe them although they could not write that in their reports. Yes, I'm sure the history of the pogroms in Russia is a mishmash of truth and reality, which is ultimately condensed into a one-sided narrative.

I don't think historicity is relevant in evaluating the worth or meaning of a foundational myth, but it's worth noting that there's no historical basis for the enslavement of the Hebrews in Egypt. So this foundational myth entails the exaggeration, or more likely outright fabrication, of their oppression as a propaganda tool for justifying claims to land, hostility towards their neighbors, and their own racial supremacy.

You could likewise say the Aeneid entails mostly historical myth in order to do the same: justify violence, conquest, and racial supremacy- and I agree. But the Aryan mode of that foundational myth is claiming descent from Classical heroes who built a glorious civilization that was lost to conquest, not that they were slaves within a foreign nation and their tribal god murdered the first-born sons of their host.

Properly understanding the Holocaust as a modern-day Exodus myth, there's a basis of truth, exaggerations, and outright fabrications. The truthful basis being the actual attempt by Europeans to expel the Jews into a territory outside the European sphere, the hard conditions in the concentration camps especially in the closing months of the war, reprisals being that basis of truth. And nonsense about millions of Jews being gassed inside gas chambers disguised as shower rooms. buried, then unburied and disappeared so nobody could ever find them, is the outright lie. The particularity of the foundational myth points towards the particularity of the people.

You may be aware the Holocaust is said to entail 100% of Jewish deaths in WWII. So Jewish deaths under the influence of Stalin, before or after the war, or pogroms by local populations in the Soviet sphere which fell under the German occupation, give way to the "gas chamber" myth. The myth turns a more complicated issue- like pogroms in Ukraine due to the association of the Jews with Bolshevism and the suffering by the Ukranian people, and converts it into a simpler story of them all being killed by Germans in shower rooms purely out of racial animus.

The point being, "yes" there were pogroms in Russia, but the modern-day consensus of the genealogy of antisemitism that informs the perception of those events likewise is going to contain an element of truth and an element of exaggeration or outright fabrication. While I have not really studied pogroms in Russia, I have seen how a much more complicated story of antisemitism in Eastern Europe is transmitted into a black-and-white "history" of millions of Jews dying in extermination factories purely out of racial hatred. My priors would that there is a similar whitewashing of the "history" regarding the pogroms in Russia to make those events completely one-sided in their interpretation.

It's true that there are common elements of violence and conflict in origin stories across the board, but the particularities of the myth are relevant to the particularity of the people. The Aeneid is a quintessentially Aryan foundation myth, and Exodus is a quintessentially Jewish foundational myth. It is not a coincidence that the Jewish foundational myth entails their presence as a fifth column in a host civilization, within which an influential and trusted political figure spread plagues throughout the land- including the ritualistic murder of the firstborn sons of the gentiles by the Jewish tribal god Yahweh, culminating in a slave revolt followed by their ultimate expulsion from their host nation.

Jewish revolt, in particular slave revolt from more of a Nietzschean interpretation, against their host civilizations is an endless cycle that plays out over and over. Jews acquiring political power in America and then being turned against because they are too closely associated with the social movements that have brought plagues upon the country is just another chapter in this endless cycle.

Are the Russian pogroms and the expulsions from European countries as fictitious as the Holocaust?

It's funny reading Joer's article, in which the emergence of antisemitism in America is 0% the fault of Jews and 100% the fault of everyone else. Luckily I have been alive during this time, I can see with my own lying eyes how the Jews have burned through an immense amount of goodwill in the blink of an eye. It does make you wonder how much "oppression" there actually was, when Jews have the chutzpah to complain about being oppressed by White Christian Americans in 2024.