Why the Alt-Right is a dead-end

Published by carolyn on Sun, 2017-11-19 19:08

At Ernst Zundel's "False News" trial, Holocaust expert Raul Hilberg couldn't provide the proof he had testified existed for the 'Holocaust.' Zundel was acquitted. But today he's still considered guilty by the 'Industry' and by ignorant Alt-Right leaders.


By Carolyn Yeager

THE ALT-RIGHT IS A DEAD-END BECAUSE IT TAKES THE WRONG STANCE on the alleged “holocaust of the jews” – it accepts this "holocaust" as an irrefutable fact of history. It also accepts Jews into its own ranks and sees them as a permanent fixture in White countries. This is true of all those who accept having the term Alt Right applied to themselves: Richard Spencer and Daniel Friberg; Kevin MacDonald and Tom Sunic; Jared Taylor, Greg Johnson, David Duke, Henryck Palmgren and Lana Lokteff of Red Ice, and some of the writers at VDare to name just a few that come to mind. Andrew Anglin is not above using the talents of Jews (Andrew Auernheimer) but does not accept the holocaust. He calls himself Alt-Right because he wants to belong to the club, but I don't consider him such. These people have no problem at all with homosexuals in their movement and speaking from their platforms, either.

Apart from Anglin (who has become increasingly abusive and infantile toward women - perhaps his audience is down so he's 'trying harder'), the message of the Alt Right is highly tolerant and easy-going about the holohoax, taking the position that 'what happened' is not really important to us now. We can move on to the only important issue: mass immigration. Any perceptive person can recognize, however, that the justification used for accepting large-scale immigration and “refugee resettlement” is the racial nationalism of the 1920s/30s, resulting in the “Holocaust” of the 1940s. This version of history spells doom for not only majority White countries, but for White people, with no way out!

A large part of the reason for this attitude in the Alt Right is laziness, from the rank and file all the way up to the top leadership. One always finds that they have not read the Holocaust revisionist literature because it is too difficult, too detailed, or too boring. In Europe it is outlawed, and Jews are working hard to bring about the same censorship in the US - for example Amazon and other book sellers, under pressure from powerful Jewish organizations, have made hundreds of revisionist titles unavailable. However, you can always find them at barnesreview.org and codoh.com bookstores.

I'd like to draw your attention right here to a 6min video I just watched of “Holocaust expert Timothy Snyder” calmly spouting outrageous lies about “what happened” on the Eastern Front and in Babi Yar, totally from a virulently anti-German, Jewish-contrived narrative. Watch it here: http://www.dw.com/en/poland-and-ukraine-in-spat-over-wwii-exhumations/a-41440197 He calls Babi Yar “one half of the holocaust,” meaning “killing by bullets” over open pits, yet there is no evidence for this—no bodies, no mass graves, nothing but a few tales by old, suggestible (paid? flattered?) local Jews. But this is what we are expected to accept as undisputed fact, and will eventually be mandated by law. This is what alt-right leaders are accepting by default, ignoring that such acceptance is a death-knell for Whites. You don't think it has to come to that? Read on to see why it will.

British Nationalist failure

On Saturday I learned of something called “Remembrance Sunday in Britain. There was a march by the National Front. They carried a lot of Union Jack flags and laid about a hundred small red wreaths at the Cenotaph at Whitehall in London, built in 1919 to honor Britain's war dead, and also at the monument to the Women of World War II. Of this latter monument, it was said at it's dedication: "This monument is dedicated to all the women who served our country and the cause of freedom, in uniform and on the home front ...”. I object to this sentiment, based on my judgment they did not serve the cause of freedom at all but the cause of Jewish power. Of the former monument, the same must be said. So why all the pageantry and hypocrisy from the nationalists? To appear patriotic, is my answer.

Richard Edmonds spoke to the crowd, saying that for 50 years the National Front has organized this event to honor the brave soldiers of WWI and WWII who 'charged into enemy machine gun fire', who 'flew their planes up into dangerous enemy skies', who 'sailed their ships across dark and dangerous seas.' But these brave men, he said, were betrayed by the modern politicians in Britain. I was completely unmoved by this drama, considering that Britain was largely responsible for starting both wars and turning them into world wars. Britain carried out extensive war crimes against Germany in both wars in order to make sure they came out on the winning side. And because of those war crimes, which are still affecting Germans today since the Anglo-Americans still uphold them, the German people have no war memorials to their brave soldiers they can visit, or to their brave women and youth who served their nation and suffered horribly at the hands of the fathers/mothers of these very British folk who participated in this march. Still today they refuse to admit all of their crimes, lest they appear not to be legitimate victors. The only part that gratified me was when the third speaker remembered Paul Hickman, a past, active member of the NF – I was wondering if they would.

It is not surprising to me that Britain is suffering as it is today. Some call it Karma. They brought it on themselves and are too dense and arrogant to admit it. Why am I so hard-hearted about this? Because I am mad as hell.

Nick Griffin attacks 'Hitlerism'

On Saturday, I also read through Nick Griffin's new book, “Alt Right? - Not Right!,” that was just released as a PDF. I have not been a fan of Griffin. He is called a Holocaust Denier, but he doesn't have a firm position on “Holocaust.” He is soft, and has gone even squishier. But here are some excerpts that reveal his rejection of Adolf Hitler and “Nazisim.”

Page 57: Obsessed with Hitlerism, it appears that at least some … take their lead not from the National Socialist policy of putting homosexuals in concentration camps but from the lesser known, but extremely pervasive, practice of homosexuality among some Nazi officials. This was something which led their wartime Italian fascist allies to mock what they called “the beautiful Germans” and post-war researchers Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams to produce the devastating book The Pink Swastika. [A junk book, making Nick wrong on all counts. Homos were not put in camps because they were homos, but for specific charges of breaking the law or making a public nuisance of themselves. This is Griffin's cheap attempt at a smear.]

[...]

Page 58: At the furthest end of the Alt-Right spectrum in the USA is Andrew Anglin, the self-proclaimed Nazi who runs the Daily Stormer. Until being shut down after Charlottesville, this was the most popular Hitlerite website in the world. [Hitlerite? Except that it wrote nothing about Hitler, just used the imagery.]

[...]

Page 71: That leaves us with just one realistic explanation: That these people know that, in fanning the flames of popular opposition to immigration and Islamisation, they are also fanning the embers of the old ‘far-right’ extremism which proved so terribly disastrous to millions of innocent Jews last time they flared up. [Innocent Jews ???] They surely remember what happened after Hitler’s rise to power was financed partly by Zionist Wall Street bankers, who hoped the Nazis would force European Jews to flee to Palestine. [Footnote 78 links to Antony Sutton's debunked narrative in “Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler” for this lie. Hitler was not financed by Jews – Zionist or any other. He was partly financed by German businessmen. See “Who Financed Hitler?” by James and Suzanne Pool]

[...]

Page 74: The fascination of elements of this [homosexual] cult with human skulls, the occult and the political necrophilia of Hitlerism [refers to a dead political philosophy] are further heavy hints as to the deeply unhealthy forces at work with these people.

[…]

Page 79: Collaboration with the homosexualisation of the ‘right’, whether through turning blind eyes or through active engagement, must stop from this moment on. And the same is true of Satanism, Zionism or Nazism.

If the American Right, and it's few European allies, refuse to stand up for either Hitler or Holocaust Denial, the result will be further erosion of the respect afforded to White Europeans. I have argued elsewhere that the rejection of the latter (HD) is to make sure there is no acceptance of the former (H), and for some Alt-Righters (former White Nationalists) that is how they see it. But it contributes to greater decline, not to increased acceptance. The enemy does not intend to give up or give in. So we're talking about victory or defeat—no middle ground.

Jews work harder than we do

Case in point: A Jew writes in JTA that the rise in support for nationalist parties, such as the Freedom Party in Austria, motivates Jews “to invest even greater efforts in Holocaust commenoration.”

The far-right’s success in Austria “only strengthens our resolve,” said Brigitte Prinzgau, an artist who designed the newly inaugurated Aspang Railway Station Memorial, near where 47,035 Austrian Jews were dispatched from Vienna to death camps. “Now educators and artists will make even more monuments confronting fascism and xenophobic populism.”

In Canada, the Jewish lobby held a 'panel discussion' and rudely insulted Ernst Zundel after his death in ways that should not be acceptable. Belief in the holocaust make it acceptable to insult and attack White people and White people go along with it. Jews never go along with such treatment of their own.

From left, Josh Basseches, CEO of the Royal Ontario Museum, Warren Kinsella, Dara Solomon, executive director of the Sara and Chaim Neuberger Holocaust Education Centre, Gerda Frieberg, Bernie Farber and Bill Dunphy. JODIE SHUPAC PHOTO

Below is a small demonstration of loyal supporters outside Ernst Zundel's Toronto home in 1985. Photo courtesy of ONTARIO JEWISH ARCHIVES/BLANKENSTEIN FAMILY HERITAGE CENTRE. 

Hell just got a little more crowded,” author, lawyer and political consultant Warren Kinsella declared during a panel discussion on confronting Holocaust denial on Nov. 6.

Kinsella was referring to the death earlier this year of the infamous Holocaust denier, Ernst Zundel, who lived in Canada from 1958 to 2000 and founded a publishing house that issued neo-Nazi pamphlets with titles like, Did Six Million Really Die? The Truth At Last.

The talk, which was part of the Sarah and Chaim Neuberger Holocaust Education Centre’s Holocaust Education Week programming, was held at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto.

The panel was moderated by Bernie Farber, former CEO of the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) and a leading challenger of Holocaust denial in Canada.

Kinsella and fellow panelist Bill Dunphy, a former investigative journalist who wrote for Toronto Sun, among other publications, appeared to agree that Zundel was utterly despicable, but the two diverged on the matter of how society should contend with hate mongers of his ilk.

[…]

Kinsella, whose 1994 book Web of Hate: Inside Canada’s Far Right Network is considered a seminal work on white supremacy in Canada, argued that the tactic of ignoring Zundel and his kind is dangerous.

He wouldn’t and he didn’t go away,” Kinsella stressed, “and his foul legacy is still felt in this city and this country today.”

Kinsella mentioned a current publisher he doesn't like who puts out a Toronto-area publication Your Ward News. He and his wife have launched a private prosecution against the paper’s publisher and editor.

A third panelist, Polish Holocaust survivor Gerda Frieberg, the former chair of the Ontario region at the Canadian Jewish Congress and the founder of the Holocaust Survivors of Canada and Women for Soviet Jewry, said she lost 172 family members during the Shoah. She asked:

“Can anyone imagine the pain [Zundel] inflicted on survivors after losing their entire families?”

How much lower can the speech against Whites go? Very much lower actually. It can easily be imagined that to even question anything about a Jew's speech or actions would raise a death penalty against that questioner. Our looking to the “good” Jews to work evenly with Gentiles has been demonstrated time and again to be a fruitless expectation because there are no more than a handful of "good Jews" when it comes to holocaust. What is at the base of this continuing hopeless expectation by alt-righters? Their own self-image among personal friends and associates? Their own comfort level or their own interest level? Some have given their reasons for believing the holocaust story, which are not convincing because they have nothing to do with the right or wrong, the truth or falseness of the issues at hand. Their given reasons are purely tactical or intellectualized nonsense. 

If we are fucked, it's the fault of these men who put themselves forward but have no real plan, and no track record of success. They are mainly depending on Donald Trump! I like President Trump as much as the next person, but I quit thinking I could depend on him several months ago. He's trapped in the Jewish narrative too. That is what we have to get out of. And their most heavily defended narrative is the Holohoax. There is a reason for that. So it is your responsibility to study it so you can help to destroy it.

Comments

Thank you so much, Carolyn, for writing this fiery and factual article!  As depressing as the facts are that you relate, it did my heart good to learn how angered and incensed you feel by how far the outrageous lack of integrity and pretense extend in the Alt-Right.  You claim "laziness" is responsible for these Alt-Right leaders accepting the Holocaust narrative and allowing Ernst Zundel's name and reputation to be dragged into the proverbial mud.  If the cause is laziness, it's not physical laziness.  It's intellectual laziness and a genuine lack of genuine curiosity. I have myself thought it was cowardice that was the main cause.  I have thought that these "leaders" really did not want to confront the decades of propaganda because they honestly fear a fight, fear being labeled anti-Semitic, and are too afraid to admit to anyone, including themselves. 
 
A deep, consistent, and integrated understanding of what happened pre-WWI and II and how this religious story about Holocaustianity consequently arose becomes a skill or asset that gives one the courage to fight the lies of Jewish presumption because you are armed with an array of facts, not beliefs or theories. 
 
I had no idea that Nick Griffin was such a politically correct liberal, relying upon the balderdash concocted in that disingenuous book "The Pink Swastika," while also believing in Anthony Sutton's smear about Hitler's finances.  (Sutton’s “story” regarding Hitler is a very popular meme among those who read conspiracy books or believe that someone with an Oxford or Cambridge degree “must” be infallibly knowledgeable.)  That is a rather weak intellect on display here, and Griffin, I understand, was himself also a professor once!  These people are not sufficiently skeptical of what they're hearing or reading and are not sufficiently curious and investigative. 
 
(I saw Richard Spencer debate on a YouTube video with a self-righteous, anti-White Black supremacist, and Spencer lost every battle or contention, behaving as if he hadn’t even prepared for a possible confrontation.  It was embarrassing to watch.  How could he seriously attack the Holocaust myth with even one false assertion by a contentious Jew?  Not possible.
 
And Tim Snyder’s assertions about bullets and mass killings of Jews at Babi Yar are no better than those insidious, viciously lying reports by Jewish “eyewitnesses” who saw bodies go up in smoke at Auschwitz!) 
 
I will say that my own education poorly provided me with anything even close to an accurate historical background of the 20th century.  History teachers and professors taught history so poorly that I intellectually turned off the subject for decades.  Government schools, in particular, do a very bad job of educating the young in that way which prepares them to become citizens. 
 
Only an intellectually independent human being can take on this business of studying the Holocaust in order to destroy it if only because compromise with intellectual integrity fills the halls of all our universities everywhere on this subject, offering him or her little help to understand that the “Holocaust” is a harmful invention to non-Jews.  
 
Your website, Carolyn, goes to great lengths to help the independent learner.  
 
I think the process does take courage as well an ability to overcome one’s laziness or sense of easy convenience with the pat, glib historical discourse about the “Holocaust” enough to question the easy, TV-taught "certainties" and bromidic assumptions regarding it, and to develop a sobering taste for facing the truth that one’s ideas just might be and likely are completely wrong if they have not been re-examined to the core. 
 
A whole lot of hornswoggling, distorting and lying has gone on to mythicize Post-War America and to perpetrate mass brainwashing of the citizenry. 
 
This fake history, however, is trying to shape and mold the thinking of everyone on a global scale, an endeavor that non-Jews must resist and invalidate to preserve their own race, integrity, and understanding of reality. 
 
How dare people think of themselves as individuals, as independent and free human beings, if they allow the Jews to corral and control them with an utterly malicious, flagrant falsity known as the Holocaust narrative?

This is a great refreshing and clarifying article on what ails the Holocaust Revisionist movement.
 
In my High Court challenge, which was dismissed as "abuse of process", I clearly stated that 1. I do not deny the Holocaust; 2. I do not deny the existence of gas chambers; 3. I deny the existence of homicidal gassings.
 
The reason for this position of adopting 1. is that there have occurred many holocausts, especially the German Holocaust of saturation bombing. This means the term Holocaust needs to be legally defined, which our highest court in Australia refused to do,
 
2. There were gas chambers in most cocnentration camps, which Revisionists know existed for the purpose of fumigating clothes against vermin; thus gas chambers existed to save lives.
 
3. To date there is no physical proof/forensic evidence that any person was gassed-exterminated in a homicidal gas chamber. 
 
So, my defamation action against the Australian newspaper and Senator Christine Milne was dismissed because the lower courts accepted the defendants' reasoning that I did not mind being called "a Holocaust denier", an "Antisemite" and "a fabricator of history" because all I wished to do was use the court case to air my views on the Holocaust. Had the case proceeded to a hearing, then these defamatory terms would have required a legal definition, something the legal fraternity refused to do.
 
So, forget all the various Holocaust narratives and lies and concentrate on this basic allegation about the murder weapon: Germans systematically exterminated Jews in homicidal gas chambers, which is what the Hoax of the 20th Century is all about.
 
Anyone who states that the homicidal gassing claim is now irrelevant has lost the plot because it still flows into the current racial-European extermination program now under way for over a century.

Carolyn, you are confusing the Alt-Right with the Alt-Lite.
 
The former take the position that the Holocaust is a Hoax and that our Uncle did nothing morally wrong.
 
It is true that many on the Alt-Right hold the view that real history is complex and an academic issue that is inextricably connected with Jewish self-promotion and power or control, so that Holocaust and Historical Revisionism is less immediately important than Hate Speech criminalization and the concrete Race and demographic perils facing Europe and America today.
 
The real Alt-Right also takes the position that the Jewish Question itself has to at least be on the table for discussion, and crucial for the philosophy for gaining decisive political power and reclaiming the future of Western Civilization.
 
By contrast, the Alt-Lite seldom go beyond silly Truther conspiracy theories, and would prefer not to discuss Race or Jewry at all, let alone the Holocaust--Revsionism or otherwise.
 
Richard Spencer himself has come far on this issue and he and the Alt-Right hardly put a huge amount of faith in Trump for what lies ahead.
 
Also, I can't think of anybody on the Alt-Right cadre who thinks that Jews should lead or even be part of the Alt-Right.
 
For example, Mike Enoch (Peinovich) who had been married to a Jew, recently took his 23 and Me DNA survey which confirmed his non-Jewish ancestry. Remember, to this day, Hitler's enemies still spread the rumor that he was one of the you-know-whos.
 
I'm not necessarily a huge fan of Anglin and his webmaster "Weev," but I don't think they are Jews.
 

No, I'm not confusing them at all. I know the difference between the two; I named some of the Altright, didn't I? How many of them "take the position that the Holocaust is a Hoax and that our Uncle did nothing morally wrong?" Not one of those. Richard Spencer, known as the ueber-leader of the Altright, has found lots to criticize Uncle about, including his treatment of the Jews.

Please don't confuse raising the "Jewish Question" with Holocaust Revisionism or Holocaust Denial,  or with a good attitude toward our Uncle. Specifying Jews should not be leaders is a way of accepting them as members in good standing otherwise.

I didn't accuse Enoch or Anglin of being Jews, only Auernheimer because he has said he has Jewish ancestry. If that's not true, he can let me know. He's someone who likes to make things up in order to make a good story (in his opinion), and that's pretty Jewish. But I'm open on the subject.

Some homosexuals decided that they would debunk that stupid book, The Pink Swastika. https://archive.org/stream/dudeman5685_yahoo_PN/PN_djvu.txt 
 
I don't believe that the National-Socialists had any particular obsession with skulls as Griffin says. The SS were not the first to use the Death's Head. There is a famous image of Field Marshal August von Mackensen wearing a big fur hat with a giant totenkopf on it. I read on a forum that this emblem was used as early as the Wars of Liberation in 1814-15. http://forumarchiv.balsi.de/ss/161393.html
 
It is as if most people knew nothing about Germany or about history except what was said in Anglo-American propaganda. The same idiots offer explanations for why Hitler was a madman, which no German believes.

Only I still don't get why such politicians like Mr. Griffin are scared as hell of being honest and (thus) really pro-White about the Holo-hoax. Do they fear to lose votes? They don't have much already. Are they trying to preserve their 'image'? They would be equally described as far-right monsters. Do they really believe the Holo-lies and try to compare todays' Goyim (not even Whites-only) to those 'poor Jews' in order to inspire some mercy by the public? If so, they failed, they are failing, they will always be. You told the truth: if all the people involved in pro-White, identitarian movements were to spend 1/3 of their resources to read Carlo Mattogno (for example) and try to enforce such literature into real politics, instead of shouting useless and sad slogans about Whites being exterminated, we Whites would be navigating in different waters.

Nick Griffin, as a true British patriot and defender of British history, is infected with the typical anti-Germanism of his Jewish-dominated ruling class. When he was still head of the BNP (British National Party), he even proclaimed that Churchill must be regarded as a national hero - anything less would tarnish the British image.

Thus he is trapped in a conundrum and thinks, like so many, that by attacking Adolf Hitler and "Nazism", he is not attacking Germany or the German people. By placing Hitler's Third Reich into a special criminal category (via Nuremberg trials), he can hold Germans guilty and responsible for the war, exonnerate Britain, and still be friends with contemporary Germans and "Nationalism for all."

He used to profess holocaust revisionist ideas but he has given that up. He received too much criticism for that in Britain. Now he is linked up with Russia, Putin and some Slavic countries against Western Europe, in the name of Christian values. This association makes him even more stuck in the acceptance of the holohoax narrative and anti-National Socialism, which he prefers now to call "Nazism."

Carolyn,
Thanks for your comment.  I misunderstood who Nick Griffin was.  I mistook him for Robert Griffin, author of "Living White:  Writings on Race."  I completely missed it. 

Well, now you know. Laughing Confession is good for the soul.

I did see an essay by Colin Liddell on AltRight.com that seemed to say that he didn't believe in the Holocaust. 
 
Wildman Chris Cantwell doesn't believe in the Holocaust at this point. Apparently I convinced him.

"Seemed to say." That's it. I don't think you'll find one that comes right out with it. Doing a quick search I didn't find anything but this from Greggie's site: https://www.counter-currents.com/2015/04/the-need-for-german-moral-rearmament/

What he "argues" is that Germans must stop apologizing but whoever does is dragged through court and given a stiff fine and threatened with prison.  But Colin himself is afraid to even say outright that he doesn't believe the holocaust of the jews happened. He talks only about the holocaust "industry," which is an approved topic even for Kevin MacDonald.

Anyway, just to say or imply you don't believe in or doubt the holocaust story is not enough - more people need to openly fight against it with knowledge of the facts. That is what I'm talking about.

It seems that Dicky Spencer has removed the recent article where Colin Liddell made his Holocaust-skepticism evident.
 
Here is the archive of it: https://web.archive.org/web/20171107225234/https://altright.com/2017/10/27/toast-rack-design-chosen-for-new-uk-holocaust-memorial/ 
 
I observed in the comments-section that CL apparently did not believe in the Holocaust, and he responded with a comment that substantially confirmed my observation.
 
HADDING: So, I gather that Colin Liddell doesn’t believe in the Holocaust. That’s good to see.
COLIN LIDDELL: The Holocaust is an unfalsifiable term as it is an umbrella term for bad shit that happened to the Jews in WWII, a time when bad shit happened to almost every group. In many ways it’s a bit like the term “climate change.” As long as we have any kind of weather we can talk about “climate change,” and as long as we have stories of some Jews dying unpleasant deaths in WW2 Europe we can talk of a Holocaust.
 
In substance, insofar as the Holocaust is supposed to be some kind of unique event, he is saying that there was no Holocaust.

I saw and read that article first. It is anti-Holocaust Industry stuff, not anti-Holocaust. And even in a comment, he was unable to say he did not believe in the Jewish  Holocaust. He only disagrees with the name and wouldn't budge past the semantics of it.

How long will it take him to make the next step?

Liddell alleges in essence that the Holocaust has no definition. Why would he do that? Because if the Holocaust has a definition that includes gas-chambers and a deliberate effort to kill all the Jews, then he is saying that there was no Holocaust. That's what it means when he says that nothing special happened to the Jews.
 
He's using a semantic quibble as an escape-hatch from being called a Holocaust Denier. 

The problem with people challenging the Holyhoax is that, those being sonewhat educated and, therefore, likely to have a well-paying job, one has a lot to lose materially and socially. One has to "come out of the closet" and face social ostracism. That's if one can overcome the psychological/emotional obstacle, which I've seen otherwise intelligent people unable to overcome. To challenge the Holyhoax takes a warrior spirit; it means being willing to revel in the challenge to accepted "truths". I have always been such a person--minus the material comforts (more focused on ideas and politics--unfortunately?). The bottom line is that one must be prepared for a physical battle because this subject is a "declaration of war"; a declaration of war against post-WW2 society with all it's muck and lies. Alternatives to the parliamentary approach are needed; acceptance of them leads to impotence and cowardice. Leadership remains indispensible, not pandering to ignorant majorities. What would have happened to Germany without HItler? Can you imagine anyone else that could have stood fast and held things together until 1933? I can't.

Werewolf nails it with the fear and trembling comment.  Anyone who has tried to get friends, relatives or coworkers to critically think about the  "lies and muck" accepted as truth in the post Talmudic inspired WWII/holohoax narrative can attest. 
 
Intelligent people, and particularly those who are skilled in their individulal and professional fields just can't seem to break from the kosher herd.  The evangelical crowd is the worst by far; most of my experience is dealing with them. 
 
This is especially true for those of us born into the baby boomer generation whose fathers and uncles were convinced that another fraticidal war had to be fought to keep Hitler from taking over the world.
 
Breaking free from the psychological and emotional attachments causes far too much cognitive dissonance. 
 
Threats of being fired from one's job, loss of friends, and becoming a social pariah tend to make one clam up.
 
We have to scour the web and find kameraden such as Carolyn in order to find the warrior spirit and historical truth. 
 
Having been in the same professional field as Gunter Deckert, I was fortunate not to have ended up being deprived of my livelihood as him. 
 
As most of you know here, it is very difficult to get others to read anything historical that does not come off the New York Times best seller list.  I continue nevertheless, but I have to admit I battle defeatism often. 
 
Vielen dank mein lieber Carolyn.  

@Kurt and Werewolf,

I started to compose a reply to Werewolf last night but decided to wait. Sometimes it seems that when I reply right away, then no one else does. But here it is:

I am not saying that every Joe and Jane out there should jeopardize their jobs, etc. by openly promoting holocaust revisionism. But those who claim to be leaders and spokesmen for the “Alt-Right” (some of whom I named) are the very ones who favor a “New Right” over the so-called “Old Right” by which they mean Italian Fascism and German National Socialism. The overriding reason for this is that they want to avoid the Jewish hoax of the Jewish 'Holocaust.'

(It can indeed be demonstrated to be a hoax, although even many revisionists object to that word, for PR's sake.)

I ask these people to stop avoiding it and to do some reading, but they're not going to and that's why I say their movement is a dead-end.

Holocaust revisionism, on the other hand, will continue indefinitely - because it's based on powerful facts and reality. Look how many successful, talented, highly intelligent people (mostly German/Austrian, secondarily French, but also Spanish, Swiss, Italian and American) have been willing to sacrifice their careers, their income, and even their freedom, to spread this message of truth. It has the power of a religion to those with whom it really clicks. The Altrighters can only dream of having such devoted members in their ranks.

As to talking to other ordinary folk about the hoax, all we can do is try to enlighten them as individuals, not ask them to jeopardize their liveihoods by “coming out.” I am very gratified that I've made a connection with a nephew who is well-read, politically conservative, and open to discussing this and reading whatever I send him. He is the father of three young sons so I wouldn't even want him to ruin his life over this, nor would he do it. Just to change his thinking on it and on Jewish villany along with it, is what I'm aiming for. Because, as you both say, most people's minds are not open at all and they have no interest; it only takes hold with the intellectually curious.

Well said Carolyn, thank you for continuing to make a stink about this issue - it's absolutely vital to the future of Whites. The fake "Holocaust" narrative is the lynchpin of the entire Jew World Order. It cannot be avoided if Whites are ever to be free.

Thank you Carolyn.  Blessings and good fortune to you. 

Great article Carolyn,
 
We must not forget, especially when we reside in relatively "safe" countires, that openly declaring one self to be, in enemy words "a holocaust denier", in a large number of countries could be enough to be denied access, or being deported when they find you take part in something there. I think it is wise for people who travel a lot, like MacDonald, Spencer, Duke, etc. not to be too outspoken about it. And for people who live there permanently it really is a risk in many ways. So please let everybody decide for themselves, how to present their views in public.

Hello Carolyn,
 
Thank you for your valuable education about the destructive Holocaust blame cult. I am German and must shut up like all other "Holocaust deniers" in the colorful BRD (Bundesrepublik Deutschland) if I do not want to suffer a fate like Ursula Haverbeck or Horst Mahler, who sitting in jail (again) because of "wrong thoughts".
 
Especially in Germany it is not possible to talk freely about the "Holocaust", which is why every critical article dealing with the "obvious fact" is a ray of light.Therefore, I intend to first translate your current article about Ursula Haverbeck into German and maybe even more.
 
All the best and keep up the good work!
Best regards
Wahr-Sager

Hey carolyn, you know me (Dana) - I totally agree the Jews work harder and that's why they win. It's also because they are more tribalist in nature and have done everything they can to break down white/European racial collectivist spirit and tribalism.  Until the overton window shifts and your average white is ok with nazis and not afraid to say it in public, or and our people have nothing to lose- stop acting anonymous ly and are ready to die for their beliefs as martyrs for the cause, nothing will change.  I disagree that the alt right is blanketly against revisionism- some are, some aren't.  The point they make is the Jews have penetrated the minds of mass society to the point that it becomes counter productive..and commies today never apologize for Stalin's crimes (because they don't have to), so why give them the ammunition. I have never argued this.  And I interviewed week before most people..he said he was C.I. in his past and does not have any biological Jewish ancestry, but people confuse him because he used to call himself "an Israelite", as you know they do, and I believe him.  He's bombastic but I don't see him as a Jew or an agent.  I don't call myself alt right but I think they play an important role in radicalizing whites so we can get to the point when a true NS style revolution can take place.  I am still cynical and pessimistic in the short term but optimistic in the long.

People often confuse members of the Allemannen tribe with another tribe. For example, Carolyn and I are members of the Allemannen tribe or Stamm. We have a certain phenotype: possible other members are Alex Linder, Matt Heimbach AND Weev (yes, i'd bet the farm on it).
 
But, to the main topic here: the flagship of the AR is The Daily Shoah.

"I like President Trump as much as the next person, but I quit thinking I could depend on him several months ago. He's trapped in the Jewish narrative too." - While I agree with your sentiment about AltRight being timid rather than acting as clever tacticians (as some commenters suggested) about the WWII and role, that the Jews played in it, this passage has left me slightly muddled. Wasn't it loud and clear from the very beginning, not to mention after his immediate election, that Make the Israel Great Again (MTIGA) was and will be one of his most persistent intent to implement. Do I need to reiterate his movements starting from very first foreign visit SA to the “officially putting Iran on notice” right off the bat - leave alone the recent acknowledgment of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, which wasn't that hard to anticipate? Could that kind of person/politician/president have been stopped deemed as one who you can depend on just "several months ago"? As far as I'm concerned he should've been distrusted right after he ushered that MTIGA thing, for which MAGA should be viewed as the decoy.
 
Having said that I'd like to connect today's growing anti-Israel sentiment worldwide to the rightful concern of the ordinary people with enough open mind and intelligence regarding the all too human fear of ruining their and their loved one's lives by confronting the Holocaust ever-growing narrative, which some commentators rightfully pointed as the legitimate one. Open criticism of Israel, its policy, its lobbies, its activities, its meddling with press and media, its direct promotion of global censorship (Israel hold the record for making correction to Wikipedia) should be a good start to overcome the prohibitive nature of Israeli agenda, supported almost exclusively by ethnic Jews, especially in USofA. WWII and post war history of Europe and Germany in particular requires more serious work but it also would be much easier and readily accepted and viewed by much wider population.

Add new comment