Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post questions or suggestions here.
Jaybee
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:33 pm

Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Jaybee »

Hi all, first time in this website. I see there's a similar thread running, but this is something I wanted to get off my chest.

This is something sparked by that story about the far-right loony-toon brit who was jailed in Austria for saying the holocaust never happened.

If somebody denies a "holocaust", just how many people is he saying were NOT killed? How many murders through the same process must be attributed to it to qualify as a holocaust?

9-11 was authorised by one man (whoever you think that may be!), and almost 3,000 people died through that authorisation. Why isn't a few thousand people a holocaust, and why is 6 million? Okay, meet ya halfway - is 3 million murdered a "holocaust"? How about the 300,000 that is bandied about in estimate of the western occupation of Iraqi? What is the dividing line?

I say this because I disagree in disgust about the jailing of those people who "deny" the holocaust. Why is it not a jailable offence in the states to say that THOUSANDS of blacks had NOT died en-route to America in the 1700's? You'd be taken as a crank, yes, and rightly so, but not locked up.

Just how many deaths are those "deniers" denying? So, if I go to Austria and claim, "I think the figures were falsified by Nazi concentration camp administrators anxious to get their Annual Bonuses and pensions from the National Socialist Party coffers, and I think they really added another zero because they knew their counterparts in other camps were also massaging the figures", why should I be locked up? Why shouldn't the normal, natural process of disbelief, derision and FORGETTING run it's course without the law getting involved?

Do you all see what I'm getting at? When DISSENT is surpressed, you, my friends, are all on the long, slippery road to dictatorship.

The irony of it, eh?
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Dan Rowden »

I agree it's an outrageous situation. Most so-called holocaust "deniers" don't actually deny a holocaust of sorts took place. They simply deny the standard storyline. The reason they do so is that it's nonsense and hyperbole. Why isn't Dresden a holocaust? Seems like one to me.
keenobserver
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:01 pm

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by keenobserver »

Yes, I could hardly believe it when I heard it, Im still not convinced they locked someone up for merely expressing their unpopular view, and in a supposedly civilized country!

You notice how easily a large group, whether Jew or Black or whatever, can target almost any person and destroy them, nowadays. The Jews were able because of vast power and the sympathy of the world, which they have no intention of losing, oh no! The Blacks, well they are powerful by revolution and fire, first their spokespersons insist and if the world doesnt listen and grant their injustice, we all know destruction may follow.
So thats our world, retarded, a world where anyone can be marked out and out of fear of consequence each government stands by and permits crucifixion, nothing has changed.

Outrage can have its benefits, but never allow it more than superficial reality. Nothing to gain from that.

The H thing, well more and more people are thinking "ok, enough already." But they're a very feminine people as a whole by tradition, so its to be expected.
The solution, simple: Conversion!
RalphPL

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by RalphPL »

So, denial of "facts", leads to a jail term, or is it only when someone denies, The Holocaust?(I wonder if he was Jewish). Maybe some day they'll start rounding up people who deny the existence of God? (Or do they already kill people for this, in some religions...The things people will resort to, when protecting their inner world, beliefs etc).
The word, Holocaust, derives from Greek words, meaning complete destruction, usually by fire. By the end of the 17th century, the word came to mean a great slaughter or massacre. It is now used to describe the genocide against the Jews in Europe by the Nazis.
(Greek, "the destruction of life by fire") — Since the 1950s the term has been applied primarily to the Nazi regime's attempted annihilation of the Jews of Europe. Six million Jews-two out of every three living at the time in Europe-were murdered as part of a systematic genocide. Millions of other people also were killed because of their ethnicity, culture, political ideas, sexual orientation, or physical or mental handicaps.
Literary meaning: a complete destruction by fire. Used to describe to systematic destruction of European Jewry during World War II.
In some cases 9-11, may be referred to as a holocaust of sorts, so can a family killed in a home fire. No matter the r=term, the act is still the same. Disturbing.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Dan Rowden »

Parts of Europe have been on a gargantuan guilt trip since WW2. Guilt can make people behave very strangely.
RalphPL

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by RalphPL »

Is that so...We all have experience with guilt, but how does guilt tie into all this?
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Dan Rowden »

Isn't that sort of obvious? Starting a war that causes the deaths of 19 million civilians from a single country (Russia) and allegedly (or believing you have) engaged in systematic genocide of a cultural group (Jews, Gypsies etc etc) is enough to cause anyone a massive guilt trip. That sort of guilt is easy enough to exploit.
RalphPL

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by RalphPL »

I thought it was Germany which was at fault. Anyways, that was then, this is now, why do people feel guilty? They weren't at fault. Plus, it's hard to believe anyone capable of "that", has much of a conscience, anyways. For instance: Serial killers, are only sorry they got caught, not sorry they destroyed human life.

Another thing, do you feel guilty of they way blacks were discriminated against, killed and so on.

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at, this doesn't really answer my first post. If this wasn't meant as a response for me, I apologize.
User avatar
Bondi
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 8:56 pm
Location: Brum, U.K.
Contact:

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Bondi »

The thing is that the holocaust (understood as "Jewish holocaust") is a special case. It is like a massive, world-wide business, just to pump enormous material, financial "compensations" out of the countries labelled "guilty" etc. Of course, "sed audiatur et altera pars" ("let the other party be heard") is not in their favour.

And no one ever seems to be interested in the real genocides happening nowadays: see the still existing Communist regimes, or the ever-worsening situation of the artificially made-up countries of Black-Africa (they strangely have enough money to buy modern firepower to kill each other, while their people simply starve to death) - and so on. No one seems to even know about these problems. Not to mention the massacre of Palestinians by Israeli forces.
I say this because I disagree in disgust about the jailing of those people who "deny" the holocaust. Why is it not a jailable offence in the States to say that THOUSANDS of blacks had NOT died en-route to America in the 1700's? You'd be taken as a crank, yes, and rightly so, but not locked up.
As there's no over-reacting agenda behind about a "black holocaust" (and they do not press continuously for an illegitimate "compensation"), no one gives a toss.
User avatar
ChochemV2
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:16 am

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by ChochemV2 »

I'll agree holocaust denial is picking up speed when it assumes something resembling a solid coherent idea. I see everything from "The Jewish bankers fabricated it!" to (more recently) "Hitler didn't actually order the Final Solution!"...

As for jailing people who deny the holocaust story as it's told that is ridiculous. The best press against many of these people is letting them speak their own minds...
RalphPL

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by RalphPL »

Does The Holocaust really matter? Who cares, let's forget about it! What do you think of this and why?
User avatar
ChochemV2
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:16 am

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by ChochemV2 »

RalphPL wrote:Does The Holocaust really matter? Who cares, let's forget about it! What do you think of this and why?
What purpose does forgetting about it serve?
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Leyla Shen »

The same purpose forgetting about today's holocausts serve. That's the purpose of "the" Holocaust. No-one could ever possibly be as persecuted as a Jew.

National identity.
Between Suicides
User avatar
ChochemV2
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:16 am

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by ChochemV2 »

Leyla wrote:The same purpose forgetting about today's holocausts serve. That's the purpose of "the" Holocaust. No-one could ever possibly be as persecuted as a Jew.

National identity.
Hunh? I believe this entire post is composed of sentence fragments.
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Leyla Shen »

You slave driver, you!

The purpose of “the” Holocaust is to emphasise the persecution of Jews. Such an emphasis achieves two things: 1) it unifies “them” as a displaced and victimised “people” with no place to go to escape victimisation and persecution except a place of their own, which is achieved in its turn by constantly “remembering.” That’s the sole reason any objection to Israeli policies (which is the same as objecting to Israel herself) necessarily becomes “anti-Semitic” -- or, the irrational ramblings of a “self(!)-hating Jew,” and; 2) it conditions others into believing that anything “less” than “the” extremely propagandised Holocaust pales by comparison, even if such “lesser” things are occurring today, making them ever-so easy to “forget”---like the mass murder of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, and countless other human rights violations against the Palestinians.

Thus, national identity.

“The” Holocaust is the one thing all Jews have in common; the one thing they hold up their proverbial sleeve which necessarily trumps any objection to anything they do as a “people.” You will have no problem understanding this unless, of course, you are a Jew or you take accounts of biblical proportion such as “The Promised Land”--land rights of a “people”--as historic fact. But, then, I’d have to ask you on what grounds the West thinks it has any business in the internal politics and resource management of any "peoples" in the middle-east.

