Warren G. Harding, The Revolution And The Crash

Warren G. Harding, The Revolution And The Crash

by

R.E. Prindle

 

     The Geat Black Hope announced that this period would be one of  change ‘we’ can believe in so cast that spell for a very brief look at the US from 1917 to 1933 focusing on the presidency of that great President, Warren G. Harding.  Harding has been maliciously vilified because of his great success against the Revolution.

     The Jewish revolution which began in earnest in 1913 was reaching its apogee between 1917 and 1922 both in Europe and the US.  In 1919-20 the Jews were in full revolt in Europe while running a close second in the US.  During the Wilson administration Jews were nearly in control.  Massive bombings and criminal activities filled the year 1919 in the US which while not characterized as a revolution by US historians, which is to say Jewish historians, that is what it was.

     Millions of dollars of saving bonds had been stolen which were being cashed by Jews.  The lax Wilson administration allowed revolutionary criminals to run wild so that by 1921 when Harding took office the mails were being plundered at an alarming rate.  The country was in virtual anarchy.  When Harding assumed ofice in March of ‘21 he announced a return to ‘normalcy’ and aggressively acted to bring it about.  The return to ‘normalcy’ meant the suppression of the Judaeo-Communist revolution.  The Communist Party was outlawed while Federal agents aggressively pursued the Communist Parties.

     Will Hays was appointed Postmaster General actively attacking the postal criminals and restoring order there.  Wall Street then as now was out of control.  All those who stood up to the revolution had to be destroyed.  Some, such as the Dodge Brothers were murdered.  A failed murder attempt was made on Henry Ford also.  He was successfully defamed within a few years.

     The restorer of  ‘normalcy’, Warren G. Harding was both aggressively defamed and ultimately probably murdered.  The price of his success was to be condemned as the worst President of all time.  You don’t mess with Rohan.  Right?

     But with the suppression of the revolution the Republicans were firmly in power with little chance of being moved out unless another debacle such as TR and the Progressive Party. 

     Harding, Coolidge, Hoover and full prosperity.  As Alfred Rosenberg in his Myth Of The Twentieth Century stresses the real culprit was International Jewish Finance or the Global Money Trust of today.  Then as now new destructive financial instruments based on nothing but air were introduced.  It would take a major disaster to oust the Republicans.  Therefore a financial bubble was created not unlike our own recent housing bubble created by Greenspan and Wall Street.  The bubble burst in 1929 plunging the country into Depression.  This allowed FDR to be elected as a savior.  The Jews then rushed back into DC taking a major role in the administration.  Rather than solving the financial problem Roosevelt exacerbated  it from 1933 until 1942 when WWII began aborting the revolution while renewing prosperity until the housing debacle.

     It took a while but when the going gets tough the tough get schemeing.

 

 

Alfred Rosenberg In Rehab

 

Alfred Rosenberg In Rehab

by

R.E. Prindle

Rosenberg, Alfred: The Myth Of The Twentieth Century. OP

     Ever since the Bolshevik Revolution Americans have allowed Communists and Jews to tell them who were acceptable authors and what were acceptable books.  Thus many significant and worthwhile authors and books have been dumped into the ash can because they were contrary to Judaeo-Communist ideology.

     It is time both authors and books were revived- rehabilitated in Judaeo-Communist terminology. 

     Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard are two of these.  As maligned as they have been by our Red and Jewish friends it is as nothing compared to the German writer Alfred Rosenberg and his great work- The Myth Of The Twentieth Century.  His history is sound, his interpretation valid and his prognostications accurate.  Indeed as he suggested eighty years ago that international finance would be the West’s ruin so it is being  lamentably demonstrated as you read.

     The Myth is a great work while Rosenberg has been defamed for inappropriate reasons.  A piece of trash like Das Kapital is lauded as a product of genius even though the Communists created the horrific groundwork for the 20s, 30s and 40s.  The Nazis, of which Rosenberg was a spokesman came into existence in reaction to Communism.  They would not have existed otherwise.  For every person who died as a result of Nazism a half dozen or more perished because of Communism.  Indeed, the crimes of the whole era can be laid at the Communist doorstep.

      So, while Rosenberg was a Nazi it has no bearing on the crediblity of his work.  He far exceeds Marx in intellegence.

     He is capable of offering a brilliant piece of analysis such as this which of course will be rejected by the Judaeo-Communists but anyone dependent on their opinion is to be pitied as well as ultimately despised.  P. 69-70 of the Noontime Press edition:

     Science, however is also a product of the blood.  Everything which we commonly regard today as purely abstract science is the product of  (European) creativity.  The Nordic-European concept of organizing sequential events into a framework of universal laws is not simply some “idea-in-itself” which might have occured to any Mongol, Levantine or African.  Quite the contrary; this idea (which appeared in another form in Nordic Hellas) was confronted for thousands of years by the most frenetic hostility of the many alien races and their world views.  The idea of an inward and personal law was the deepest affront to every world picture constructed on the basis of the capricious tyranny of various systems of magic.  A science of our kind could as little emerge from the world picture offered in the Old Testament as it could from the witchcraft and demonology of the African.  It is the eternal antithesis which explains the struggle of the  Roman Church against (European) science….This (European) racial creation which we call science is not mere technology.  It is the product of a unique method of posing questions to the universe.  As Apollo faces Dionysus, so Copernicus, Kant and Goethe stand opposed to Augustine, Boniface VIII and Pius IX.  The Maenads and the phallic cults worked to the destruction of ancient Greek culture, and the Etruscan ideas of heaven and hell and wizardry blocked in every way they could the rebirth of the Nordic world vision.

     Of course the very use of the word Nordic will arouse the bigotry and hatred of Mongols, Semites and Africans.  Nevertheless as Rosenberg indicates and we should all be aware the struggle, the basis of the war, is science vs. superstition.  I recently saw it affirmed on Tablet Ezine that ‘God’ does indeed have a human body which is a ‘fact’, it was offered as, usually overlooked today.

     Oh, indeed!

     So, as should be clear the struggle is between Darwin and ‘the body of God’;  intelligence vs. superstition.  There can never be peace between two such diverse and opposing opinions.  One or the other must rule as Rosenberg understood and pointed out.  That is the heart of the struggle today.

     The Myth Of The Twentieth Century is an essential text for our times.  We must gird our loins and fight for the right lest ignorance triumph for all time.  Should we allow that to happen the crime will be ours not theirs.

Da Capo: Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution

 

Da Capo:  America’s Unfinished Revolution

by

R.E. Prindle

http://contemporarynotes.wordpress.com/2009/04/05/greil-marcus-bob-dylan-bill-ayers-barry-obama/

http://idynamo.wordpress.com/2008/03/29/a-review-reconstruction-americas-unfinished-revolution/

http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/?p=1891

 

In historical order:

1.   Africans sell Africans to the West.

2.   Africans set to work in the US per terms of sale.

3.   USA fights CSA over Africans.

4.   US imposes ‘Reconstruction’ on defeated CSA according to law.

5.   CSA imposes Jim Crow on Africans.  (N.B. Jim Crow was a lawful state of affairs.)

6.   Period of discrimination.

7.   African revolt begins c. 1954

8.   Civil Rights Act of 1965 kicks off armed rebellion of Africans.

9.   Barack Obama is elected president in 2008.

10. The completion of  America’s Unfinished Revolution begins.

     The whole series of events resulted in an insatiable desire for revenge by Africans with point 1.  The key period is 4. Reconstruction in which the USA strips Whites of the CSA of any rights imposing African rule on them.  This was quasi-legal but still done in a lawful manner.  Beware of laws.

     The Whites threw off the African yoke using the legal system to impose Jim Crow laws on Africans as Get Whitey laws had been imposed on them by USA.  Jim Crow was a defensive maneuver against Reconstruction laws.

     In 10. Obama will reimpose Reconstruction laws on the White population thus completing the unfinished revolution.  This is a psychological necessity for the Africans and must be resisted by ‘any means necessary.’

     Apparently Obama’s ‘Health Care Bill’ is a grim joke and key legal maneuver to strip Whites of any rights, subjugating them to the Africans.

     Now, in my essay: Greil Marcus, Bob Dylan, Bill Ayers and Barack Obama, I pointed out that Obama, at the very least, knew of 9/11 before it happened and allowed it to happen.  This is now confirmed by Bobby Eberle’s essay linked above.  Bear in mind the historical outlines of Negro history in the US.

     On 9/11 of this year Obama is calling on his supporters to pressure the Senators to pass the Health Care Bill, now.  How are the two items reconciled?  It is a fact that on 9/11/01 the United States was attacked with the WTC towers being destroyed.  I am nearly sure Obama knew of the attack beforehand- he and Ayers for sure, probably Marcus and possibly Dylan although Dylan may have been used.  Doubtful.

     If the Health Care Bill is meant to deprive Whites of their rights or enslave them, then that is why Obama links  9/11 with the Bill.  In other words this is the follow up attack everyone has been expecting.  With a whimper not a bang.

     In an attempt to polarize the country (tactics from the Jewish culture) Obama’s website (view Eberle’s article) is characterizing the ‘loyal opposition’ as Right Wing Domestic Terrorists.  As we all know we are at war with ‘Terrorism’ but we aren’t allowed to call the Moslems terrorists.  It now becomes clear who Obama thinks the terrorists are.  This is now transparent.  Obama promised us transparency.  It also tells you who he thinks his friends and enemies are.

     There is no longer any question.  Obama should be put on a plane and flown back to his beloved Kenya on ‘the Continent.’  His day is over.

The Frankfurt School, Science And Religion

 

The Frankfurt School, Science And Religion

by

R.E. Prindle

Wheatland, Thomas, The Frankfurt School In Exile, UMinnesota, 2009

 

     I think it fair to say that one can dismiss the so-called thought of the Critical Theory school as so much blather.  Essentially the nembers of the school were Jewish boys playing at being geniuses.  Unable to impress anyone individually they banded together where they could all noisily beat their drum while praising each other.

     For instance, a couple of quotes by  Wheatland from the merry band’s chief drummer, Max Horkheimer. P. 118:

     The facts of science and science itself are but segments of the life process of society, and in order to understand the significance of facts or of science one must possess the key to the historical situation, the right social theory.

     ‘The right social theory is the key to the historical situation by which facts and science which are but adjuncts of society (subordinate to religion) can only be understood.’

     In other words there is only one way in which life and its attributes such as meaningful facts and science can be understood.  That way is that one must have the key to the right social theory amidst the historical situation.

     In still other words Horkheimer reverts society back to a mythical age when only priests and wizards were in communication with God or the Elementals.  Truth as Horkheimer understands it.    And who might these modern priests and wizards be?  Why, obviously Max Horkheimer and his fellow Critical Theorists.

     Wheatland gives Horkheimer the floor again on p. 119:

     The viewpoints which (Critical Theory) derives from historical analysis as the goals of human activity, especially the idea of a reasonable organization of society that will meet the needs of the whole community, are immanent in human work but are not correctly grasped by the individual or the common mind.

    That means that you or I have no hope and must rely on the high priests and wizards for direction.  Nor can the common mind, educated or not grasp the situation.  One must have the key to the right social theory or, in other words, be uncommon.

 Who then are the wizards and high priests of this religion?  Why Horkheimer and his fellow bandmen of Critical Theory.  And who are they and what exempts them from the limitations of individualism or the common mind?  Why Jewish boys playing at being geniuses.  And what should be the goal of  the community of human society?  The age old one of the triumph of Judaism.

     It is interesting that no one took these would be Jewish geniuses recklessly flaunting the extra intelligence gene seriously until after the gas chambers of  WWII.

     The wonder is that they are being taken seriously today.

    

What Is More Important- Art Or Integrity?

 

What Is More Important- Art Or Integrity?

by

R.E. Prindle

http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=104343

 

     Curator Baruch Tenembaum on the 150th birthday of the Norwgian novelist, Knut Hamsun, asked the above question.  What is more important- art or integrity.  A difficult if not a trick question.  One must ask the question what is art and what is integrity and who is asking it?

     Mr. Tenembaum is the curator of the Raoul Wallenberg  Foundation.  Obviously a Jewish outfit.  One might think the occasion of his asking was to comment on Elie Wiesel (assumed name) and his so-called autobiography, Night, which has been proven to have been falsified by the author.  In that case I would have thought integrity was more important than art.  If art only was involved Wiesel should have called his book a novel and avoided the integrity charge.

     But no, Mr. Tenembaum is discussing Knut Hamsun, the Norwegian novelist, but he is not questioning the quality of the art of this Nobel Prize winner.  One imagines that his question concedes the quality of Hansum’s art and its integrity.

     So, the question of integrity concerns the politics of Mr. Hansum during the Second World War.  It seems that taking a balanced point of view Mr. Hamsun chose to support Hitler rather than Stalin.  Mr. Tenembaum believes Hamsun’s beliefs make him a ‘criminal.’  He finds it incredible that Mr. Hamsun could support ‘one of the most sinister regimes in history.’  Well, yes, one of the most sinister regimes in history.  Another was the equally or even more sinister Communist Stalin regime in the Soviet Union. 

     Mr. Tenembaum’s evaluation of the Hitler regime may be correct however Hitler’s regime was no less sinister than the Communist Stalin regime in the Soviet Union.  I believe the sinister Stalin regime was universally supported by Jews and their Liberal fellow travelers.  Both improbably denied Stalinist crimes or justified them making them both accessories after the fact and consequently criminals themselves.  Yet there has been no rush to denounce either Stalin or Communism.  Quite the contrary, apologetics for both Stalin and Communism are written by Jews and Liberals today.

     So, let us say that integrity is not of concern here but only art.  No one denies that Knut Hamsun is an artist so there is no reason to deny his being honored by his native Norway anymore than Elie Wiesel is honored by society today.

     What kind of bigot are you, anyway, Mr. Tenembaum?

Will It Be Light Tomorrow?

 

Will It Be Light Tomorrow?

by

R.E. Prindle

http://www.jewcy.com/post/burden_light

 

     Charlie Bertsch in his article “The Burden Of Light” in Jewcy Magazine writes:

It’s a long way from New York City to Boise, a distance that has as much to do with ideology as geography.  For all its diversity, vast stretches of the United States remain strongholds of a white, Christian worldview that struggles to make sense of other cultural heritages even when it open to doing so.

     Once again there is a ghetto Jewish mentality that makes the world outside the ghetto impervious to them.  I cannot recognize these vast stretches from Mr Bertsch’s description.  The author clearly separates himself from white Christians as fellow humans placing them as eccentric atavists in a broader world of which he believes himself to be the virtuous epitome  While Mr. Bertch believes White Christians are not ‘diverse’, even unaware of other cultural heritages we are led to believe that Mr. Bertsch is the opposite not longer narrowly Jewish but open to all other cultural heritages.   All Jewish though is contradictory yet one wonders how Mr. Bertsch can at one and the same time be narrowly Jewish and yet embrace all cultures into himself thus amalgamating all humanity except White Christians in his being.

    To an outside observer, White but not Christian,the claim might seem a trifle specious.  A difference in perception at least.  As Mr. Bertsch writes for a very narrowly Jewish Magazine, proudly proclaimed in its masthead, one might be forgiven for thinking that Mr. Bertsch is indeed Jewish.  It is difficult to determine whether he believes Jews are exclusive of all other cultural heritages or whether they have made sense of all other cultures and exclude them from the Chose People.

     Further he seems to believe that while ‘vast stretches of the United States’ are of this state of mind even vaster areas are now fully appreciative of cultural traditions but presumably still exclude all others for to have a cultural heritage precludes the acceptance of any others.  For all humanity to be brothers they must share the same worldview, hence have a common cultural heritage.  It would seem that Mr. Bertsch has painted himself into a corner, a conundrum from which there is no escaping.

     He condemns what may be presumed a White Christian culture for being exclusive but finds a virtue in other cultural heritages for being exclusive thus finding fault with Whte Christians for a universal viewpoint.

     While the Jewish mind appears to be closed to any illumination from others, Mr. Bertsch condemns the White Christian worldview for what he finds a virtue in his own Jews.  This is the Great Conundrum of Jewish history.  What is right for the Jews is wrong for the gentiles while what is wrong for the gentiles is right for the Jews.  The Jewish is approach is situationist.  tThe Jews cannot be wrong while the gentiles cannot be right in any circumstances.

     It is this sort of wrong headed reasoning that invalidates any Jewish thought.  There is no reason to take the Jews seriously.

Bad Day At Auschwitz

 

Bad Day At Auschwitz

by

R.E. Prindle

http://www.tabletmag.com/arts-and-culture/music/9994/letter-from-krakow/

 

     One must read with scepticism.  The movie Wag The Dog should be a constant reminder of how news and opinion are manipulated to reflect the needs and prejudices of the manipulators.  Nothing can be taken at face value.

     Leaders in this manner of manipulation seem to be the writers of Tablet Magazine.  I have already mentioned Wesley Yang and now comes a Roger Bennett to pursue the same course.  He speaks of a Jewish music festival in Krakow, Poland, the heart of the Jewish Disneyland- Holocaustland.  Mr. Bennett says:

     Krakow is a town where the Holocaust is everywhere- thanks to a battery of brightly colored wagons, little bigger than golf carts, that litter the streets, energetically competing to lure visitors onto a series of niche tours they market via menus emblazoned on their sides.  Trips to Auschwitz, ‘Kazimeirz Ghetto,” and “Schindler’s Factory”…

     Thus the unwary are lured to the crown jewel of Holocaustland, the Auschwitz Extermination Camp in ‘gaily colored carts.’  In this festive manner unwary tourists are lured to the most depressing spot on earth sometimes with disastrous results to their psychology.  God only knows what horrific Disney like special effects the promoters have devised, imaginary heaps of dead bodies with bulldozers moving them toward mass graves  or even worse.  Mr. Bennett records one such devastated psyche.

     One such person while attending the first night of the music festival disrupted the emcee in mid performance continuing to heckle him until in desperation the MC asked him ‘to come up  here and tell us what kind of bad day you have had that gives you the right to be Mr. Rude and bring us all down like that.”

      Staggering to the stage he blurted into the microphone:  I have had a bad day…because…I went to Auschwitz.  Apparently the depressing experience had unhinged the poor man’s mind.  Too tender, perhaps.

     This raises the question of whether it is right for the Jews to commercialize this great disaster of world history by turning it into a Disney like amusement park.  A grim one at that.  Lord knows we all love a good disaster; disaster films are some of the most popular cult films around, people watch the WTC bombing over and over but Great God Almighty isn’t some suffering sacred?

     Are the Jews so light minded that they turn their own great national disaster into coin?  One would hope that these misguided souls would discontinue Holocaustland in honor of the dear departed fallen.

     Making money from the suffering of their own people, indeed!  What barbarism!!!

Leiber And Stoller, Wesley Yang, And Their Magic Moment

 

Leiber And Stoller, Wesley Yang,

And ‘Their Magic Moment’

by

R.E. Prindle

http://www.tabletmag.com/arts-and-culture/music/8898/their-magic-moment/

 

     To quote Wesley Yang:  (my italics wherever they appear)

     (Rock and Roll) was the instrument of a revolution in bourgeois manners and mores.  What other country would dress its privileged children in the garb of its sharecroppers, (read, Negroes) and coal miners, or school them, three minutes at a time in the sexual mores of the ghetto…

     Let us examine this quote in the light of Mr. Yang’s next statement.

     You would need people eager to embrace the new (read divisive) able to serve as intermediaries linking black and white, sensitive enough to hear joy where others heard only sqalor, clever enough to hear opportunity where others heard only noise, alive to the mordant humor of the ghetto, heedless of existing prejudices (think Lenny Bruce) and conventions…you needed Jews.

     An interesting description of Judaism and its goals.  As I have said rock and roll would have evolved without Jews but in different directions.  Jews weren’t needed for anything but as Mr. Yang candidly confesses, rock and roll in the hands of the Jews was an instrument of social revolution.  As he says Jews wielded that instrument to further their own interests at the expense of everyone else.  Toward what end did Jews use their intrument?  Mr. Yang answers, to destroy bourgeois manners and mores.  Here bourgeois is a code word for White.   How did the Jews attack White manners and mores?  By linking up with the ghetto morals of Blacks in three minute barrages undermining White sexual mores to be replaced by (it is implied) destructive and debased Negro and Jewish mores.  Mr. Yang makes it plain.

     Let us remember that Negroes wrote few of the lyrics to their songs. The content of the lyrics was provided by Jews such as Leiber and Stoller, Doc Pomus, Goffin and King and numerous others.

     So, as Mr. Yang says, Jews were those people ‘who could operate at the bloody crossroads where commerce, art and social change were converging.’  That is, where Jews were directing them.  One has only to think of the career of the despicable Lenny Bruce to see how true Mr. Yang’s perception of  events is.

     It is even more remarkable that Jews are now prepared to confess how they managed the corruption of American society.  Perhaps they think the job is done and they are the victors.  But there you have it from Wesley Yang and the editors of Tablet Magazine.

 

 

Rock And Roll Will Never Die But It Becomes Perverted

 

Rock And Roll Will Never Die But It Becomes Perverted

by

R.E. Prindle

http://www.tabletmag.com/arts-and-culture/music/8898/their-magic-moment/ 

     I usually follow the ezine Tablet for a variety of interesting takes on contemporary society, of course from the Jewish point of view.

     As such Tablet unrelentingly puts down Whites, White culture and mores.  This doesn’t bother because the writers are usually Jews and of course Jews despise all things not Jewish.  In the cuurent issure (7/2/09) Tablet employs a Chinese sounding sort, Wesley Yang, to laud the Jews and put down Whites here in, as Mr. Yang puts it, ‘miscegenated America.’

     Mr. Yang’s essay is more or less a review of, or at least inspired by, the volume of Leiber and Stoller quotes entitled Hound Dog.  Leiber and Stoller entertained us vastly in the fifties.  Of course back then Jews hid their identity so no one knew Leiber and Stoller were Jewish nor would  we have cared.  We were all Americans then, not yet becoming Jews, Whites, Chinese and whatever.  It is only in the last few decades that the Jews have taught us that we’re Hound Dogs and they’re super cool, sporting an extra intelligence gene that they believe humbles the world.  Never mind that no one’s ever found it, it’s there they tell us, have faith, believe.

     Mr. Yang unselfconsciously makes some astounding comments that if made by others would indeed be blaphemous or in today’s parlance, racist.

      Mr. Yang says, and I quote:

          You needed people who could operate at the bloody crossroads where commerce, art and social change were converging.  All of which is to say that you needed Jews.

     Whether needed or not, which is open to question, we got ‘em.

     All of which is to say that according to Mr. Yang and one presumes his publishers, the editors of Tablet Magazine, is that Jews were firmly in control of the record industry  and hence by extension, American culture.  ‘What a fine mess they’ve gotten us into, hey Ollie?’  Not an astounding revelation but astounding that it was so openly revealed.  The obvious fact will immediately be contradicted if a White person makes it.  I make it, go ahead and contradict.

     Now, these Jews managed a music that Mr. Yang believes was created by ‘trashy whites.’  So if you’re White you should begin getting how the other side views you.  Nothing astounding there, either.

     I say nothing, or little, here about the Jews.  If you want a hint about the criminal side of Jewry I refer you to Gus Russo’s fabulous Supermob.  As to trashy Whites and the chinese I rather suspect there’s a little racial envy there, hey, Mr. Yang?  Anyone visiting San Francisco’s Chinatown has always been impressed by the wise old mandarins sitting behind their squalid counters selling trashy fake Chinese crap.  Buy for a dime, sell for 10.00 as authentic Chinese artefacts.  And then the Tongs.  Perhaps Mr. Yang will believe I’m referring to a large pair of tweezers but, no, I’m referring to the trashy chinese murderous criminal gangs who terrorize White, well any, merchants to extort their protection money.  Not to mention, of course, the fabled Chinese role in the drug business and people smuggling.  You can read ‘people smuggling’ as prostitution.

     Bash, bash, bash.  There’s the crux of my argument.  Mr. Yang speaking for the Chinese and in this case the Jews is hypocrisy personified.  If there were some amusing Chinese statue representing hypocrisy it would look like Mr. Yang sculpted.

     It becomes clear why the Jews and ‘minorities’ like Mr. Yang’s Chinese want anti-hate laws.  It is to indulge their own vile hatreds while gaining legal immunity.   Perhaps retaliation.  Who needs to, the truth is obvious.

 

 

Mark Oppenheimer And The Holocaust

 

Look At Me- I’m Beautiful

Mark Oppenheimer And The Holocaust

by

R.E. Prindle

 

Weber has a deep admiration for Jews- us powerful, cohesive,brilliant Jews- but it’s an admiration that could never survive actually knowing us.

-Mark Oppenheimer

http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/7721/the-denial-twist-part-iv/

     I can’t imagine who would take the holocaust seriously and that means Jews as well as gentile ‘Holocaust deniers.’  I can’t imagine who would make a fetish of the number 6,000,000.  Who can actually prove such a precise figure?   I don’t have to imagine anymore:  I’ve got Mark Oppenheimer as a living avatar.

     Mark has taken time out from what I presume is a busy life to write a four part series about ‘the leading proponents of Holocaust revisionism- leading proponents?, what fantasy is this?- Bradley Smith and Mark Weber.  I’ve actually heard of the latter proponent but not the former.

     If  Brad and Mark are obsessed with anti-Judaism Mark Oppenheimer is definitely obsessed with being Jewish as the above quote demonstrates.  If it’s a question of being crazy, which Oppenheimer seems to believe, it’s not who’s crazy but who’s craziest.

     To quote Oppenheimer:  These people are not stupid or cynical…if they scale the wall that they’ve built for themselves and look around at the world outside the playground, they might even do some good.

     Good advice that Oppenheimer might paste to his own mirror.

     Speaking of Brad M.O. says: …he was not ashamed to have lived with and loved a Jew….  C’mon, M.O., hop that wall.  For us, on the other side of the wall, the most important question is not, are you a Jew?  That’s a Jewish obsession.  If you read Jewish magazines the big question is how does Judaiism stop intermarriage.  Horrors, Mark, I’m married to a Jew.  Are you?

     The nineteenth century mythologist  and quondam lawyer, J.J. Bachofen, was always amazed that two lawyers using the same laws and the same facts could come to diametrically opposed opinions.  What holds for law apparentely according to M.O. doesn’t hold for history.  In history there can be only one opinion- Mark’s.  He quotes ‘one professor of mine’ who had worked as a ‘public historian’, whatever that is, referring to Mark Weber:

     Beware the history buff.  the buff- as opposed to the scholar, or the curious peruser, or the diletante- eats up all this knowledge but can’t properly digest.  He (most buffs seem to be male) cannot keep facts in perspective; he fails at precisely the task the scholar is good at, figuring out which facts matter most, which piece of evidence to privilege,  what facts to weigh more than what.  So a particular truth- that there are a lot of Jewish executives in Hollywood, or African-Americans commit more crimes, per capita, than (W)hites- assumes an outsized importance.  With no ability to create proper contexts for facts, the buff is in danger of becoming a conspiracy theorist or a bigot, or both.

     When I was a ranker we had a word for this sort of solipsistic thinking.  I think the initials were BS but I’m not sure if I’m remembering correctly.  What sort of proper context does the ’scholar’ create for the fact that a disproportionate by far number of executives in Hollywood are Jewish anyway?  There must be consequences.  What are they?  Can we agree on them?  Not very likely Mark.  Does our learned ‘public historian’ have a lock on creating proper contexts?  Obviously all contexts are not created equal so what makes the ‘public historian’  the judge-penitent on the issue.  Oh right, right, he has the good digestive tract that doesn’t produce you know what.

     I went to college where ‘a learned historian’ told me not to worry about the teaching which was all hokum anyway, the thing you’re here for is to learn method.  I took him at his word and went after the method, I could get the facts later.  Stupid old history buff me, hey?  Of course M. O.’s expert was probably a ‘powerful, cohesive, brilliant Jew.’  Hey, come to think about it, so was mine.  Cohen, Cohen…is that a Jewish name?

     M.O. has a PhD but he is still capable of interjecting crap like this into his essay:

One scholar (not buff mind you) of Holocaust denial told me, quoting a friend, that Holocaust deniers they “are like the shit you step on in the street- it has no relevance unless you fail to scrape it off before entering your house.”

     Oh, oh.  It wasn’t the Holocaust denial scholar who was so vulgar nor M.O., no, too much culture, he was quoting a friend and M.O. was quoting him.  Thrice removed and therefore pure.  Good technique, Mark.  ‘Look at me, I’m so beautiful.’

     If I had to choose between J.J. Bachofen and Mark Oppenheimer it would J.J. everytime.