Lessons of the Holocaust: Diversity + Proximity = War?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Lessons of the Holocaust: Diversity + Proximity = War?

Postby Lamprecht » 2 years 7 months ago (Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:28 pm)

I suspect everyone is aware of the recent attack in New Zealand. The motivation for this attack (as referenced in the manifesto: https://archive.is/Ms5ed) was opposition to diversity/multiculturalism, much like the attack in Norway by Brevik. Obviously, what this guy did was abhorrent, but it was certainly predictable -- not this individual atrocity, but that something of this sort would happen eventually.

The "Holocaust" story, in public schools, is used as a lesson to teach people that racism is bad, that we must learn to love ethnic diversity. But actually, the whole WWII event should really be seen as one of the largest failures of diversity (multiple ethnic groups sharing the same living spaces and government) in human history.

From the USHMM: https://www.ushmm.org/educators/teachin ... -holocaust
Why Teach about the Holocaust?
By studying these topics, students come to realize that:

- Democratic institutions and values are not automatically sustained, but need to be appreciated, nurtured, and protected.
- Silence and indifference to the suffering of others, or to the infringement of civil rights in any society, can—however unintentionally—perpetuate these problems.
- The Holocaust was not an accident in history; it occurred because individuals, organizations, and governments made choices that not only legalized discrimination but also allowed prejudice, hatred, and ultimately mass murder to occur.
- The Holocaust was a watershed event, not only in the 20th century but also in the entire course of human history.

Studying the Holocaust also helps students to:

- Understand the roots and ramifications of prejudice, racism, and stereotyping in any society.
- Develop an awareness of the value of pluralism and an acceptance of diversity.

- Explore the dangers of remaining silent, apathetic, and indifferent to the oppression of others.
- Think about the use and abuse of power as well as the roles and responsibilities of individuals, organizations, and nations when confronted with civil rights violations and/or policies of genocide.
- Understand how a modern nation can utilize its technological expertise and bureaucratic infrastructure to implement destructive policies ranging from social engineering to genocide.

We are generally told that Jews need Israel, an ethnically homogeneous living space, because they were victims of a Holocaust. But instead of focusing on always protecting the victims, why not focus also on preventing the alleged "perpetrators" from being provoked?

Some Jews have understood this, to an extent, and compared European antisemitism to anti-colonial movements in the third world.

Jewish historian William D. Rubinstein, Jewish Journal of Sociology, Vol. 42, nos. 1 and 2, 2000, p. 18-19:
"Over representation in the economic elite of a visible ethnic minority of the degree found in Poland and Hungary was certain to cause trouble regardless of the identity of the group: if Belgians, Bulgarians, or Bolivians had constituted 62 per cent of the highest income-earners of Hungary, rather than Jews, that would certainly engendered resentment against them ... To us [Jews], European antisemitism appears to be a weapon of the strong against the weak, a kind of ideological sadism. To European right-wing nationalists of the post-1870 period, however, antisemitism appeared to be a weapon of the weak against the strong, an attempt (as they saw it) by a downtrodden nation to regain control over its resources from a separate, distinctive minority which appeared to dominate the economy -- an aim not unlike that of anti-colonial movements in the Third World vis-a-vis the Europeans and foreign entrepreneurial minorities (like the Chinese throughout South-East Asia). The Zionist movement understood this perfectly well, however disturbing such a perspective may seem to us viewed with post-Holocaust eyes.

Moreover, research is most likely to demonstrate a very considerable actual Jewish over-representation in many other social and political areas which figured largely in the litany of continental antisemitism of the post-1870 period, especially Jewish participation in the radical left, the liberal professions, in journalism, and in the media."

https://archive.jpr.org.uk/object-jjs26 or http://web.archive.org/web/201905122057 ... ad?id=2276

Mirror: http://archive.vn/S3FKj

What do you think? I will post some more research in the next post.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
— Herbert Spencer

User avatar
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Lessons of the Holocaust: Diversity + Proximity = War?

Postby Lamprecht » 2 years 7 months ago (Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:29 pm)

Some studies / info on diversity and ethnic conflict:

(From "Ethnic Conflicts Explained by Ethnic Nepotism" by Tatu Vanhanen)
See also page 80 of Vanhanen's 2012 book: http://web.archive.org/web/202004182339 ... nhanen.pdf


Continuing ethnic tensions in the early years of the twenty-first century seem to confirm Mahabun ul Haq’s prediction—that wars between “people” (ethnic, religious, racial or cultural groups) will continue to far out-number wars between nation-states.

Classic accounts of modernization, particularly those influenced by Marx, predicted that the old basis for divisions, such as tribe and religion, would be swept aside. As hundreds of millions of people poured from rural to urban areas worldwide, during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, it was expected that new alliances would be formed, based on social class in particular.

Scholars point out that fear of and hostility toward other ethnic groups are far older and often more entrenched than modern principles of tolerance or equality under the law.
“No matter how we may wish for it otherwise, we did not leave violence against outsiders behind us as our nations became modern and democratic.”

Indeed, over the past 50 years, the most frequent settings for violent conflict have not been wars between sovereign states, but rather internal strife tied to cultural, tribal, religious, or other ethnic animosities. Between 1989 and 2004, there were 118 military conflicts in the world. Of those, only seven were between nation-states and the remaining 111 occurred within a single state, a large portion of which involved ethnic conflict.[1]

According to another recent estimate, “nearly two-thirds of all [the world’s] armed conflicts [at that time] included an ethnic component. [In fact], ethnic conflicts [were] four times more likely than interstate wars.”[2] Another study claimed that 80 percent of “major conflicts” in the 1990s had an ethnic element.[3]

Any listing of the world’s most brutal wars in the past few decades would include ethnically based internal warfare or massacres in Rwanda, the Congo, Ethiopia, Sudan, Lebanon, and Indonesia (East Timor). In 1998, one authoritative study estimated that some 15 million people had died worldwide as a result of ethnic violence since 1945 (including war-related starvation and disease).

In the decade since, at least 5 million additional deaths resulted from ethnic conflict in the Congo alone, with hundreds of thousands more in Sudan, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. Since the end of the Cold War, the world’s attention has focused increasingly on ethnic clashes. Some experts predict that poor, densely populated countries will experience increased ethnic conflict over scarce resources (such as farmland) in the coming decades. Warfare between Serbs, Croats, Bosnian Muslims, and Kosovars in the former Yugoslavia, along with separatist movements by French-speaking Québécois, racially based riots in Los Angeles, Basque terrorism in Spain, and Protestant–Catholic clashes in Northern Ireland all demonstrate that interethnic friction and violence can erupt in both Western democracies and former European communist countries.

The intensification of ethnic, racial, and cultural hostilities during the twentieth century undercut several assumptions of modernization theory; it also contradicted an influential social psychology theory known as the “contact hypothesis.” That hypothesis predicted that as people of different races, religions, and ethnicities came into greater contact with each other, they better understand the other groups’ common human qualities, causing prejudice to decline.11 Although the contact hypothesis frequently predicts individual level attitudes and behavior (i.e., as individuals of different races or religions come to know each other better, their prejudices often diminish), increased interaction between different ethnic groups, occasioned by factors such as urban migration, frequently intensifies hostilities.
[1] Jennifer De Maio, "Confronting Ethnic Conflict", 2009, p. 23

[2] Monica Duffy Toft, "The Geography of Ethnic Violence: Identity, Interest, and the Indivisibility of Territory", 2003, p. 3

[3] David Bloomfield and Ben Reilly, "The Changing Nature of Conflict Management" in Peter Harris and Ben Reilly, "Democracy and Deep-rooted Conflict: Options for Negotiations", 1998, p. 4
From: https://archive.is/5r4xU or http://web.archive.org/web/202006210846 ... 791239.pdf

Additional studies on ethnic diversity and ethnic conflict:

– Social trust is negatively affected by ethnic diversity, case study in Denmark from 1979 to the present. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2012.00289.x

– Ethnic homogeneity and Protestant traditions positively impact individual and societal levels of social trust. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jci022

– “In longitudinal perspective, [across European regions], an increase in immigration is related to a decrease in social trust.” https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sou088

– Immigration undermines the moral imperative of those who most favor welfare benefits for the neediest. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0020715212451987

– The negative effect of community diversity on social cohesion is likely causal. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcv081

– In Switzerland, social peace between diverse factions isn’t maintained by integrated coexistence, but rather by strong topographic and political borders that separate groups and allow them autonomy. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0095660

– “Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by both physical and political boundaries.” https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1705-1_12

– Diversity hinders between-group cooperation at both the one-on-one and group levels. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0190272515612403

– The best chance for peace in Syria is better borders (intrastate or through the creation of new states) “suited to current geocultural regions”, and tribal autonomy. http://web.archive.org/web/201504231725 ... /syria.pdf

– Using data from US states, study finds a negative relationship between ethnic polarization and trust. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7287.2010.00215.x

– Diversity is associated with more White support for nationalist parties, except at the local level where large immigrant populations cut into vote totals for nationalist parties. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sot046

– In Australia, ethnic diversity lowers social cohesion and increases “hunkering”, providing support for Putnam’s thesis finding the same results in the US. https://doi.org/10.1111/juaf.12015