Note: all quotation marks are used both as actual quotes and to indicate the author's reservation. (Just in case you might be wondering.)
Between Suicides
User avatar
Oceaxer
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:16 am
Location: Imperium Britannia
Contact:

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Oceaxer »

Wrote Leyla Shen,
The purpose of “the” Holocaust . . .
The initial Letter in the Word Holocaust is capitali?ed, & preceded by the definite Article, becau?e the said Word maketh reference to a ?pecific historickal Event.
. . . is to emphasise the persecution of Jews.
The Purpo?e of the Holocau?t, that is, the phy?ickal Liquidation of ?everal millions of Jews by the National Sociali?ts during World War the Second, was to remedie the perceiv'd deleterious Effects of Jewish Influence on German Society.
1) it unifies “them” as a displaced and victimised “people” with no place to go to escape victimisation & persecution except a place of their own
That the Holocau?t hath had the peripheral Effect of reënforcing Jewish ethnick Solidaritie hath no bearing what?oever on the Facticity of the Event.
2) it conditions others into believing that anything “less” than “the” extremely propagandised Holocaust pales by comparison, even if such “lesser” things are occurring today, making them ever-so easy to “forget”
The Holocaust is an Event entirely unparallel'd in the Historie of Western Civili?ation.
---like the mass murder of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, and countless other human rights violations against the Palestinians.
There is no ?uch thing as a 'Pale?tinian'. 'Pale?tine' is entirely mythical; & the Region was largely uninhabited when the Jews arriv'd.

Wrote Jaybee,
I say this because I disagree in disgust about the jailing of those people who "deny" the holocaust. Why is it not a jailable offence in the states to say that THOUSANDS of blacks had NOT died en-route to America in the 1700's? You'd be taken as a crank, yes, and rightly so, but not locked up.
Holocau?st Denial is not a criminal Offence in the United States; nor is "saying that THOUSANDS of blacks had NOT died en-route to America in the 1700s" &c.
childrenofmillennium.org/BB/
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Leyla Shen »

Here we go, another nutter.

I'm afraid you'll have to wait. There's only one of me to go round.

I'll be back, darlin'.
Between Suicides
User avatar
DHodges
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2002 8:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

posting from steam-powered computer

Post by DHodges »

Muremaker wrote:That the Holocau?t hath had the peripheral Effect of reënforcing Jewish ethnick Solidaritie hath no bearing what?oever on the Facticity of the Event.
Nice writing style. Have you been reading the Baroque Cycle? Mason & Dixon?
User avatar
Oceaxer
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:16 am
Location: Imperium Britannia
Contact:

Re: posting from steam-powered computer

Post by Oceaxer »

Wrote DHodges,
Have you been reading the Baroque Cycle? Mason & Dixon?
[/quote]No, but thank you very much for that link. It looks interesting. I may order it.
childrenofmillennium.org/BB/
Leyla Shen
Posts: 3851
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Leyla Shen »

Muremaker wrote:The Holocaust is an Event entirely unparallel'd in the Historie of Western Civili?ation.
So? If you don’t have a biased criteria, it's amazing what you can see. That's not in a Jew's interests, though, since they like to think that way precisely because it was used to create and is used to justify the expansion of the state of Israel (for example, in the form of slandering people who oppose it with the “anti-Semitic” slur)--for Jews. It’s a plain and simple fact, really.

In Mao Tse-tung’s China, for instance, an estimated (between lowest and highest possible) total of 45,000,000 Chinese citizens died. And that’s a conservative estimate, since there are accounts which indicate 30-40,000,000 deaths at the hands of the Great Famine ("China's secret famine") alone (‘58-‘61--that’s some 10 million deaths by famine a year over four years).

So, the only thing “unprecedented” about it is certainly not the numbers. It is that it is a Jewish story with gas chambers, rather than a Chinese one by starvation, and also torture and otherwise. Do you mean to tell me the Jewish story is more horrific than the Chinese? That perhaps the qualifying feature is that there was something non-German about the Jews killed, but there was nothing non-Chinese about the Chinese killed---or, what? Are you trying to point out that the Germans were especially barbaric since this occurred in Western Society? What would that say, then, about Israel? It's quite apparent that you are nothing more than the same type of racist as a member of the KKK. Go on, prove me wrong. I dare you.
There is no ?uch thing as a 'Pale?tinian'. 'Pale?tine' is entirely mythical; & the Region was largely uninhabited when the Jews arriv'd.
And that is typical and utterly false Jewish propaganda. The only place Israel existed before 1948 and Palestine did not is in religious texts. And you call Palestine and Palestinians mythical?!

As for the rest of what you had to say: [shrug] prattle.
Between Suicides
User avatar
Oceaxer
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:16 am
Location: Imperium Britannia
Contact:

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Oceaxer »

Wrote Leyla Shen,
So? If you don’t have a biased criteria, it's amazing what you can see. That's not in a Jew's interests, though, since they like to think that way precisely because it was used to create and is used to justify the expansion of the state of Israel (for example, in the form of slandering people who oppose it with the “anti-Semitic” slur)--for Jews. It’s a plain and simple fact, really.
I repeat: That the Holocau?t hath been appeal'd to for this or that politickal End; that it hath had the peripheral Effect of reënforcing Jewish ethnick Solidaritie; this hath no bearing what?oever on the Facticity of the Event.
So, the only thing “unprecedented” about it is certainly not the numbers. It is that it is a Jewish story with gas chambers, rather than a Chinese one by starvation, and also torture and otherwise. Do you mean to tell me the Jewish story is more horrific than the Chinese?
The Mongol Famine was cause'd by agricultural Incompetencie; unlike the Holocau?t, it was not an intentional Act of Genocide directed against a specifick ethnick Group.
What would that say, then, about Israel?
What about Israel?
It's quite apparent that you are nothing more than the same type of racist as a member of the KKK. Go on, prove me wrong. I dare you.
I do believe in the ?cientifick Reality of Race, the Relevance of Race in the Formulation of publick Policie, and the De?irabilitie of race Con?ervation. I am oppo?'d to the prepo?terous ?ociali?tic Doctrine, promulgated by Martin Luther King, of race Equalitariani?m. I am, however, equally oppo?e'd to the Nordick Supremaci?m and Anti?emiti?m of the KKK, David Duke, and other National Sociali?t dullards.
And that is typical and utterly false Jewish propaganda.
Simply calling my Argument propagandistick refuteth it not.
The only place Israel existed before 1948 and Palestine did not is in religious texts.
It was a Land without People and the Jews were a People without Land.
childrenofmillennium.org/BB/
User avatar
Alex Jacob
Posts: 1671
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:10 am
Location: Meta-Rabbit Hole

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Alex Jacob »

Aun que el ingles es el idioma 'oficial' del foro, me gustaria agradecer 'el que hace muros' para su analisis tan claro y directo. Bravo!

"I do believe in the ?cientifick Reality of Race, the Relevance of Race in the Formulation of publick Policie, and the De?irabilitie of race Con?ervation. I am oppo?'d to the prepo?terous ?ociali?tic Doctrine, promulgated by Martin Luther King, of race Equalitariani?m. I am, however, equally oppo?e'd to the Nordick Supremaci?m and Anti?emiti?m of the KKK, David Duke, and other National Sociali?t dullards."

Who do you refer to to support the idea of 'scientific reality of race' (distinct races, race-difference)? I have read some people, referring to genetic science, who propose something similar. Who is forumlating public policy with the relevancy of 'race' as a consideration? Are you opposed to all 'socialistic doctrine' or just the socialistic doctrines of MLK as they pertain to the ideal of race equality? In what ways do the nordic supremicism and antifeminism of the KKK, Duke and other national socialist dullards differ in their articulation of race difference from the sort that informs you? If you are not anti-feminist are you pro-feminist? Do you want me to write all this without using an 's' and what are the words that must be capitalized? You capitalize Nordick Supremicism but not preposterous socialistic Doctrine---why?

;^)
Ni ange, ni bête
User avatar
Carl G
Posts: 2659
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Carl G »

"I do believe in the fcientifick Reality of Race, the Relevance of Race in the Sormulation of publicke Policie, and the Defirabilitie of race Confervation. I am oppof'd to the prepofterous focialiftic Doctrine, promulgated by Martin Luther King, of race Equalitarianifm. I am, however, equallie oppofe'd to the Nordicke Fupremacifm and Antisemitifm of the KKK, David Duke, and other Nationale Socialift dullardf."
How jdo yu seel about the preponderanfe of evidenfe that fhowf that there if no fcientifick baifif for defignation of Earth Racef. JDo yu Arcturianf sind it goofie?
Good Citizen Carl
User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Tomas »

.

-Choke Em All-
ChochemV2 -- I'll agree holocaust denial is picking up speed when it assumes something resembling a solid coherent idea.

