The Holocaust Truth?


Does anyone really deny that the camps existed, that they were imitations of the Jewish bolshevik use of camps of Russia, or that the prisoners were put to work as forced labor, or that by the end of the war the prisoners were starved to death or murdered in large numbers because the state decided it would and could no longer to pay for their maintenance and care?

As far as I know the only debate is over whether the jews were practicing corruption by the usurpation of institutions of cultural production (as they had repeatedly elsewhere), whether the numbers of dead were dramatized or exaggerated, whether or not there was use of gas chambers, whether the original intent was relocation or extermination, and that the natural economics of any such program by a country losing a war would be to maximize resources directed to the people and military rather than ‘undesirables’, resulting in the camps we saw at the end of the war.

In other words, who is being honest or dishonest? what is the truth. The truth is rather obvious from the evidence. The untruth is rather obvious from the evidence, and the motivated reasoning, and motivated propaganda. AFAIK every objector is just demanding the truth. (And yes, there may be some fking crazies who deny it all, just as there are crazies that fictionalize it all. )

As far as I can tell when the postwar generation has died off, which will occur shortly, the public understanding will adjust to the evidence, and the evidence is pretty clear that camps were created with the intent of relocation, that the war caused need for slave labor, then drove deprivation, starvation, and killings. That smaller numbers died than claimed. That postwar propaganda was used for political purposes. That the Germans were organizing to prevent the expansion of Jewish bolshevism from Russia into Germany (and anglo liberalism as well). That the postwar jewish marxists moved from germany to the usa and converted from class warfare that caused russian and german conflict, to race warfare that caused broader european and american social conflict. As such, there was no different intention of a purge of the jews this time than any other, or any different from the exit of the Moors from Spain, and that the original rather optimistic nature of the camps degenerated as the war pressed on for rather ordinary reasons that would occur and have occurred in history as resources are depleted.

As far as I know, that’s the empirical evidence, and it’s all rational, it’s not dramatic, or especially ‘evil’ at all. It’s nothing compared to the Albegentsian crusades, the Inquisition, or even the protestant use of claims of witchcraft as a proxy for continuing the dominance of Protestantism over catholicism and other ‘heretics’.

Worse, as far as I can tell with the present failure of liberalism, the success at repeating class bolshevism with race (identity) bolshevism, creating the same conflict as Marxists in Europe, and bolsheviks in Europe, and communists in China, the restoration of the conflict of civilizations and the balance of power between civilizations, has resulted in fascism (meaning ethnonationalism, ethnocentric secular state religion, civilization-states instead of federations, intermixed vs mixed economies, the organization of the population as commercial military order within the economy, and radical intolerance for hyperconsumption, deviancy, and feminization), is sweeping the world, meaning fascism has won the debate of optimum political organization of the industrial and scientific age.

So the narrative is going to collapse from the empirical evidence alone. It’s certainly going to collapse with the end of the boomer generation. The only question is whether the Jewish race-bolshevism, of the woke-pc-anti-white pseudoscientific and sophomoric religion, succeeds in the west, resulting in the third-worlding of European civilization, continuing the Abrahamic destruction of six civilizations of the ancient world, or whether the ‘fascists’ win restoring western civilization so that it can equally compete with the other macro civilizations.

At least that’s the science.
Not that either side of the fence isn’t selective in their tolerance for the science.

Leave a Reply