The official blog of the site “Der Stürmer” – http://der-stuermer.org
Tuesday, November 30, 2021
Saturday, November 27, 2021
Jewish Influence – Part I
„The Jewish Idea has a tremendous infiltrating force and a serious degenerative power. It is a powerfully disintegrating influence. It eats the substance out of the civilization which it attacks, destroys its moral virility, throws don its reverence, saps its respect for authority, casts a shadow on every basic principle. This is the way the Jewish idea works in American civilization...They have built their international power upon the exact opposite of the Mosaic law.“ (The International Jew, Dearborn Publication (1922), Vol. IV, p. 227).
„If anything, the law should encourage, not forbid, the intermingling of bloods...But legislation cannot change the human heart. The only way we can accomplish that, the only we can achieve a Final Solution to racial prejudice, is to create a melange of races so universal that no one can preen himself on his racial ‘purity’ or practice the barbarism to safeguard it. The deliberate encouragement of interracial marriages is the only way to hasten this process. And it may be that time is growing short. The dominance of our world has begun to shift, like cargo in a listing vessel, from the White races to the colored. The sooner we adjust to this fact, the better it will be for our children. For we might well acknowledge, even the most enlightened of us, that we will never completely eliminate racial prejudice until we eliminate separate races.“ (Rabbi Abraham L. Feinberg, Maclean’s Magazine, September 5, 1967).
„Whoever is in power in Downing Street, whether Conservative, Radicals, Coalitionist, or Pseudo- Bolshevik, the international Jews rule the roost. Here is the mystery of the ‘Hidden Hand’ of which there has been no intelligent explanation.“ (Leo Maxse, writing in the August issue of the „National Review“ 1919)
„The public negotiations and secret intrigues of the English (Jews) and the French (Jews) have been employed for centuries in every court and country in Europe. Look back to the history of Spain, Holland, Germany, Russia, Sweden, Denmark, Prussia, Italy and Turkey for the last hundred years...all the power of Europe will be continually maneuvering with us to work us into the real or imaginary balance of power.“ (John Adams)
„[Jews were] fomenting a general plague on the whole world.“ (Claudis, Roman Emperor, Epistolas).
„[Jews] ate the English nation to its bones.“ (John Speed, British Historian, in Historie of Great Britaine).
„Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed, and Jews admitted. Assassination too dangerous. Charles should be given an opportunity to escape. His recapture will then make a trial and execution possible. The support will be liberal, but useless to discuss terms until trial commences.“ (Letter from Ebenezer Pratt to Oliver Cromwell)
„Marriages began to take place, wholesale, between what had once been the aristocratic territorial families of this country and the Jewish commercial fortunes. After two generations of this, with the opening of the twentieth century those of the great territorial English families in which there was no Jewish blood were the exception. In nearly all of them was the strain more or less marked, in some of them so strong that though the name was still an English name and the traditions those of purely English lineage of the long past, the physique and character had become wholly Jewish and the members of the family were taken for Jews whenever they travelled in countries where the gentry had not suffered or enjoyed this admixture.“ (The Jews, by Hilaire Belloc)
„The pressure for war is mounting. The people are opposed to it, but the Administration seems hell-bent on its way to war. Most of the Jewish interests in the country are behind war.“ (Wartime Journals, May 1, 1941).
„The greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government.“ (Charles A. Lindberg, Speech at Des Moines, Iowa, September 11, 1941).
„I probably had more power during the war than any other man in the war; doubtless that is true.“ (The International Jew, Commissioned by Henry Ford, speaking of the Jew Benard Baruch, a quasi-official dictator during WW I).