-tomas-
The whole idea is to interview the "internees" before they all die off... Interesting area of thought is that the internees were denied access to 1948 Israel... shipped off elsewhere. The peoples that were allowed to emigrate/immigrate to Israel were the younger set.



-Choke Em All-
I see everything from "The Jewish bankers fabricated it!" to (more recently) "Hitler didn't actually order the Final Solution!"...

-tomas-
Well the Jewish religion is very ancient, indeed.

Hitler was another puppet in a long line of surrogate running dogs and lapdogs of the wealth/influence class.

The 'final solution' is continuing as planned.




-Choke Em All-
As for jailing people who deny the holocaust story as it's told that is ridiculous.

-tomas-
Agreed...




-Choke Em All-
The best press against many of these people is letting them speak their own minds...

-tomas-
Better to present the voice in the wilderness as 'lone nuts' than to fully examine (no holds barred study) on the religious/financial/political maneuverings of the "elite", who, of course, know all but are also... dying off.

History (his story) is written by the victors.

Same as it ever was.


Tomas (the tank)
VietNam veteran - 1971



.
Last edited by Tomas on Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Oceaxer
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:16 am
Location: Imperium Britannia
Contact:

Re: Holocaust denial and dissent - the difference.

Post by Oceaxer »

Wrote Alex Jacob,
Who do you refer to to support the idea of 'scientific reality of race' (distinct races, race-difference)?
Neil Risch, University of Stanford; Richard D. Arvey, University of Minnesota; Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr., University of Minnesota; John B. Carroll, Un. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Raymond B. Cattell, University of Hawaii; David B. Cohen, University of Texas at Austin; Rene V. Dawis, University of Minnesota; Douglas K. Detterman, Case Western Reserve Un.; Marvin Dunnette, University of Minnesota; Hans Eysenck, University of London; Jack Feldman, Georgia Institute of Technology; Edwin A. Fleishman, George Mason University; Grover C. Gilmore, Case Western Reserve University; Robert A. Gordon, Johns Hopkins University; Linda S. Gottfredson, University of Delaware; Robert L. Greene, Case Western Reserve University; Richard J.Haier, University of Callifornia at Irvine; Garrett Hardin, University of California at Berkeley; Robert Hogan, University of Tulsa; Joseph M. Horn, University of Texas at Austin; Lloyd G. Humphreys, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; John E. Hunter, Michigan State University; Seymour W. Itzkoff, Smith College; Douglas N. Jackson, Un. of Western Ontario; James J. Jenkins, University of South Florida; Arthur R. Jensen, University of California at Berkeley; Alan S. Kaufman, University of Alabama; Nadeen L. Kaufman, California School of Professional Psychology at San Diegol; Timothy Z. Keith, Alfred University; Nadine Lambert, University of California at Berkeley; John C. Loehlin, University of Texas at Austin; David Lubinski, Iowa State University; David T. Lykken, University of Minnesota; Richard Lynn, University of Ulster at Coleraine; Paul E. Meehl, University of Minnesota; R. Travis Osborne, University of Georgia; Robert Perloff, University of Pittsburgh; Robert Plomin, Institute of Psychiatry, London; Cecil R. Reynolds, Texas A & M University; David C. Rowe, University of Arizona; J. Philippe Rushton, Un. of Western Ontario; Vincent Sarich, University of California at Berkeley; Sandra Scarr, University of Virginia; Frank L. Schmidt, University of Iowa; Lyle F. Schoenfeldt, Texas A & M University; James C. Sharf, George Washington University; Herman Spitz, former director E.R. Johnstone Training and Research Center, Bordentown, N.J.; Julian C. Stanley, Johns Hopkins University; Del Thiessen, University of Texas at Austin; Lee A. Thompson, Case Western Reserve University; Robert M. Thorndike, Western Washington Un.; Philip Anthony Vernon, Un. of Western Ontario; and Lee Willerman, University of Texas at Austin.
I have read some people, referring to genetic science, ...
Aye,?Consider, for instance, NEIL RISCH, leading American Population Geneticist and Professor at the University of California, whose recent Work irrefutably confirms the objective Reality of Race:?

"What makes the current study, published in the February issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics, more conclusive is its size. The study is by far the largest, consisting of 3,636 people who all identified themselves as either white, African-American, East Asian or Hispanic. Of these, only five individuals had DNA that matched an ethnic group different than the box they checked at the beginning of the study. That's an error rate of 0.14 percent.
"According to Neil Risch, PhD, a UCSF professor who led the study while he was professor of genetics at Stanford, the findings are particularly surprising given that people in both African-American and Hispanic ethnic groups often have a mixed background. "We might expect these individuals to cross several different genetic clusters," Risch said. This is especially true for Hispanics who are often a mix of Native American, white and African-American ancestry. But that's not what the study found. Instead, each self-identified racial/ethnic group clumped into the same genetic cluster." (http://mednews.stanford.edu/releases/20 ... l-data.htm)
Who is forumlating public policy with the relevancy of 'race' as a consideration?
Who formulated the United States Immigration Act of 1924, or the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882? Who formulated Australia's White Australia policy, or Canada's Chinese Immigration Act of 1923? All I want is an Immigration Policy that reflects the ethnick Interests of the Majority, who, by the bye, are overwhelmingly in favour of greater Restrictions than at present exist. I desire Restrictions no severer than those that have been placed in, say, Japan.
Are you opposed to all 'socialistic doctrine' . . .
It depends, Sir, on how you define Socialism. If by Socialism is meant publick Ownership of the Means of economick Production, then I am strongly in favour of moderate Socialism; howbeit by such Definition, "right-wing Reactionaries" such as PLATO, OTTO VON BISMARCK, and MUSSOLINI were as much Socialists as MARX, ENGELS, & LENIN. Now if by Socialism is meant, what I think conforms to the historickal Signification of the term, the Doctrine of social Equality; publick Ownership being only a Means to such Equalitu; I repugn all Variety of Socialism, as contrary to human Nature.
In what ways do the nordic supremicism and antifeminism . . .
Antisemitism, not antifeminism.
. . . of the KKK, Duke and other national socialist dullards differ in their articulation of race difference from the sort that informs you?
Sir, mine is a purely empirical, non-valuative Conception of Race. I judge not by the colour of one's skin, but by the content of one's character; which not being directly observable, can only be infer'd by one's outward Behaviour; and discovering average Differences in Behaviour betwixt the various Races of Men, I act with greater precaution in respect of some Races than of others, and expect more creative Productivity of some than of others, in proportion as the said Races have been dispose'd to emit criminal or creative Behaviour, & in proportion as such behaviour is engendered by the Influences of Heredity. I have a higher regard for a Negro of Wit & Learning than a white Dullard; tho' I hold that a randomly selected Negro hath a different Probability of being man of Wit & Learning than a randomly selected Mongol, or White Man, or East Indian, owing to innate Differences in cognitive Capacity betwixt the said Peoples. And, what farther distinguishes me from the National Socialists, I include within my own race Category, the Jews, and other Indo-Mediterraneans ethnick Groups; excepting, however, certain Strains of the Mohammedan Arab Population, in whom Negroid Hybridisation hath been prevalent,?signify'd by a darker Tint of the Skin, & confirm'd by physical Anthropology as well as recent genetick Analyses.
If you are not anti-feminist are you pro-feminist?
No, Sir. I am against Feminism. I was referring to Antisemitism, not Antifeminism. I am opposed to any form of Equality betwixt the Sexes, except upon the Basis of Merit; altho' I hold that the average Woman is less intelligent than the average Man; whether due to Nature or Nurture, I know not, tho' I strongly suspect the latter, in view of certain scientifick Findings, that have likely been discuss'd elsewhere on this Forum.
Do you want me to write all this without using an 's' . . .
The medial s (?) is use'd in the middle of words; the terminal s (s) is used at the end of words. Instead of using the gamma-shaped capitalised long s (?) at the beginning of words, I use the capitalised terminal s (S).
. . . and what are the words that must be capitalized?
Anything that is normally capitalised in contemporary English is capitalised, but also substantives (call'd Nouns) must be capitalised, as in German.
You capitalize Nordick Supremicism but not preposterous socialistic Doctrine---why?
I do not capitalise preposterous and socialistic because neither of them is a Substantive; I capitalise Nordick because it refers to a specifick People (viz., the Scandinavians), in Conformity with contemporary Usage.

Wrote Carl G,
How jdo yu seel about the preponderanfe of evidenfe that fhowf that there if no fcientifick baifif for defignation of Earth Racef. JDo yu Arcturianf sind it goofie?
Sir, you are misusing the Letter f, apparently mistaking it for the medial s. As regards your question,?see above.
childrenofmillennium.org/BB/
Locked