Israel Shamir praises "Holocaust" Revisionism at www.unz.com

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
avatar
Breker
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 699
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: Europa

Israel Shamir praises "Holocaust" Revisionism at www.unz.com

Postby Breker » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Thu Sep 13, 2018 12:29 pm)

Ron Unz and his website, http://www.unz.com are at it again.

We see that Mr. Unz has accepted another endorsement of "holocaust" Revisionism.

This by noted critic of Zionism, Israel Shamir. Shamir sings songs of praise for Ron Unz whose brave efforts in confronting the increasingly disbelieved fable of '6,000,000 murdered Jews', as exemplified here: American Pravda: Holocaust Denial, by Ron Unz, http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda ... st-denial/

Ron Unz describes the daft narrative with a question: "Does anybody seriously believe something so totally ridiculous?".
That was taken from a much longer statement by Unz in the mentioned American Pravda: Holocaust Denial, comment #1333. The full quote was posted by Hannover here:
Ron Unz goes full on Revisionist: "Does anybody seriously believe something so totally ridiculous?"
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11985

Now read Israel Shamir's praise of Unz & those who challenge the dogma here:

Image
Kamikaze from California, by Israel Shamir:
http://www.unz.com/ishamir/kamikaze-from-california/

example:
Moreover, our society is a result of Sacred Cows’ wholesale slaughter undertaken by previous generation. The cows of Family, Marriage, Normal life, of Boys and Girls, of Womanhood and Manhood, of Going to Church, of trying to keep fit, so many established truths had been slaughtered in the last fifty years. Upon their bones, new cows had been grown: of gender minorities, of toxic white male patriarchy, of bodyshaming, and indeed the Holocaust is one of the fattest cows.

It is a bout of poetic justice that these cows will be slaughtered too. H priests hoped that their narrative, that of Holocaust, will last forever, smoothly flowing into Noahide utopia. But nothing is forever, not even their dogma.
B.


Revisionists are just the messengers, the impossibility of the "Holocaust" narrative is the message.

User avatar
Sannhet
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 374
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:12 pm
Location: USA

Re: Israel Shamir praises "Holocaust" Revisionism

Postby Sannhet » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:28 pm)

Thank you. It is quite a good polemical essay, confidently but provocatively written, probably all amenable for his fan-base. I note that it is a kind of political summary of the Holocaust -- not as 'event,' but as 'ideology,' as political tool, and even as quasi-religious founding myth.

I read that Mr. Shamir [b. 1947] is of Soviet-Jewish origin and formerly lived in Israel for 15 years (including all of the 1970s), which he knows gives him credibility on this issue. Ron Unz, whose essay he praises, is also Jewish.

__________________________

Note Israel Shamir's birth details: 1947 in Novosibirsk, Siberia.

What were his parents (both of East European Jewish origin) doing in 1941-1945? When did they arrive in Novosibirsk?

According to Jewish Virtual Encyclopedia,
During World War II large numbers of Jewish refugees from the areas occupied by the Germans reached Siberia, and some of them remained there after the war ended. [...] In Novosibirsk, which became the capital of Siberia, the Jewish population (with a synagogue and an old Jewish cemetery) numbered in the late 1960s about 25–30,000, consisting of a small nucleus of Siberian Jews who had been there from czarist times – and their descendants – and mostly of Jews who had been evacuated from the western Soviet Union during World War II. In 2002, 3,330 Jews remained in the Novosibirsk oblast and 14,579 in the entire Siberian district.
To resummarize the above: Most Novosibirsk Jews by the 1950s/1960s were those that had been evacuated from the German-Soviet war-zone in the period 1941-1945.

This leads me to the conclusion that Shamir is likely of Jewish-Holocaust ancestry (given that the Jewish Virtual Encyclopedia says "most" of the Jews there were WWII evacuees), that Shamir's parents both survived the chaos of the German-Soviet war, and end up somewhere deep in the Soviet Union. There is even a possibility that they were interned first by the Germans, deported via one of the east-bound transit camps; Anyway, this is exactly the kind of "second-hand" personal experience that may have led Shamir to doubt the Holocaust, when it first began to be aggressively marketed in its modern form in the 1970s.

Personal doubt is one thing; the courage to actually publicly dispute the Holocaust, and turn into a full-fledged Holocaust Opponent (subject to imprisonment in much of Europe and in Israel) must have come when Shamir had a kind of political conversion, to anti-Zionist, after he emigrated from Israel. It appears that he has mainly lived in Sweden since the early 1980s, which as yet has no Holocaust-belief Enforcement law.

User avatar
Sannhet
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 374
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:12 pm
Location: USA

Israel Shamir on Why the Holocaust Cult became so popular

Postby Sannhet » 2 months 4 weeks ago (Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:31 pm)

The below are, I think, the most important points raised in the Shamir essay:
The most important question Unz’s essay leads us to, is not ‘whether six million Jews were killed by Germans just because they were Jews’ but: Why the Holocaust cult became so popular, with its temples, perversely called “Holocaust museums” or “Places of Tolerance” sprung up everywhere from Nebraska to Fiji? [...]

The first and obvious answer is “It is good for rich and powerful Jews”. [...] The second answer is “It is good for Israel”. [...] The third answer is “Because it is profitable”. [...]

These three answers cover the Jewish position, but they do not fully explain the almost universal acceptance of the H dogma by the ruling classes all over the West.

And here comes the fourth answer: “The H cult is good as a discursive tool of the Deep State against the majority”. [...]The fifth answer is “It is good for the US providing it with a licence to be the World Sheriff”. [...] The sixth answer, “It is good for justifying unlimited migration and open borders”. [...] The seventh answer will lead us into deep waters, and you can skip it if it is too deep for you. “It is good to replace Christ”. The H dogma is a parody of Christian teaching, with Jews being brought as a sacrifice, with Auschwitz replacing Golgotha, and with creation of the State of Israel as a new Resurrection. [...]
All of these are generally agreed-to by most Revisionists. While none of it is new ground, necessarily, it does serve two purposes: (1) It will be new to many readers at the Unz Review, (2) It is a good perspective on the Holocaust from the position of the 1990s-2010s era that I think Shamir is referring to, putting it into world-political context in our time.

________________________________

Here are two papers that deal with the non-Jewish role in Holocaust promotion and 'enforcement,' Shamir's points 4 through 6 or 7:

________________________________

(1) "The Non-Jewish Stake in Holocaust Mythology," originally published by Paul Grubach in Bradley Smith's Smith Report, Jan. 2010.

This from Grubach is something close to Shamir's fifth point ("[Holocaust belief] is good for the US providing it with a licence to be the World Sheriff"):
Non-Jewish American and British power elites also have a vested interest in promoting the Holocaust ideology. As historian Jeffrey Herf recently revealed in his study, The Jewish Enemy, the Holocaust ideology paints the American and British war effort during WWII in a good and ethical light, and thus “justifies” the entire Allied war effort against Germany.
Grubach doesn't quite extend this all the way to relevance to present-day international (and even domestic-political) affairs. U.S.-led military interventions of recent memory are really all justified by reference to the Holocaust.

A cornerstone of the international system today is: The U.S. and its allies can do anything militarily because [1] the Holocaust occurred in the 1940s and is the most significant event in history, and because [2] we (the U.S. and to an extent UK and France) were on the side opposing the Holocausters, therefore [3] we are moral, and finally [4] we have a responsibility to prevent any potential future Holocausts through aggressive action if needed.

Grubach towards the end of his essay also goes in for Shamir's most controversial, seventh point:
For many influential non-Jewish, American and European liberals, belief in the Holocaust has replaced belief in God as the supreme virtue.

________________________________

(2) "Qui Bono? An American Veteran's Views on Non-Jewish Toleration and Propagation of the Extermination Thesis," paper presented at the Nov. 1981 IHR Revisionist Conference at the University of California, by Dr. Charles E. Weber [1922-2002], published in the Journal of Historical Review Vol. 3 (1982), No.2.

There is a lot in this longer essay, some of it dated considering its authorship nearly forty years ago during the Cold War. One of the things that Weber does is place early Holocaust "propagation" in a party-political setting, as I have done recently here at CODOH-Forum for modern day party politics, especially in Germany (see German Bundestag Election 2017 and 'Holocaust Politics', The Holocaust in Swedish Politics: 2018 election, and Potential Support for Abolishing Holocaust Laws in Germany by Party). Here is Weber:
[S]ome time after the hostilities were over no less a figure than Senator Taft of Ohio [leading Republican Senator, 1939-1953] had the wisdom, decency and courage to question the legal basis of the Nuremberg trials.

The Democratic Party, which had its men in the presidential office from 1933 to 1953 and, thus bore the essential responsibility for the conduct of the war and the postwar relationship with the USSR, welcomed any means of rationalization and justification of its conduct during this period. Democrats further welcomed any means to discredit their former adversaries on the intervention question
Now, the Holocaust as we know it today has become hegemonic. All parties and even many third-party dissidents use it, thus justifying nearly all U.S. politics in any form. Even activists on the hard-conservative-right who support wide gun ownership rights and oppose gun restrictions almost invariably use the Hitler argument; "Hitler regulated gun ownership and then the Holocaust occurred" is the argument.

While I don't think it's accurate to say, in the first and (soon coming) second quarters of this century, that the Democratic Party uses the Holocaust as a weapon against the Republican Party, Weber's argument of a partial party-political origin of Holocaust promotion, in the Holocaust's early iterations, is excellent. It is something Shamir does not touch on.

In other words, the Holocaust is partly a historical puzzle (who promoted it, when, why, how?) and not just something that dropped down in full-form and seized hegemonic control of our culture, which is how one might read Shamir without other context. But Shamir's polemical style is effective at getting to the heart of why the Holocaust matters.

One final excerpt from Dr. Charles Weber (1981):
Let us finally consider a group of states which have exploited the "Holocaust" material in a most energetic manner: the USSR and its satrapal governments in eastern Europe. As we shall see, the communist lands have had compelling reasons to continue to propagate the "Holocaust" material.
[...]
Skillful and energetic propaganda efforts on the part of the Soviet rulers have undoubtedly been a big factor in the upward climb of the Soviet Union, which started from a nadir of its fortunes in 1943. The "Holocaust" material has proved to be especially valuable to the Soviet Union for a number of objectives. It has not been without design that memorials relating to the "Holocaust" claims are to be found in many places throughout the Soviet empire and that the sites of former relocation and labor camps in which large numbers of Jews were interned...have been preserved and altered in such a way as to make the "Holocaust" claims seem plausible, at least to the superficial viewer. Even postage stamps issued by the satrapies over a long period keep up the publicity of the "Holocaust" [eight communist-country postage stamps relating to the Holocaust are included as an appendix]

An essential objective of this propaganda effort is the demonstration that in spite of the obvious and continued oppressiveness of the Soviet empire, a German victory would have meant a worse life. The "Holocaust" material thus plays an essential role in the pacification of the many nations and ethnic groups of the Soviet empire [...]
This is very certainly a major reason the Holocaust myth exists in the first place, as its most important political use was by the USSR, not the USA, to justify its sudden major expansion (half of Europe). The Soviet Union is now gone; the post-1991 Russian state, and its successors, has largely inherited this, the "Soviet WWII cult," but it is now watered down there -- and ironically became solidified in the non-communist West!

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3220
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Israel Shamir on Why the Holocaust Cult became so popular

Postby Hektor » 2 months 2 weeks ago (Tue Sep 25, 2018 7:06 am)

Sannhet wrote:.....
(1) "The Non-Jewish Stake in Holocaust Mythology," originally published by Paul Grubach in Bradley Smith's Smith Report, Jan. 2010.

This from Grubach is something close to Shamir's fifth point ("[Holocaust belief] is good for the US providing it with a licence to be the World Sheriff"):
Non-Jewish American and British power elites also have a vested interest in promoting the Holocaust ideology. As historian Jeffrey Herf recently revealed in his study, The Jewish Enemy, the Holocaust ideology paints the American and British war effort during WWII in a good and ethical light, and thus “justifies” the entire Allied war effort against Germany.
Grubach doesn't quite extend this all the way to relevance to present-day international (and even domestic-political) affairs. U.S.-led military interventions of recent memory are really all justified by reference to the Holocaust.

A cornerstone of the international system today is: The U.S. and its allies can do anything militarily because [1] the Holocaust occurred in the 1940s and is the most significant event in history, and because [2] we (the U.S. and to an extent UK and France) were on the side opposing the Holocausters, therefore [3] we are moral, and finally [4] we have a responsibility to prevent any potential future Holocausts through aggressive action if needed.

Grubach towards the end of his essay also goes in for Shamir's most controversial, seventh point:
For many influential non-Jewish, American and European liberals, belief in the Holocaust has replaced belief in God as the supreme virtue.

.....



Indeed, the Holocaust is a justification ideology not only for Jews, but for others as well:
1.) Communist use it as battering ram in their "Antifascism" and it's a convenient distraction from their own atrocities.
2.) Neocons and their predecessors use it to justify interventions against "another Hitler".

What would be of interest is why the Western Elites upheld it during the 50s and 60s or at least didn't oppose it.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests