Guest post: Root Pruning
This article was sent to me this morning presumably by its author who goes by the name of Miecz Elizejski in his comment section. The name matches up with the email. I’m seeing a lot of reasons we should pool our resources with these people, and believe me I’m not easily impressed, ask Douglas Dietrich. But I want input from commenters before going any further with that… – Jack Heart
Root Pruning: Getting Rid of the Rot to Save the Lot
Western Civilization’s rotten root has been one of its major defining characteristics. The issue is that while the hateful verses of the Tanakh/Old Testament are widely known, these are only the tip of the iceberg. A more complete examination of the issue involves going back to older texts and rituals whose symbolism has been prevalent in many Western, and to a degree certain other, schools of thought even if those who actively practice these have been a demographic sliver. Yet, it’s a powerful one whose claims to be the basis of Western ethics and identity should not be denied, rather affirmed and also condemned. What Western Civilization needs is a thorough root pruning so as to allow room for new ideals to flourish and perhaps even redefine the whole thing itself.
2- Uncover & Uproot
—Modern Jewish Colonialism
3- Establish a New Order
This is what you are to do them: Break down their altar, smash their sacred stones, cut down their Asherah poles and burn their idols in the fire.
For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession. ~Deuteronomy 7:5-6
These words, sacred in the Judeo-Christian tradition of the West, can be seen as a harbinger of the worst that Western Civilization would go on to become after adopting them into its core creed. And it is words and the ideas, which they put forth that are the ultimate battleground. The establishment exercises a ruthless control over words and ideas, however as we all know, ideas can’t be killed. And since words cannot killed, the establishment has sought to excise words that go against its interests, by power of taboo; and then enshrining its own words, by the power of dogma.
In the Judeo-Christian and Western tradition this has its root in the Jewish Aggadah, or a tale that becomes Jewish canon after approval by a high enough religious authority.  In short, Jews believe that they “speak truth into being” and this reflects their cult’s world origin tale as YHWH (the Demiurge) inscribes everything into existence with a fiery stylus.  The most common Hebrew font is mean to resemble flames.
In practice, this paradigm of “words to truth” coupled with their fanatical belief in their own “choseness” leads Jews to turn their subjective viewpoint into a general (and “self-evident”) truth via their vast influence in media, politics, and finance. It also leads them to censor non-Jewish voices as those people weren’t “chosen” – given the mission by the Demiurge – thus, as with the Herder deciding the fate of his cattle, Zionists have no interest in letting others speak, and it in fact collides with their worldview.
1965 Speech in Harlem, NYC 
One of the most telling examples of Jewish chosen words suddenly becoming sacrosanct, is the fact that between the years 1900 and 1945, there were no less than 200 published mentions 6,000,000 Jews in peril or facing imminent death.  Yet, it was only after 1945 that the number came to be taken seriously and all previous mentions were suddenly forgotten in a stunning feat of Orwellian double-think. Also noteworthy is that in 1977, David Irving published his seminal and fact-based biography of Hitler’s years in government. It dealt a stunning blow to popularly propagated post-war image of Hitler as a raving maniac. Particularly when Irving cites meeting records, which indicate Hitler merely acknowledged that the Red Army captured Auschwitz as if there was nothing incriminating there at the time nor had been disposed before.  It may very well have been this book that prompted the pathos-laden response in 1978, the miniseries Holocaust, which enshrined the now “official” word to describe any and all Jewish misfortune during World War 2. The establishment outer party followed the line and swarms of “holocaust” mentions now referred to that one particular period with all the previous mentions of “holocaust”, as with the infamous “six million” figure, plunged down the memory hole.
The supreme Aggadah of the Age had been established and now it was heresy to challenge any aspect of it. Whereas previously the Judeo-Christian Inquisition (which was non-Jews propagating Jewish ethics and methods) worked through outright terror and torture, reflecting the aggressive hunter archetype, while the newer methods are much more subtle and for good reason. Edward Bernays, dubbed “the father of American propaganda” and a Jew related to the Freud family, called his work “the engineering of consent” and explained in his 1928 and bluntly titled work, Propaganda:
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government, which is the true ruling power of our country.
We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind.” 
The Jewish Herder archetype works in a way that discourages straying too far from where the comfort of a stable career (in line with herder-dictated rules), the pleasures of social circles (in line with herder-dictated rules), and wealth increase (by those same established rules and only those rules) are to be found; a paddock by another name. It’s only natural for those who view themselves as superior to behave as such. ^
2- Uncover & Uproot
The true nature of the Herder archetype has been carefully hidden, since if livestock knew they were being exploited and likely sent for slaughter for the gain of the Herder, they’d revolt, which would be trouble, or launch a revolution, which would be deadly. A revolt is limited to those who can be made to believe that they will personally gain from it, while a revolution attracts initially uninterested groups to the cause. However, before a movement can take on revolutionary characteristics in order to overthrow the status quo, we must identify the causes of the status quo and not merely criticize the results. The latter is the rigged game and paddock.
Appealing to fear and telling people how terrible their lives will be if they don’t revolt is insufficient. As is an appeal to hubris and telling them how wonderful their lives will be if the revolt succeeds. Thus, even if the slaves break down the barriers, they have kept the conditioning of their imprisonment. A new order is not possible from this and the slaves themselves will rebuild the very kind of system from which they broke free. Within a few generations, if not earlier, that’s a given. Therefore, we must introduce new values or long forgotten values that are no longer in play in order to cut the roots of the status quo and prevent its causes from spreading again. This is inherently harder as it requires a sense of duty and devotion, since those fighting will not necessarily benefit from the fight to establish something better. And this makes revolution harder to unleash in a materialist society. ^
The whole debate about whether Judaism is an ethnic, religious, or cultural identity is meaningless, since Jewish identity (as with all identitarian viewpoints) is whatever the in-group needs it to be. There are appeals to religion, culture, and ethnicity according to the point being made. The key is that such identity is largely arbitrary and voluntary. A bit of Jewish humor aptly demonstrates the quintessential identitarian point of view:
“Jews have a joke among themselves that goes something like this: A class of schoolchildren is asked to produce an essay about giraffes; little Tom Smith hands in a piece on the neck; little John Baker writes about its diet; others write about the tail, the environment, and so on. Then little Benny Cohen hands in his paper, and it is titled ‘The Giraffe and the Jews.’” 
Mostly only Jews are familiar with that “humorous” anecdote yet it’s a spot on representation of the fact that for Jews all things, regardless how far removed, are always seen through the prism of Jewish identity. As the author of the quoted article goes on to state: “it’s a joke about Jewish ethnocentrism.” And the fact that that very topic is celebrated and very frequently discussed in Jewish circles, yet not discussed much in non-Jewish circles, or even downplayed and outright avoided, is equally celebrated by Jews.
“Self-glorification is commonly defined as the exaltation of oneself and one’s abilities, though one could add that it entails excessive or unjustified elements of superiority. Individually, high levels of self-glorification are correlated strongly with psychopathy. A small number of studies have found that groups demonstrating feelings of exaggerated self-love and superiority were more prone to desires or attempts to dominate other groups.” 
And so Jews hold the proverbial Ring of Power and they know others want it, too. However, upon snatching it, the correct thing to do would be to destroy, not hijack, said ring. ^
It wants to be hijacked.
Hanukkah is an apt demonstration of tribalist mythos. While the modern rendition of Hanukkah is a gift giving holiday and generally speaking “being happy in winter,” a time that was typically cold and dark before modern conveniences. The origin of this holiday might be shocking to non-Jews. Not only does Hanukkah affirm Jewish identity, be it religious, cultural, or ethnic (whatever the situation needs), the first rendition of this holiday was a pogrom.
It was a targeted killing of Jews that were accepting Hellenization, thereby becoming accustomed – and accepted in – to the dominant Greek culture. Those Greeks accepting the Jews were also killed and thus we can see why White Nationalists have slowly come to love this holiday.
“Not all Jews helped Maccabee. In fact, the elites of Jewish society favored the blending away of the Jews (much as our modern elites favor the blending away of whites) and they helped the tyrant in his attempt at assimilating Jews into non-existence.
The ‘extremist’ Maccabees, weren’t having it and they fought against both the Syrian tyrant and their own Jewish elites. In time, the Maccabees won, and Jews who didn’t assimilate, became the only Jews, and they celebrated their victory over the forces of assimilation with Hanukkah.” 
Maccabee led the tribalist revolt that was, likely, the first Western incarnation of identitarianism. All that was done, White Nationalists talk about doing today; some in more extreme levels than others, yet all part of the same symphony.
“So, Hanukkah was about Jews being able to have their own identity and religion as they themselves decided was right for themselves, and it was a struggle against their extinction by assimilation.” 
This is a good indicator of why Jews have been expelled 109 times, if one counts only the biggest expulsions, but the real number of Jewish Expulsions is much higher. 
Always the “others” fault.
The Jewish identity was created and upheld as an aggression against all others, symbolized in the quintessential image of what Hanukkah represents: Judith with the severed head of Holofernes.  It’s a zealous adhering to identitarianism and dogma much like the creation of “whiteness” in people when “the Virginians legislated a new class of people into existence: the whites. They gave the whites certain rights, and took other rights from blacks. White, as a language of race, appears in Virginia around the 1680s, and seems to first appear in Virginia law in 1691. And thus whiteness, and to a degree as well blackness, was born in the mind of America.” 
This was done to keep two groups that were essentially compatible – both poor, farm subsistence-level, largely Christian, small town life-style – divided across race. The early American Republican party (now a shadow of its former self) was broadly inclusive based on idealist principles and varied communities lived in proximity and peace. However, it was the increase in such legislation echoing the essences of Judaism that led to violence, thereby echoing the Maccabean mass slaughter – Tulsa, Rosewood, etc – and a instilling a resentment that holds to this day.
Don’t blame “whites,” get them to see where they’re wrong about identifying as “white.” Maybe like Boromir, they will see the truth about the force that attracts them, and if they see early enough, they won’t perish as he did. ^
Taking the fanatically motivated killing of Hanukkah to the next level for all-out mass-murdering bloodlust frenzy we come to another celebration that has been given serious window dressing. Purim isn’t mentioned too much outside of Jewish circles, it doesn’t appear on many calendars (unlike Hanukkah), and in general is at most mentioned as a just a “joyous holiday.” Christians have Easter, a celebration of life representative of Spring, which also appears in many other religions and cultures. However, Judaism celebrates what would today probably be labeled as genocide. And this mass killing was also motivated by identitarianism.
“The Book of Esther (Megillat Esther in Hebrew), the basis for the Purim holiday, recounts one of the most beloved [beloved of the Jews] of all biblical stories. Haman, the arch villain of the story, devises a plan to annihilate the Jews of Persia, which is approved by the Persian King Ahasuerus. Through a complex turn of events, the Jewish Queen Esther and her adoptive father Mordechai manage to intercede with the king, thwart Haman’s evil plan, and destroy Haman, his family and other enemies of the Jewish people. The holiday of Purim is then proclaimed.” 
This sounds very familiar.
However, the real revealing thing about Purim is not just what it celebrates, rather also how it is celebrated. While the events themselves happen behind closed doors reserved for the most zealous, there are few inhibitions. The killing of Haman and his 10 sons is depicted in lurid detail and celebrated with a fanatical hate fervor that mirrors the “two minutes of hate” as depicted in Orwell’s 1984. 
This is then compounded by lurid displays of Haman dolls going through a simulated execution, and Jewish children (mainly young boys) are encouraged to get their zealotry and hate on full steam.
The Many Minutes of HateA Haman effigy that is dressed in contemporary clothing,
an indicator as to what Jews think of what should be done
to non-Jews who act against their tribes interests.
Purim toys: A depiction of Haman and his 10 sons.
Fresh bread and a salad don’t seem to be enough for this Jewish celebration during spring. There are two Purim-specific foods and these go right along the same mindset at the above rituals. “Hamantaschen are triangular-shaped dough pockets meant to symbolize Haman’s ears and Kreplach are dough pockets filled with ground beef symbolizing the beaten flesh of Haman. Does this sound appetizing?” 
Ritual cannibalism of a defeated enemy.Morbidity at its finest.
Judaism’s most sacred icon represented by symbolic severed ears.
As gruesome as symbolically wishful cannibalism might be, it fits right into a religion whose “prophets not only hated their enemies, but rather reveled in their suffering” and which considers exclusion and hate as virtues, since “not a single Jewish source asserts that God deeply desires to save all humanity, nor that He loves every member of the human race.”  Well, of course! YHWH only loves his “chosen” and everyone else is under their dominion. That is the Jewish covenant with the Demiurge.
Dietrich Eckart wrote some poignant words about Purim: “The Jews call our Sedan Day celebration barbarous, but they find entirely in order the fact that, year in and year out, they still, after all this enormous time, celebrate in the synagogues their heroic deed concerning the seventy-five thousand Persians, in the feast of Purim.”  Sedan Day was held on September 2 in the former German Empire until 1918. On that day in 1870 the Prussian Army won a decisive victory against France during the Franco-Prussian War by accepting the surrender of the French army. It was celebrated in various ways, from games and festival grounds to music and food, and major cities, especially the capital, typically had a military parade. 
While Aryanism and National Socialism have a rather obvious propensity for large folk celebrations and something like Sedan Day might very well fit right in. However, they also have room for hate, though it’s a hate of evil and the initiation of violence, which is unlike Jewish hate of what causes them tribal disadvantage. Also, Jewish hate is going by a loose or insufficient definition of the word. Jews cannot, in the strict sense of the word, “hate” goyim, since they are, by their own cult beliefs, to inherit them as servants after the coming of their messiah. Even today, many Jews see “gentiles” as for performing menial task of simply deriving tribal advantage from. In fact, that is the entire point of the Jewish Lobby, the most salient tentacle of which is AIPAC. 
True hate flows towards the violator/deceiver/oppressor from the lowest levels of the exploited, not the other way around. ^
Track record of acting “chosen”
“The Holocaust is something different. It is a singular event. It is not simply one example of genocide but a near successful attempt on the life of God’s chosen children and thus, on God Himself. It is an event that is the antithesis of Creation as recorded in the Bible; and like it’s direct opposite, which is relived weekly with the Sabbath and yearly with Torah, it must be remembered from generation to generation”
~~~~~~~~~~Abraham Foxman, behaving very “chosen” 
Abraham Foxman, former head of the ADL of B’nai B’rith, did something very telling with those words quote above. By simply using written words in what is simply an editorial piece he elevates one event he deems important above all others, regardless how similar, since it was his in-group that suffered and his group is “God’s chosen children.” Thus, Foxman has provided an identitarian justification for endless Holocaust commemoration. The idea of using words to elevate certain events above others is an old Jewish practice – the aforementioned Jewish Aggadah that itself is derived from the Jewish world creation myth.
Considering how many Jewish texts on the Holocaust are memoirs and recollections and even admitted works of fiction and/or “fictionalizations” (to make the matter even more convoluted), it is no surprise that these have been elevated to “official narrative” status.  They serve Jewish tribal needs, provide advantage over other tribes in discourse and politics, and allow control over subsequent narratives since “he who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past.” 
For example, the current establishment’s highest Holocaust cleric, the late Elie Wiesel, published many works about his experiences during World War 2. The first of these, Night, has the problem “that in its central, most crucial scene, Night isn’t historically true, and at least two other important episodes are almost certainly fiction.”  And this being the first of Elie Wiesel’s major works means that: first, his memory was supposed to have been the freshest at its writing and second, it laid the foundation for his subsequent writings. Thus, if it is flawed or intentionally false, this casts doubt on his all his writing and certainly discredits them as fact. They are popular op-ed pieces and subjective and heavily embellished accounts with a specific cult’s theology running through them. This is even confirmed by the more scholarly Raul Hilberg calling Night “the most read of all Auschwitz memoirs not only because of its brevity but because it has something mystic, surrealistic in it.”  This also shows that while Hilberg attempted a research-based body of work, his cult background shines through and, in fact, has received thorough criticism  that – no real surprise – hasn’t been publicized since it doesn’t conform to the “official narrative.”
Perhaps most interestingly, is that while the official “Holocaust Narrative” has been spoken into being,  it is orthodoxy within in it to think that the perpetrators and their sympathizers wish to forget it out of being.
“Forgetting extermination is part of extermination, because it is also the extermination of memory, of history, of the social, etc. This forgetting is as essential as the event… it must be effaced by an artificial memory (today, everywhere, it is artificial memories that efface the memory of man, that efface man in his own memory). This artificial memory will be the restaging of extermination.” 
Those are words from 1981, not too long after the 1978 miniseries Holocaust that cemented the capitalization of the h-word into use in Jewish cult canon. However, this long “restaging of the extermination” was hardly “forgetting.” In fact, the mixed-reception of that miniseries led to the perpetual “lively debate, limited sphere” that we have today. Every debate about good and evil has an anchor in the Holocaust narrative. Jewish filmmaker Claude Lanzmann, who admitted and boasted about not using archival and documentary material, said the following:
“If the pain of Auschwitz is much more extreme than that of the Apocalypse, much more horrifying than that described by John in the Apocalypse (since the Apocalypse can be described as, and even resembles, a huge, Hollywood-style spectacular, while Auschwitz is inexpressable and undescribable), then the Book of the Apocalypse is false, and the Gospels are false, too. Auschwitz is the refutation of Christ.” 
Thus, the motivation of Jews, be they Torah thumping Rabbis or humanist atheists such as Lanzmann and Hilberg, is a redefinition of morality and ethics according to their own tribe’s advantage. Also, it is very ironic that the current rosy and sociable celebrations given to Hanukkah and Purim are actually a “forgetting” and their “restaging” has most certainly been a way to bury the inherent mass atrocity at the core of each story. Thus, the Jews forget their own crimes and seek to redefine the moral outlook of others based on crimes against their own tribe – after these have been given the mystical Elie Wiesel-style Aggadah embellishment. The herder’s worldview is the only one permitted. Fitting for a people who see themselves as “chosen.” ^
Modern Jewish Colonialism
“Zionism was never simply about the idea that Jewish Lives Matter: from the beginning, it meant the lives of Jewish colonists would be valued more than the lives of indigenous groups — from Herzl’s time, until today.” 
Even that truthful quote is extremely generous. Around halfway through, the words of the Tanakh promise the Jews that the Demiurge will “reign on Mount Zion.”  Zionism is central to the Jewish religion. Such an attitude also pervades Judeo-Christianity, thus making it no surprise that that Alexander H. Stephens, vice president of the short-lived Confederate States of America alluded to the “curse against Canaan”  where Noah’s youngest son Ham sees his father undressed (since Noah had passed out drunk) and this offends the traditionalist patriarch so he condemns Ham to forever be a servant.  This perfectly matches Stephens’ vision for Americans from Africa. The inspiration came from the same rotten root that inspired Herzl.
“The Jews made no converts: they butchered all.” ~Thomas Paine, Age of Reason
Words about the Ancient Jews whom present day Jews claim to exalt.
Herzl is only one neck on the Zionist Hydra. Various diplomatic dealings, the most salient of which is the Balfour Declaration, are another. And yet another is the outright terror used on ground in Palestine.  And the Israeli lobby has necks, claws, and tentacles nearly everywhere in the form of Hasbara,  an information manipulation strategy that has mostly replaced the old style Rabbinical aggadah. Such an elaborate system – that is seemingly not centralized, thus more easily deniable – is required upkeep considering the eugenics-bound direction Israel is heading in where the semen of men with combat experience is in top demand. 
Not many see past Israel’s smoke and mirrors, and even less connect all the “bad apples” into one hydra. Yet, there are those that have managed this feat of perception. By leaving the proverbial cave with its shadow show (on this issue at least) one can see that “American Jews sympathetic to Israel dominate key positions in all areas of our government where decisions are made regarding the Middle East.” Virtually all US news publishers simply refuse to publish the non-Jewish perspective. Letters mentioning taped interviews of Palestinians who related stories of torture at the hands of Israel go unanswered. Later, a realization hit the writer of the letter, “I hadn’t known: had it been Jews who were strung up and tortured, it would be news. But interviews with tortured Arabs were ‘lost.’” Some research is given “to the Israeli Embassy, to let them read it for mistakes,” and even if there are no mistakes “it shouldn’t be published. It’s anti-Israel.” This is the goal of Hasbara: “The Israelis have a policy to discourage us [news reporters] from visiting the Holy Land except under their sponsorship. They don’t want Christians to start learning all they have never known about Israel.” 
Surely, if Christians found out about this  then they would sympathize increasingly with the Muslims and the Christian-Muslim rapprochement is what Judaism/Zionism fears most – two of the world’s biggest universal religions realizing common cause against an old tribal religion that cannot stand by itself.
This would be the start of a New Order. ^
Zion’s Biggest Fear
3- Establish a New Order
Looking to Islam may very well be counter-intuitive to many present self-proclaimed supporters of National Socialism, yet that would mean that they are as ill-informed on this legendary movement as the rest in the traditional left-right/liberal-conservative “lively debate/limited sphere” spectrum. What would be genuinely closer to counter-intuitive is recognizing that even among Jews themselves there hasn’t always been a monolithic anti-Hitler stance. While many of those Jews had been excised in a way akin to the original Hanukkah cleansing, the fact remains that many Jews in Germany were concerned about the hyperbolic anti-German propaganda, which said that the NSDAP was already mass killing Jews  in some desperate continuation of the atrocity propaganda of WW1 such as corpse factories and “babies on bayonets.”  The Jews within Germany had a profoundly different reaction to Hitler’s election and assuming of the Chancellorship than Jews outside of Germany.
The Central Association of German Citizens of the Jewish Faith condemned press sensationalism:
“Following press reports in German papers, which were then disseminated by various foreign newspapers, which claimed that mutilated Jewish corpses were found at the entrance to the Jewish cemetery Berlin-Weißensee, and that Jewish girls in public places had been forcibly rounded up, and that hundreds of German Jews had arrived in Geneva, including many children, nine tenths of which were severely abused. All such claims are completely fictitious.” 
In light of books such as Black Nazis and Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers it is no surprise that the NSDAP wasn’t nearly as draconian as they have been portrayed to be when it comes to their treatment of minorities, yet few people have found out about these books.  Despite these books seemingly pioneering nature, uncovering some hitherto unknown aspect of the III Reich, they are actually in a line of research, writing, and opinion that has been excised or just not widely discussed.
One German Citizen of the Jewish faith wrote:
“At first the German reaction to riotous, Jewish-led, anti-German demonstrations abroad was a government-decreed one day (!) boycott of Jewish stores which had been marked overnight with stars of David. Never at any time, neither then nor today, did National Socialists mark Jewish properties of any kind with swastikas, because this would be considered a desecration of their revered symbol. The most astonishing result of this boycott was the revelation of the unbelievably large number of big and small businesses in Jewish hands. Had the German-Jewish community voiced a unanimous and vociferous protest against the action of their co-religionists throughout the world, they would have avoided, in my opinion, some of the harsher measures soon to come.” 
The calm and reasoned tone throughout that work, which was written many years after the Second World War, suggests a very different experience than the usual that is presented. Another such example is Joseph G. Burg, who defended Ernst Zundel during the latter’s 1988 trial and despite having been interned for 3 years at Auschwitz, he had never heard of gas chambers until after the war. His testimony led to him being given the proverbial Hanukkah slice of Judith’s sword as Jews disowned Burg. Eventually, Zundel had to have his friend buried in a Catholic cemetery – the last favor for a friend who was a man of faith. 
As one researcher in 2010 pointed out, the root problem with studying the NSDAP and its policies is that “popular and academic discussion of Nazi race theory has been in general highly misleading, and vitiated by a failure to differentiate between: (1) popular, propagandistic and aesthetic stereotypes of race; (2) racial policies; (3) academic race theory as expounded within scholarly publications in the Third Reich.” Thus, the propaganda war that had been started and engaged in by all sides of the Second World War was ceased by the defeated Axis, however the Allies/Soviets never ended theirs. This has had a profound shaping of the popular perception of the German Third Reich. The fact that “the term widely used in English, “Aryan race,” now almost synonymous with Nazi thought, has no unambiguous counterpart in the German language” and that the “normative German term is therefore ariches Volk, not arisches Rasse.” The paper comes to the conclusion that “standard histories of the Nazi era generally make little or no reference to debates about the nature of race, and the lurid associations of the word “Aryan” obscure the fact that mainstream Nazi scholarship was not radically at odds with the wider framework adopted by European intellectuals” and that “the Nazi understanding of race needs to be set within an evolving intellectual and political landscape, rather than singled out as a single, static and defining idea.” 
This sort of “woke” perspective is hardly new. In 1958, an academic paper was published that details how National Socialist race theory and studies had three distinct periods. In the first there was the hyperbolic German nationalism after the shame of Versailles. Second, there were attempts at scientific affirmation of this nationalism and it was during this time that the work of ardent Nordicist Hans F.K. Guenther was widely circulated. However, upon realizing that so few people even within Germany fit into these strict Nordic criteria, after 1934 Guenther’s work was rejected by the NSDAP itself. “It was this last phase of National Socialist race theory that was cut off… the work of half a decade was scattered or destroyed – to leave only the tragic-comic image of the Nordicism of Guenther and his followers, to appear and reappear as the popular misconception of the National Socialist theory of history.” This was in stark contrast to the third phase of NSDAP positions on race where there “was no longer of fixed and immutable races, but of races in formation, the components for which arise out of the crucible of the past.” 
Thus, the NSDAP looked into and studied race, as did their European counterparts, however unlike he British Empire or Judaic traditionalism, the NSDAP’s goal was to find a unifying factor among its people and then later among its allies, which included non-Europeans.
Only a few years later in 1966, Murray Rothbard, a Jewish revisionist wrote:
“Revisionism as applied to World War II and its origins (as also for previous wars) has the general function of bringing historical truth to an American and a world public that had been drugged by wartime lies and propaganda. This, in itself, is a virtue. But some truths of history, of course, may be largely of antiquarian interest, with little relevance to present-day concerns. This is not true of World War II revisionism, which has much critical significance for today’s world.” 
Thus even by the mid-1960s there were those well aware that the Allied/Soviet propaganda line was still in action. Their societies and governments had grown complacent to it, and in fact the wartime (and often pre-war) demonization of the enemy had become a lucrative venture.  And so, due to “market pressure” and the laws of supply and demand, the new religion was being preached and printed with a Judaic vengeance.
“The Enemy, then, says the war propaganda, is guided by but one purpose: conquest of the world. He never suffers from such human emotions as fear — fear that we might attack him — or belief that he is acting in defense, or out of self-respect and the desire to save face before himself as well as before others. Neither does he possess such human qualities as reason… Now revisionism teaches us that this entire myth, so prevalent then and even now about Hitler, and about the Japanese, is a tissue of fallacies from beginning to end. Every plank in this nightmare evidence is either completely untrue or not entirely the truth… For revisionism, in the final analysis, is based on truth and rationality. Truth and rationality are always the first victims in any war frenzy; and they are, therefore, once again an extremely rare commodity on today’s “market.” 
Very telling that a staunch libertarian and advocate would criticize the free use of a capitalist market; Rothbard was very likely driven by higher ideals and finally stated: “such truth is almost desperately needed in today’s world.” 
Joseph G. Burg echoed this sentiment in saying that “If the Holocaust story went on the way it was going, there would never be a sincere relationship between the Jews and the Germans.”  When one side is committed to fanaticism based on its belief in its “chosen” status, then even the mildest suggestion to take a new perspective is met with fury as David Irving’s experience relates:
[When asked if the Jews are responsible for being sent to Auschwitz]
“It’s a bit of a dazzling question, and when you think about it, I said, ‘well… the short answer is: yes.’ But that’s a cruel answer, because to do the question justice you’ve got to have a lot of intervening stages, of course, but the short answer, if you want to hop from A to Z is ‘yes, if you hadn’t behaved the way you have as a race for 3,000 years, first the Russians, then the Poles, then the Galicians, and the Austrians and the rest wouldn’t have harried and hounded you from pillar to post so you end up finding yourself in Auschwitz. And you’ve never asked yourselves ‘why?” And they still don’t want to accept that. To him [the Jew asking the question], that question, and my answer, was unacceptable. In Germany, it would no doubt have been grounds for another $22,000 fine, and in Canada I would no doubt have found myself in handcuffs again. But I don’t think it was an anti-Semitic answer, it was an attempt to be helpful in a kind of ‘psychiatrist couch’ way – analyze yourself, cast out the mote from thine own eye.” 
Perhaps a religious cult taking such a perspective is understandable, however why do historians, of all stripes, basically parrot the same story?
[Explaining why historians fail to criticize the official Holocaust narrative]
“Their only conceivable excuse – to claim ignorance – is to surrender their entire claim to expertise. For the experts to somehow claim that they ‘did not know’ about these issues is to admit gross incompetency, if not sheer idiocy. Thus our experts are caught in a terrible bind: either they are outright, malicious liars, or they are gross incompetents. Needless to say, the future does not bode well for their reputations.” 
To create a new order, that goes (finally) past the Allied/Soviet propaganda lines of a massive war, it would perhaps be better to offer POSITIVE SUGGESTIONS. After all, isn’t it better if all those people didn’t die? That even if families were not reunited after the war, isn’t it better to know that they weren’t, in all likelihood, hunted and herded to death? And critically, who wants to push the current, deeply flawed, version of the story? Who wants those people to remain dead in the most horrible way imaginable and in a way that will cause strife and anger and further fanaticism for generations to come?
Well, it’s definitely not “the Nazis” that equipped facilities with life-saving equipment.
It’s the fanatical cult whose sacred beliefs include a mythical “6,000,000” as a requirement for their god granting them their promised land.  Hence, they have been mentioning this number for nearly a century before the founding of Israel.  And today, they refuse to let go of it. All ethical arguments in present Western society are based on this morbid tale. All so that an old, tribal cult can claim to be the basis for Western thought. Perhaps they’re right.
And perhaps that’s why it’s time to abandon traditional “Westernism” for something better and that starts by root-pruning the rotten root.
“The euthanasia of Judaism is the pure moral religion.” ~Immanuel Kant
Back to top ^
 Aggadah (Aramaic אַגָּדָה: “tales, lore”; pl. aggadot or (Ashkenazi) aggados; also known as aggad or aggadh or agâdâ) refers to non-legalistic exegetical texts in the classical rabbinic literature of Judaism, particularly as recorded in the Talmud and Midrash. In general, Aggadah is a compendium of rabbinic texts that incorporates folklore, historical anecdotes, moral exhortations, and practical advice in various spheres, from business to medicine.
 Creation Mysticism: Fashioning the World from Letters
“He drew them [letters], hewed them, combined them, weighed them, interchanged them, and through them produced the whole creation and everything that is destined to come into being.”
 Malcolm X “White Liberals and Jews” speech (quote @ 5:47)
 David Irving, Hitler’s War (2002 ed.), p. 782
 Edward Bernays, Propaganda (1928), p. 9
 Jewish Superiority – For the Bible (that Jews wrote) Tells Us So!
Note: Many of the US Founders were Deists and critical of Jewry. See the writing of Thomas Paine, who called the ancient Hebrews “ruffians” and “cutthroats” thus has contempt for those who establish their laws, ethics, and culture based on those traditions.
 Is Hanukkah a Racist Holiday? (December 11, 2015)
 Internet search query: “Judith head of Holofernes”
 How White People Got Made (October 14, 2014)
 Segment of Jewish Purim Celebrations
 The Virtue of Hate (February 2003)
 Dietrich Eckart, Bolshevism From Moses to Lenin (1923)
 What Every American Should Know – AIPAC 101
 ADL On the Frontline (January 1994) p. 2
 George Orwell, 1984 (1949)
 Truth and Fiction in Elie Wiesel’s “Night”(October 21, 2014)
 Jürgen Graf, The Giant with Feet of Clay (2001, English Ed.)
 Jean Baudrilliard, Simulation and Simulacra (1981), Chapter III
 Jürgen Graf, Hoax or Holocaust: The Arguments (1996), p. 27; Les temps modernes, December 1993, pp. 132-133.
 Under Zionism Jewish Lives have always mattered more (July 8, 2020)
 Isaiah 24:23
 Genesis 9:20-25
 The Zionist Terrorists Who Created Israel (July 30, 2017)
 Israeli sperm banks see rise in demand for combat semen (August 14, 2014)
 What Christians Don’t Know About Israel (May/June 1998)
 Once Day in Gaza (leaked documentary, Hasbara Hydra tried to bury it)
 David Irving, Goebbels – Mastermind of the Third Reich (1994), p. 293
“‘In the spring of 1933,’ Brüning would write, ‘foreign correspondents re- ported that the River Spree was covered with the corpses of murdered Jews.’ At that time, he pointed out, hardly any Jews had suffered except for the leaders of the communist party.’”
 Babies on Bayonets – PropagandaWatch (November 26, 2018)
 Veronica Kuzniar-Clark, Black Nazis II! – Ethnic Minorities and Foreigners in Hitler’s Armed Forces: An Unbiased History (2010) – online book page
Bryan Mark Rigg, Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers: The Untold Story of Nazi Racial Laws and Men of Jewish Descent in the German Military (2004)
 Heinz Weichardt, Under Two Flags, p. 8
 “Did Six Million Really Die?” Joseph G. Burg defends Ernst Zündel
 Christopher Mark Hutton, Nazi Race Theory and Belief in an “Aryan Race” (2010)
 Dr. A. James Gregor, National Socialism and Race (1958)
 An Internet search of “comic books in world war 2” reveals the extent of this enterprise. Numerous “Nazi villains” were being published, yet Germany was not demonizing the USA.
 “Did Six Million Really Die?”
 David Irving speaking about the 1956 Hungarian Uprising (quote @ 4:50)
 Thomas Dalton, Debating the Holocaust (2015, 2nd Ed.), p. 261
 The Six Million Hoax: How Israel was lied into existence (June 25, 2019)
 Don Heddesheimer, The First Holocaust (2003)
Jack Heart, pen name for George Esposito, is known for his extensive research and writings that provide high-quality information and authentic alternatives to mainstream narratives on a wide variety of subjects. His life experiences make for a highly intriguing perspective. Jack runs his own research expose site called: Jack Heart Esoteric Evolution