„Our movement is growing rapidly...I have spent the sum given to me for the up building of my party and I must find new revenue within a reasonable period.“ (Jews, The Power Behind The Throne! A letter from Hitler to his Wall Street promoters on October 29, 1929, p. 43)
„How do you account for the fact that so many young Jews may be found in the radical movements of all the lands?“ (Michael Gold, New Masses, p. 15, May 7, 1935)
„As president of the largest Jewish organization, I disposed of budgets of hundreds of millions of dollars; I directed thousands of employees, and all this, I emphasize again, not for one particular state, but within the frame work of International Jewry.“ (The Jewish Parado, Nahum Goldmann, p. 150)
„Federation played a major part in Jewish life throughout the world. There is a federation in every community of the world where there is a substantial number of Jews. Today there is a central movement that is capable of mustering all of its planning, financial and political resources within twenty-four hours, geared to handling any particular issue. Proportionately, we have more power than any other comparable group, far beyond our numbers. The reason is that we are probably the most well organized minority in the world.“ (Nat Rosenberg, Denver Allied Jewish Federation, International Jewish News, January 30, 1976)
„There is a Jewish conspiracy against all nations; it occupies almost everywhere the avenues of power - a double assault of Jewish revolution and Jewish finance, revolution and finance. If I were God, I’d clean this mess up and I would start with cleaning the Money Changers out of the Federal Reserve. He does say in His Word that the gold and silver will be thrown in the streets. Since they aren’t using money in Heaven now, we won’t need any when He gets here. It will be done in earth as it is in heaven. Oh, I do thank God for that! Hallelujah! I’ll bet you haven’t heard this much praises, ever.“ (La Nouveau Mercure, Paris 1917, Rene Groos)
„We Jews had more power than you Americans had during the War [World War I].“ (The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon de Poncins, p. 205)
„It is not unnaturally claimed by Western Jews that Russian Jewry, as a whole, is most bitterly opposed to Bolshevism. Now although there is a great measure of truth in this claim, since the prominent Bolsheviks, who are preponderantly Jewish, do not belong to the orthodox Jewish Church, it is yet possible, without laying ones self open to the charge of antisemitism, to point to the obvious fact that Jewry, as a whole, has, consciously or unconsciously, worked for and promoted an international economic, material despotism which, with Puritanism as an ally, has tended in an ever-increasing degree to crush national and spiritual values out of existence and substitute the ugly and deadening machinery of finance and factory. It is also a fact that Jewry, as a whole, strove with every nerve to secure, and heartily approved of, the overthrow of the Russian monarchy, which they regarded as the most formidable obstacle in the path of their ambitions and business pursuits. All this may be admitted, as well as the plea that, individually or collectively, most Jews may heartily detest the Bolshevik regime, yet it is still true that the whole weight of Jewry was in the revolutionary scales against the Czar’s government. It is true their apostate brethren, who are now riding in the seat of power, may have exceeded their orders; that is disconcerting, but it does not alter the fact. It may be that the Jews, often the victims of their own idealism, have always been instrumental in bringing about the events they most heartily disapprove of; that perhaps is the curse of the Wandering Jew.“ (W.G. Pitt River, The World Significance of the Russian Revolution, p. 39, Blackwell, Oxford, 1921; The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins, pp. 134-135)
„It may seem amazing to some readers, but it is not the less a fact that a considerable number of delegates [to the Peace Conference at Versailles] believed that the real influences behind the Anglo-Saxon people were Jews...The formula into which this policy was thrown by the members of the conference, whose countries it affected, and who regarded it as fatal to the peace of Eastern Europe ends thus: Henceforth the world will be governed by the Anglo-Saxon peoples, who, in turn, are swayed by their Jewish elements.“ (Dr. E.J. Dillion, The inside Story of the Peace Conference, pp. 496-497; The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins, p. 170)
„Its doctrines [Judaism] have been carried by Jewish immigrants into the crowded places of the diaspora were Jewish sources Bund branches nourished them, and injected their various into the blood stream of other nations.“ (Jack B. Tenney, Cry Brotherhood)
Wednesday, November 24, 2021
David Duke - The Jews’ Shared Genetic Ancestry Traces Back To Antiquity
If this video is not available in your country use TOR Browser to watch it – fight the jewish censorship!
Dr. David Duke reviews scientific literature on the Jewish genotype and its origins in the ancient Middle-East, while rebuking the “Khazar theory” created by Jewish writer Arthur Koestler in aim of combating race-based anti-Semitism. Duke has called this talk one of the most important shows he's ever done.
Monday, November 22, 2021
Saturday, November 20, 2021
Hope for the Future
If this video is not available in your country use TOR Browser to watch it – fight the jewish censorship!
by Dr. William Pierce
If Our Enemies Were Secure They Wouldn’t Be so Worried
When I talk with people in the United States about the problems our country is facing and about the need to organize everyone of good will into an effective force for dealing with these problems, the most common complaint I hear is: „People don’t care.“ Or: „People are afraid to talk about the real problems. They just want to complain, but as soon as you start talking about doing something they become frightened.“
In other words, the people I talk with tell me, „White Americans are like ostriches with their heads in the sand, hoping that things won’t get much worse if they just pretend not to notice what’s happening and don’t think too much about it.“
Now, that’s partly true, but there are many different types of White Americans, and not all are afraid to face the real problems in this country. Let’s take a look at some of these different types.
First, let’s note that there are a great many White Americans who do care about what’s being done to our country and our people. Some of them are afraid to talk about it, but others are not. Some are confused about what’s happening, but others have a pretty good understanding.
It’s also true, of course, that many Americans don’t care. There are millions of couch potatoes, of Joe and Jill Sixpacks, of sports fans, of disco-goers, of trendy air-heads who believe whatever they see and hear on TV and try to learn all of the latest clichés and imitate all of the current fads. As long as their refrigerators are full, their brains will be turned off. But White Americans today are not much worse in this regard than other people at other times. Most people always have been like that: without initiative or imagination or curiosity or independence. Let’s not concern ourselves with them now. Later, when their refrigerators are empty, we’ll see what can be done with them.
Let’s look at the Americans who do care. Let’s look at the ones who are observant enough to know that something is wrong and are responsible enough to be concerned. That’s probably a good half of the adult White population. The question is, why aren’t more of them doing something about their concern?
We know that Bill Clinton was elected to his second term as President with the votes of only 23 per cent of the electorate, fewer than one in four. Of course, some of the other 77 per cent voted for Bob Dole or Ross Perot, but two-thirds of this other 77 per cent said, in effect, „To hell with the whole business. I’m not voting for any of those clowns.“
Now, that’s something! That’s a new record for voter alienation. That’s a clear sign that a substantial portion of the population is fed up. It’s a real reason for hope, and it’s no wonder that the controlled media have not had much to say about the election statistics. But the question remains, why aren’t the people who’re fed up doing more than simply choosing not to play the game any longer?
I know that many of them are too frightened to do anything. They’re afraid of the government, which they have come to realize is no longer an institution to serve the people but instead has become a dangerous and powerful enemy of the people.
Do you remember the FBI’s response to the terror-bombing at the Atlanta Olympics last year? The FBI didn’t have a clue as to who the bomber was, so they fingered the security guard who had found the bomb, Richard Jewell; told the media that he was their prime suspect because he was a heterosexual White male with an interest in firearms; and then during the next few months proceeded to ruin the poor man’s life, hoping that some evidence might turn up to implicate him or that he might crack under the pressure. Eventually they had to admit, very grudgingly, that they’d made a mistake.
Perhaps you saw the televised news conference held by Jewell and his lawyers after that. I saw it on the NBC Evening News, and I remember one of Jewell’s friends who made a very moving statement at the conference. He said that he realized that living in the sort of country the United States has become is inherently dangerous. He said he realized that he could be killed by a terrorist bomb at any time. But, he said, after seeing what the FBI had done to his friend Jewell and the way they had done it, he was far more afraid of the FBI than he was of terrorists.
I think many people feel that way today. They feel intimidated by the government and the media. They’ve seen too much abuse of power, and they’re afraid that if they open their mouths, if they criticize the government, if they become known as dissidents, the government will retaliate against them. Others are aware of the bias of the controlled news media. They have seen the vicious treatment the media give to anyone who is Politically Incorrect.
Do you remember the way the media hounds tore apart poor Marge Schott, the Cincinnati baseball team owner, after she made a couple of Politically Incorrect remarks last year? People are afraid of being attacked and hounded by the media if they do or say anything the media bosses don’t approve of. They are afraid that the media will cause their employers to fire them or will incite minority criminals to attack them or their families. It has happened -- too often -- and people are frightened.
Many people also are discouraged. They see the jungles our cities and our schools have become after decades of destructive immigration and suicidal race policies. They see the terrible condition of our racially integrated armed forces, and they see the decline in the quality of law enforcement in our cities. It seems impossible to them that things can ever be sorted out and cleaned up. They look at the immense power wielded by the media and by the government, and they see no way to overcome that power. They see things getting worse and worse every year, and they conclude that the country cannot be saved, our people cannot be saved. And so they give up on trying to do anything more than looking out for themselves and their families. They don’t want to sacrifice themselves in what they view as a hopeless cause. There are really a lot of people who feel this way.
And many of these people are not cowards. They understand the power and the ruthlessness of the government and the media, and they are wary of this power, but they have not let themselves be conquered by unreasonable fears. They just don’t believe that anything useful can be done,
and so they don’t try. If they did believe something could be done, then they might be willing to defy the government and the media and take their chances.
There are millions of people like this. They know that things aren’t the way they ought to be, even though they don’t completely understand why. They aren’t cowards, but they aren’t inclined to be heroes or martyrs either. They concern themselves almost exclusively with their own security and comforts, yet they aren’t entirely without a spark of idealism and altruism. They’re ordinary White men and women: moderately perceptive, moderately brave, and capable of becoming moderately idealistic.
What these millions of ordinary White men and women need is understanding and hope. Understanding, so that they can see what has happened to our country and our people and what needs to be done to set things right; and hope that what needs to be done actually can be done, so that they become willing to take a chance and participate in a struggle for the future that no longer seems hopeless to them.
Giving understanding and hope to our people are our two tasks, the two reasons for these American Dissident Voices programs. Of the two, giving understanding is the easier -- and it is necessarily the first. Each week I use this radio broadcast to explain one facet or another of this confusing world around us, so that our people can have a clearer picture of what is happening, what has happened, and what is likely to happen in the future. And this program’s sponsor, National Vanguard Books, publishes many books and periodicals which also provide understanding.
One of the books published by National Vanguard Books is a novel I wrote more than 20 years ago, The Turner Diaries, in which I tried to look into the future and project where the trends I could see around me in the 1970s would take us. One of the things I saw coming was a great increase in terrorism in the United States as resentment against the government and its policies grew. Another thing I saw coming was a great increase in violence against our women: I predicted the rape of our women by Blacks in our minority-pampering Army under a government unwilling to stop it for fear of being charged with „racism.“ And I have been very gratified by the many people who have written to me and told me that their eyes were first opened when they read The Turner Diaries: that after reading the book they not only could understand what is happening now but also could have some inkling of what will happen next. These people who had read my book weren’t surprised by the World Trade Center bombing and the Oklahoma City bombing and the Atlanta Olympics bombing and other acts of terrorism which have occurred recently, and they weren’t surprised by the revelation of the widespread sexual harassment of White female recruits in our Army by Black drill instructors and the unwillingness of the Army brass to stop it before it attracted public attention. They had seen these things coming from reading my book.
The difficulties we face in providing understanding are primarily economic difficulties. We should have this radio program on every station in America, but air time is expensive. We would like for every adult White person in America to read The Turner Diaries, but so far only about a quarter of a million have. We need to expand our outreach greatly and reach many more of our people with our message, but that will require many more helpers working with me, and it will
require much more money. We are slowly doing what needs to be done, but we could do it much faster with more help. Fortunately, we gradually are getting additional help, but we need much, much more.
The bigger part of our task is giving our people hope. Understanding what has happened and what needs to be done is not enough for most people. Of course, if all of our people were heroes by nature, then understanding would be enough. They would consider only what it is necessary and proper to do, and then they would be willing to die trying to do it, whether it were possible or not. But most of our people are only slightly heroic. Most people not only need to understand what they should do; they also need to believe that it is possible to do it. And so our task is to persuade them that what we are trying to do is not only necessary and proper, but also possible. Then they will join us. Then we will sweep the enemies of our people, who now seem so powerful, into the trashbin of history.
And so how do we give hope to intelligent, perceptive people, who look at the situation around them and see this powerful and corrupt government steamrollering anybody who gets in its way? How do we make them believe that it is possible to successfully oppose such a government?
Well, first we simply focus their attention on some of the things they already know but perhaps haven’t thought enough about: things like the utter moral corruption of the government, a corruption which robs it and its supporters of any conviction that their cause is just. A morally crippled enemy is a mortally weakened enemy. A government led by a moral cripple like Bill Clinton may still be able to do a lot of damage, punish a lot of its enemies, and keep many people frightened into silence and inaction -- but it is vastly more vulnerable than it would be if were not corrupt, and its corruption increases every year. Certainly, it would be depressing to see support for such a government remaining strong. We kindle hope in patriots by as simple a thing as reminding them of the recent election results, which show the great withdrawal of support from the government: results which show them that fewer than a quarter of the eligible voters voted for Clinton and his government.
It is important to continue emphasizing these things, because the controlled media deliberately create the false image of great popular support for Clinton and the government. They deliberately create the impression that what is happening is inevitable and unstoppable. The media spokesmen show us great crowds of smiling faces: everyone is happy, they tell us, because we have more minorities than ever before, more feminists, more proud homosexuals, more equality, more „diversity.“ Sure, we have a few little problems, the media tell us, but people generally are happy with the way things are going, and if those awful patriots, those awful extremists and dissidents would just keep quiet, everything would be wonderful.
I believe that it’s important to contradict this lie with the facts, with the real numbers, so that people can have hope, so that they can see that the evil forces destroying our country and our people are not as strong, do not have as much support, as the controlled media would have us believe -- and that the support they do have is declining.
For most people, though, real hope will come not just from realizing that our enemies aren’t quite as strong as we’d thought they were: it will come more from having a realistic goal before their
eyes instead of a hopeless goal. When they look at the mess our enemies have made of America and they try to figure out how to straighten it out, of course that seems hopeless to them.
Imagine that you are a doctor, and you have two hospital beds before you. In one bed is an old man of mixed race whose health has been ruined from a lifetime of depraved living, an old man riddled with AIDS and a dozen other incurable and infectious diseases. In the other bed is a healthy White infant. You should not waste your time working to make the old man healthy again by trying to undo what cannot be undone. The thing to do is pull the plug on his life- support system before his disease has a chance to sicken the healthy White infant in the other bed, and then to devote all of your energy and skill and resources to ensuring that the infant stays healthy, that he doesn’t grow up to lead a life like the old man did and fall prey to the same diseases. That can be done. That is something which is possible.
Now, the choice facing the ordinary American of good will today is not quite that simple, but there are strong similarities. What we need to do is stop worrying about undoing the awful, mixed-up mess our enemies have made. Instead let’s let the process of self-destruction proceed as quickly as it will, so that it is finished before it has infected the lives of all of our people. We can’t stop it anyway. I mean, what can you do with a city like New York or Washington, except try to keep it from spreading, by whatever means are necessary? What can you do with a political system like the one in Washington, except encourage it to even further excess? Let’s not waste our time and energy trying to undo what cannot be undone. Let’s pull the plug and focus all of our efforts on salvaging what is still healthy and then ensuring that it stays healthy. That can be done. That is something which is possible.
Let the fire which is coming take care of New York and Washington. Let’s try to show as many healthy people as we can how to keep from becoming infected, and then how to avoid being burned when the fire comes. Let’s show them how to avoid becoming discouraged by enemy propaganda. While the controlled media gloat over the rising rate of racial intermarriage and over the rising number of White families adopting Black children and over the darkening of America from the non-White immigration flood, let us keep pointing out to people the numbers that show the declining level of support for this rotten system. While the enemy rejoices over the new destruction he is accomplishing, let us rejoice over the new people whose eyes are being opened by this destruction, and let us reach out to these people.
Let us realize that we cannot save everything. We cannot save what has become sick and corrupted. But we can save many of those who are still healthy and who are repelled by the sickness. Let us do a better and better job of that, because in that is our hope for the future.
Wednesday, November 17, 2021
Healthcare in Auschwitz
Medical Care and Special Treatment of Registered Inmates
By Carlo Mattogno and Christoph M. Wieland
Source: https://shop.codoh.com/book/healthcare-in-auschwitz-en/613/
DOWNLOAD THE BOOK IN PDF FORMAT
The famous Italian Holocaust survivor Primo Levi informed us in his eyewitness account Survival in Auschwitz that a number of sickbays and infirmaries etc. existed in the area of the Auschwitz camp. The present book gives an overview of the camp’s organizational and historical development in this regard. For example, there was a change of policy among Himmler and his entourage toward the end of 1942 regarding the main function of Germany’s concentration camps. While initially reeducation and punishment were their main focus, exploiting the inmates’ productive potential became increasingly important later on. The main reason for this was the ever-increasing needs of the German armed forces for manpower. Another reason for the installation of sanitary facilities were epidemics which emerged repeatedly for a number of reasons and which had to be combatted.
In the first part of this book, the author analyzes the inmates’ living conditions as well as the various sanitary and medical measures implemented to maintain or restore the inmates’ health.
The second part explores what happened in particular to those inmates registered at Auschwitz who were “selected” or subject to “special treatment” while disabled or sick. The comprehensive documentation presented shows clearly that everything was tried to cure these inmates, especially under the aegis of Garrison Physician Dr. Wirths.
The last part of this book is dedicated to the remarkable personality of Dr. Wirths, the Auschwitz garrison physician since 1942. His reality refutes the current stereotype of SS officers. In this context, the statements by the former communist concentration camp survivor Hermann Langbein are particularly revealing.
Sunday, November 14, 2021
Friday, November 12, 2021
Should teachers give „both sides“ of the Holocaust?
Source: https://codoh.com/library/document/should-teachers-give-both-sides-holocaust/en/
A new Texas law is more openminded than legislators intended.
by Hadding Scott
Published: 2021-10-31
Due to a recent rightward shift in political and cultural winds, there has been a controversy focused on the Carroll Independent School District (near Dallas-Fort Worth), where the director of curriculum, in a private conference, said something that to some people seems controversial. Somebody conveyed a secret recording to NBC News, who broke the story as follows:
„A top administrator with the Carroll Independent School District in Southlake [Texas] advised teachers last week [on Friday, 8 October 2021] that if they have a book about the Holocaust in their classroom, they should also offer students access to a book from an ‘opposing’ perspective, according to an audio recording obtained by NBC News.(A. Hylton, NBC News 14 October 2021)
Predictably, this stimulated an immediate spastic flow of opprobrium from certain circles, in reaction not only to the suggestion that an opposing perspective on the Holocaust should be presented in public schools, but even to the idea that an opposing perspective exists.
The controversial utterance from Gina Peddy is this:
„As you go through, just try to remember the concepts of 3937, and make sure that if you have a book on the Holocaust that you have one that has an opposing, that has other perspectives.”
On the recording, one hears a teacher ask incredulously, „How do you oppose the Holocaust?” Instead of suggesting titles, Peddy seems to take the question as an expression of incredulity that anybody would question the Holocaust, and she replies:
„Believe me, that’s come up.”
She informs the teacher, who may be unaware of it, that the Holocaust is indeed disputed, and that schools have somehow had to deal with that. It is not evident whether controversy about the Holocaust has „come up” in the Carroll ISD, but in Boca Raton, Florida there was in 2019 the case of William Latson, a principal who was caught in a bind between parents who did not want the Holocaust taught to their children and a Jewish activist who demanded it.
Since the Holocaust is indeed a matter of current controversy, the new Texas law requiring deference to both sides in in discussions of current events (mentioned by Gina Peddy as „3797“) logically must apply to Holocaust Revisionism.
One may discern from careful consideration of Gina Peddy’s words that she is not arbitrarily demanding equal time for skeptics of the Holocaust, but merely advising teachers about how to conform to new legal/bureaucratic requirements (with which she very likely does not agree) and to avoid trouble. It is evident from context that she is only using the Holocaust as an example, perhaps in her mind the extreme example, of a subject where an opposing view would be required.
Although NBC’s anchorman introduces the segment by saying that „comments about books on the Holocaust are sparking new outrage,” the substance of Antonia Hylton’s report places the blame not on Gina Peddy but on politicians. The first talking head in the report is a parent saying: „With some of the local politics right now, I’m not sure that teachers feel supported.” Then „censorship” and disallowal of books is vaguely discussed: “It all started when a fourth-grade teacher was reprimanded, after a parent complained about her having a book about anti-racism.” The same parent is then shown again, defending the teacher who had the anti-racist book.
The whole complex of controversy started with a reaction against what was being taught in public schools, which, according to NBC’s reporter Tyler Kingkade (interviewed on NPR’s Fresh Air) resulted from distance learning during the coronavirus lockdown. With many children suddenly attending classes via Internet, parents for the first time were able to hear what was taught in public schools, and many did not like some of what they heard. For example in fall of 2020, Kingkade says, parents complained about teachers promoting Black Lives Matter. In general the reaction has been based not on ignorance but on newly gained firsthand knowledge and alarm about what children are being taught, and this is happening throughout the United States. (NPR, 21 June 2021)
In particular there is a reaction against „Critical Race Theory.” Critical Race Theory infers from (1) the premise that all races have equal ability, and (2) the observation of racial discrepancies in success, the conclusion that „systemic racism” is causing Blacks (especially) to be relatively unsuccessful in American society. As a solution to this presumed injustice, some Critical Race Theorists propose “equity,“ which goes far beyond Affirmative Action (which clearly was not enough): it means forcing equal outcomes among racial groups.
The State of Texas reacted with a new law, mentioned by Gina Peddy as 3937, that was intended to stifle teaching of Critical Race Theory in Texas public schools.
Within the Carroll Independent School District, the reaction came in the forms of a conservative takeover of the local school board, a directive from the school board not to allow books with singular perspectives that could be „considered offensive,” and the ensuing reprimand of a fourth-grade teacher in that district for having in her classroom a book titled This Book is Anti-Racist.
After that, teachers’ concerns about how to stay out of trouble were raised with Gina Peddy, who is the district’s director of curriculum. The recording begins with Peddy saying:
„We are in the middle of a political mess, and you are in the middle of a political mess, and so, we just have to do the best that we can.... There are a lot of districts in the exact same spot we’re in, and no one knows how to navigate these waters. I mean, no one.”
What may have caused some confusion is that House Bill 3797, although supposedly intended to combat Critical Race Theory, actually mandates teaching „the history of white supremacy … and the ways in which it is morally wrong.” In that light, one might suppose that This Book is Anti-Racist would be perfectly fine. Perhaps as a consequence of the perennial Republican dread of being called racist, there seems to be a contradiction between what the law was supposed to do (stop Critical Race Theory) and what it says.
Probably this is why Gina Peddy advised the teachers to take refuge in the law’s requirement of „deference to both sides” in discussions of current events. The problem there is that rigorously respecting „both sides” in all cases must mean, when it comes to matters about which most people agree, affording respect to a minority view – such as skepticism about the Holocaust.
The proponents of Texas’s anti-CRT law do not seem to have contemplated this ramification.
The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith has been supporting „Holocaust education“ in public schools since the 1970s. Oren Segal, Vice-President of the ADL’s „Center on Extremism“ pronounced a condemnation of Gina Peddy for trying to help Carroll ISD’s teachers to conform to the law. He himself seemed to exemplify extremism in statements reported by CNN:
As for „opposing“ views to the Holocaust, Anti-Defamation League vice president Oren Segal told CNN New Day it’s plain antisemitism.
„The idea that opposing views of the Holocaust would in someway sound legitimate to anybody is a sign of the time perhaps,“ Segal said. „It’s antisemitism, it’s Holocaust denial, and it’s the thing that animates extremists. There are no two sides to this issue, there are no two sides to the Holocaust.“ (A. Elassar, CNN, 16 October 2021)
The line laid down by the ADL’s spokesman, that „there are no two sides to the Holocaust,“ is the line that timid public officials followed.
State Senator Bryan Hughes (R), a proponent of the new law, asserted that its requirement of „deference to both sides” did not include deference toward skepticism about the Holocaust:
„State Sen. Bryan Hughes, an East Texas Republican who wrote Senate Bill 3, denied that the law requires teachers to provide opposing views on what he called matters of „good and evil” or to get rid of books that offer only one perspective on the Holocaust.” (M. Hixenbaugh & A. Hylton, NBC News, 14 October 2021)
Texas state Sen. Kelly Hancock (R) likewise argued that Gina Peddy’s advice to the teachers had nothing to do with the bill:
„School administrators should know the difference between factual historical events and fiction. Southlake just got it wrong. No legislation is suggesting the action this administrator is promoting.“ (Twitter)
On the other hand, State Senator Beverly Powell (a Democrat and daughter of a teacher) was sympathetic to the teachers’ position, tweeting:
„Already, we are seeing the impact of a vague and unnecessary bill that leaves teachers and administrators confused and afraid to teach the history of the Holocaust or the Civil War without teaching ‘both sides’.“ (Twitter)
Carroll ISD’s Superintendent Lane Ledbetter issued an apology via Facebook, declaring:
„During the conversations with teachers during last week’s meeting, the comments made were in no way to convey that the Holocaust was anything less than a terrible event in history.
„Additionally, we recognize there are not two sides of the Holocaust. As we continue to work through implementation of HB3979, we also understand this bill does not require an opposing viewpoint on historical facts.” (L. Ledbetter via Carroll ISD on Facebook)
There were enough legislators in Texas to pass a law mandating „deference to both sides” in public schools, but it seems that none of that law’s proponents really embrace the full implication of those words. The attempts to justify ostracizing Holocaust Skepticism show narrow, rigid thinking.
Senator Hughes seems to believe that „good and evil” are matters of fact rather than opinion, and, furthermore, that there need be no concern about whether these highly consequential labels have been correctly applied.
Likewise, Senator Hancock’s assumption that there is no controversy about what constitute „historical facts” seems very backward and uneducated. Thomas D. Fallace, an expert on Holocaust education, mentions the persistence of such an attitude:
„In history, the naïve conception (one that many adults still hold) is that a single, objective past exists and that historians look at primary sources to access and report the past directly.” (T.D. Fallace, The Emergence of Holocaust Education in American Schools, 2008, p.164)
„Many adults“ indeed! – among them Republican legislators in Texas.
If these Republican legislators knew what they were doing, and were sincere about eliminating subversive propaganda from public schools, they would not treat the Holocaust as sacrosanct. You will hear some teachers today speak of the Holocaust as an indispensable subject, but „Holocaust education” is not exactly traditional. It made small beginnings in the 1970s, grew as a consequence of NBC’s Holocaust miniseries, and only became widely regarded as indispensable after 1993 with the release of Stephen Spielberg’s Schindler’s List. The growth of Holocaust education has been driven largely by television and Hollywood. The Holocaust has long been used as a tool for subversive agitation. In 1969 Jean-Paul Sartre accused the USA of „genocide” in Vietnam. More recently, invocations of the Holocaust against efforts to control illegal immigration have been obvious to anyone with ears to hear. It was Holocaust guru Elie Wiesel who coined an important slogan for enthusiasts of illegal immigration:
„You who are illegal aliens must know that no human being is illegal.”
Is that a kind of thinking that Texas Republicans want to support? It has always been conservatives who were called Nazis. Recent attempts (e.g. by Dinesh D’Souza) to put the shoe on the other foot have not been very successful and are not likely to be successful. If some Republican legislators in Texas were genuinely conservative and knew what they were doing, they should at the very least insist that the opposing view on the Holocaust be granted the deference that their bill promised.
Gina Peddy responded to the question about how to oppose the Holocaust as if it had been rhetorical, but it is evident that these teachers really are at a loss for how to offer a skeptical view of the Holocaust. An unidentified teacher who was present at the meeting says:
„There are no children’s books that show the ‘opposing perspective’ of the Holocaust or the ‘opposing perspective’ of slavery. Are we supposed to get rid of all of the books on those subjects?” (NBC News, 14 October 2021)
Getting rid of all books about the Holocaust would not be a disaster, since most schools 30 years ago got along fine without them, but if teachers insist on presenting such propaganda, and there really is no book suitable for children that opposes that propaganda, then by all means an effort should be made to fill that void.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)