– After controlling for a self-selection bias, study finds that ethnic diversity in English schools reduces trust in same-age people and does not make White British students more inclusive in their attitudes towards immigrants. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.07.006

– In Germany, residential diversity reduces natives’ trust in neighbors, while it also reduces immigrants’ trust but through a different pathway. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.03.014

– Increasing social pluralism (diversity) is correlated with increased chance of collective violence. http://www.jstor.org/stable/425106

– “[E]thnic heterogeneity [diversity] explains 55% of the variation in the scale of ethnic conflicts, and the results of regression analysis disclose that the same relationship more or less applies to all 187 countries. … [E]thnic nepotism is the common cross-cultural background factor which supports the persistence of ethnic conflicts in the world as long as there are ethnically divided societies.” http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojps.2014.43016

– Genetic Similarity Theory (GST) could help explain why diverse groups in close proximity increases ethnic conflict and ethnic nepotism. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.014

– Genetic diversity has contributed significantly to frequency of ethnic civil conflict, intensity of social unrest, growth of unshared policy preferences, and economic inequality over the last half-century. https://doi.org/10.3386/w21079

– Using social science data and computer modeling, researchers found that policies that attempt to create neighborhoods that are both integrated and socially cohesive are “a lost cause”. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-013-9608-0 (http://archive.is/0Gc6s | http://web.archive.org/web/201311200345 ... -possible/)

– The numbers and the genetic distance matter. Minority groups that get above a certain critical mass, and that are culturally distant from the majority culture, begin to self-segregate from the majority, moving society toward division and away from cooperation. http://archive.is/G2JQg | http://web.archive.org/web/201608281703 ... 201530.pdf

– Using data from Copenhagen school registers, researchers found that native Danes opt out of public schools when the immigrant population concentration hits 35% or more. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp024 | http://web.archive.org/web/201404062320 ... chools.pdf

– In the most liberal region in the US, San Francisco and surrounding suburbs, White parents are pulling their kids out of public schools that are becoming increasingly Asian. http://archive.is/ivrc1

– School integration (forced proximate Diversity) will not close race achievement gaps. http://archive.is/dnbxD

– Exclusionary dating is a natural consequence of racial diversity. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/89.3.807

– As diversity increases, politics becomes more tribalistic. http://archive.is/Z8YEG

– Company diversity policies don’t help minorities or women, and they psychologically discriminate against White men. http://archive.is/5E63T

– Greater classroom and neighborhood diversity is linked to stronger tendencies to choose same-ethnic rather than cross-ethnic friends. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12248

– A longitudinal test of the impact of diversity finds that it makes existing residents feel unhappier and more socially isolated. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcv081 (http://archive.is/Fw6uu)

– Internal dissension stoked by ethnic, social, political, and religious diversity, rather than environmental degradation, caused the collapse of the urbanized Cahokia Indian Tribe. http://archive.is/cE04o

– The volunteer participation rate in America hit a record low last year, declining 0.4% from the previous year, and has been declining since 2005. Not coincidentally, the racial composition of America has become more fragmented during the same time. http://archive.is/cmhZ2

– A sense of social cohesion with the people who live around us is as happiness-inducing as love for the place itself. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20165 (http://archive.is/aP8dK)

– Our desire for ‘like-minded others’ is hard-wired. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000088 (http://archive.is/AIn9E)

– “The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation” - "Recent agent-based computer simulations suggest that ethnocentrism, often thought to rely on complex social cognition and learning, may have arisen through biological evolution. From a random start, ethnocentric strategies dominate other possible strategies (selfish, traitorous, and humanitarian) based on cooperation or non-cooperation with in-group and out-group agents. Here we show that ethnocentrism eventually overcomes its closest competitor, humanitarianism, by exploiting humanitarian cooperation across group boundaries as world population saturates." http://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.2176

– A wealthy Virginia county that is rapidly racially diversifying is getting poorer and less socially cohesive. http://archive.is/Jo1sU

– Gender diversity does not promote nonconformity in decision-making bodies. (But individual ability diversity does) https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2382

– High ethnic diversity has a negative effect on innovation, but high “values diversity” has the opposite effect, as long as ethnic diversity is low. The best innovation happens in countries that are ethnically homogeneous but diverse in values orientation. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2015.1130785

– Growing racial diversity in Houston is contributing to declining construction standards and aggravating the impact of natural disasters. http://archive.is/zORTF

– As an explanation of recent voting behavior, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2004.05.008 “…the political salience of white ethnicity persists, suggesting that ethnic groups do not simply dealign or politically “assimilate” over time

– Globalization and the internet are increasing the proximity of human diversity and consequently increasing mutual animosity as well. “The scholars traced the phenomenon to what they called ‘environmental spoiling.’ The nearer we get to others, the harder it becomes to avoid evidence of their irritating habits. Proximity makes differences stand out.” http://archive.is/2UNXB

– A study of social spiders finds that in-group spider homogeneity fosters individual spider distinctiveness. In contrast, spiders in unstable heterogeneous settings produce within-species uniformity of behavior. http://archive.is/2B4Tf

– Data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health showed that multiethnic diversity decreases happiness among all groups, and most markedly for the downscale and economically dispossessed. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2015.06.004

– A 2017 paper concludes that in societies where individuals differ from each other in both ethnicity and culture, social antagonism is greater, and political economy outcomes are worse. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20150243 | http://web.archive.org/web/201708090811 ... ersity.pdf

– Analysis of publicly available data and social science research finds that smaller, homogeneous cities have more social capital than larger, diverse cities. http://archive.is/kXy0r

– Homogeneous states have higher quality of life scores measuring feelings of social belonging than do racially diverse states. https://www.kcra.com/article/study-cali ... 1/18858827
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
— Herbert Spencer

Rogal Dorn
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: Lessons of the Holocaust: Diversity + Proximity = War?

Postby Rogal Dorn » 2 years 7 months ago (Sun Mar 17, 2019 7:02 am)

Most of Africa is not diverse at all...so the idea that a homogeneous society is automatically better off than diverse societies seems a bit iffy.

User avatar
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10386
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Lessons of the Holocaust: Diversity + Proximity = War?

Postby Hannover » 2 years 7 months ago (Sun Mar 17, 2019 9:47 am)

The Zionist USHMM said:

Develop an awareness of the value of pluralism and an acceptance of diversity.

The fact is that their beloved 'Israel' has strict immigration laws which mandate JEWS ONLY.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Lessons of the Holocaust: Diversity + Proximity = War?

Postby Lamprecht » 2 years 7 months ago (Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:37 pm)

Rogal Dorn wrote:Most of Africa is not diverse at all...so the idea that a homogeneous society is automatically better off than diverse societies seems a bit iffy.

Actually it is, Africa is home to many ethnic groups. Indeed, they would all be considered "Black" in the USA, but even less than in Europe do their political borders coincide with different ethnicities, quite often being a relic of European imperialism.
Really, only in South Africa and Zimbabwe is there a much of an all-encompassing "Black" group, due to their history as White colonies.

- Nigeria, the largest country [by population] in Africa, has the Hausa [most numerous ethnic group] making only 25% of the population. https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/lar ... geria.html

- In Ethiopia, 2nd most populous, the largest ethnic group is Oromo at only 34.5%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_Ethiopia

- After Egypt (which is not "Black"), the DR Congo is the 4th most populous, with "Mongo, Luba and Kongo peoples (Bantu) and Mangbetu-Azande peoples constitut[ing] around 45%" of the population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrati ... nic_groups

- After DR Congo is South Africa, which you probably know about, with white people's land soon to be taken without compensation. Then is Tanzania, which is actually seen as abnormally peaceful despite its high levels of ethnic diversity. It is in fact studied for this purpose; after independence in 1961, a series of ethnically repressive laws pushed by a one-party autocracy managed to keep this place relatively peaceful. There is a 2013 study about this called "The Policy Roots of Ethnic Peace in Tanzania" :)

And it continues this way, if you go down the list and look at each African country.. Please refer to the following graph:

mirror: https://i.imgur.com/4z1DloJ.png

Which measures Fractionalization, or "computing the probability that two randomly drawn individuals (from a country) are not from the same group" in this case, ethnic or cultural groups. Sub_Saharan Africa is clearly the most diverse, from this measurement. Although they would mostly all be considered "Black" in the USA, or some other white-majority country.

Even in Switzerland, where its "diversity" is just two different European ethnic groups, they have had problems with political borders in the past:
Good Fences: The Importance of Setting Boundaries for Peaceful Coexistence

Here we analyze how peaceful stability is maintained. Our analysis shows that peace does not depend on integrated coexistence, but rather on well defined topographical and political boundaries separating groups. Mountains and lakes are an important part of the boundaries between sharply defined linguistic areas. Political canton and circle (sub-canton) boundaries often separate religious groups. Where such boundaries do not appear to be sufficient, we find that specific aspects of the population distribution either guarantee sufficient separation or sufficient mixing to inhibit intergroup violence according to the quantitative theory of conflict.

In exactly one region, a porous mountain range does not adequately separate linguistic groups and violent conflict has led to the recent creation of the canton of Jura. Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by physical and political boundaries. A similar analysis of the area of the former Yugoslavia shows that during widespread ethnic violence existing political boundaries did not coincide with the boundaries of distinct groups, but peace prevailed in specific areas where they did coincide. The success of peace in Switzerland may serve as a model to resolve conflict in other ethnically diverse countries and regions of the world.

And I wouldn't say my conclusion was "homogeneous society is automatically better off" but rather, they do not have the potential for issues of ethnic conflict. I can point to North Korea, a very ethnically homogenous country, not being "better off" (for any number of reasons), but it's quite clear that ethnic diversity within the same political borders is not the "strength" it is made out to be. This is quite evident by Israel's total insistence on Jews-only immigration policies, as pointed out by Hannover.

"Diversity for thee, but not for me" :roll:
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
— Herbert Spencer

User avatar
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1535
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 5:38 pm

Re: Lessons of the Holocaust: Diversity + Proximity = War?

Postby Dresden » 2 years 7 months ago (Sun Mar 17, 2019 6:42 pm)

Rogal Dorn wrote:Most of Africa is not diverse at all...so the idea that a homogeneous society is automatically better off than diverse societies seems a bit iffy.

The fact that homogeneous White societies are better off than "diverse" societies is not in the least bit "iffy" ..... it should be obvious to a deaf, dumb and blind person.
Maybe, just maybe, they believe what they are telling you about the 'holocaust', but maybe, just maybe, their contempt for your intelligence and your character is beyond anything you could ever have imagined. -- Bradley Smith

User avatar
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Lessons of the Holocaust: Diversity + Proximity = War?

Postby Lamprecht » 2 years 1 week ago (Wed Oct 16, 2019 9:46 pm)

A new study on ethnic diversity has come out just as "Holocaust education" is becoming mandatory everywhere. Every western child is taught that "diversity is a strength" all throughout school, because, for some reason, it does not appear to be self-evident. The USHMM has stated that the 'Holocaust' must be taught to "Develop an awareness of the value of pluralism and an acceptance of diversity" even though the story of the 'Holocaust' proves that so-called 'diversity' can have disastrous consequences.
This new study, just like nearly all previous studies on the subject, has reported that ethnic diversity is actually not a strength at all!

New Peer-Reviewed Danish Academic Study Finds Diversity Is Not A Strength
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ ... t-strength or https://archive.is/giGx4
The study, entitled ‘Ethnic Diversity and Social Trust: A Narrative and Meta-Analytical Review’, was conducted by Peter Thisted Dinesen and Merlin Schaeffer from the University of Copenhagen and Kim Mannemar Sønderskov from Aarhus University.

Seeking to answer whether “continued immigration and corresponding growing ethnic diversity” was having a positive impact on community cohesion, the study found the opposite to be the case.

Studying existing literature and also carrying out a meta-analysis of 1,001 estimates from 87 studies, the researchers concluded, “We find a statistically significant negative relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust across all studies.”

Eric Kaufmann, Professor of Politics at the Birkbeck University of London, also tweeted about the study, commenting, “Higher diversity *is* significantly associated with lower trust in communities, even when controlling for deprivation.”

A PDF of the study can be found here: http://web.archive.org/web/201910170217 ... Review.pdf

No wonder the Zionists & Jewish supremacists are pushing so hard for these "Holocaust" classes. It's just a propaganda tool, they show kids a bunch of photos of emaciated, head-shaven prisoners and piles of corpses and say "This is what will happen to you if you listen to anyone that says diversity isn't the best thing ever!"

What is quite obvious for anyone that can see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears is that this artificial obsession with "Diversity" being imposed on Western societies is not merely a weakness, but rather a poisonous ideology that can accurately be described as "deadly." Diversity destroys the sense of community and in a democracy turns politics into a battle of immigration and reproductive rates between competing groups.

For thousands of years, Jews have had a special mode of existence living as a minorities everywhere instead of having their own separate living spaces with political borders. In his Culture of Critique series, Kevin Macdonald describes Judaism is a "Group evolutionary strategy" which the Jews have adapted over many generations to help them compete effectively as a minority group inside of a society with a dominant ethnicity.

This quote, from American Jewish Journalist Charles E. Silberman's 1985 book "A Certain People", also explains this concept well:
"American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief - one firmly rooted in history - that Jews are safe only in a society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming majority of American Jews to endorse 'gay rights' and to take a liberal stance on most other so-called 'social issues.'"

Recommended thread:

Complete list of Jewish Expulsions / Jews expelled from over 1,000 places in history
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
— Herbert Spencer

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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests