Jim Goad denies holocaust denial
March 2, 2009
Jim Goad continues a classic series of articles on his excellent site jimgoad.net after his essential “Fuck the Muslims” piece. Enjoy the ever sensitive Mr. Goad on holocaust denial. Its great, he denies denial. He makes a lot of good points about other holocausts, and asks the important “why?” regarding the tarring and feathering of anyone who dares question the official story of the Jewish holocaust. Enjoy his lucid and timely piece:
Someone recently asked me what I thought of “the Holocaust,” and my immediate reaction was:
I will always be an earnest supporter of free inquiry, but regarding the wholesale slaughter of Jews during World War II, the most honest thing I can say is:
I wasn’t there.
In my endless research for this “Race” book o’ mine, I’ve brushed up against a tiny bit of what is generally referred to as “Holocaust Denial” literature, and I can say this much:
I’ve never run across ANYONE who claims Hitler loved Jews and didn’t oversee the confinement and murder of a whole LOTTA Jews during World War II.
Never. They always argue, to the point of speed-freak niggling, about the number of Jews killed and the methods used to kill them. I’ve never seen anyone who does what the term “Holocaust Denier” seems to imply—namely, someone who denies the very existence of Jew-hating and Jew-killing during World War II.
Therefore, I deny the very existence of what is commonly understood to mean a “Holocaust Denier.” In short, I am a Holocaust Denial Denier.
I take no official stance on the actual numbers killed and the methods used to kill Jews during WWII because, as stated previously in larger and bolder type, I wasn’t there. And I haven’t read enough of the literature on all sides to form a more solid opinion on what the evidence tends to reveal.
I WILL state that the ritual disembowelment, tarring-and-feathering, and eventual Pay-Per-View crucifixion of anyone who dares QUESTION the official story and the official numbers is enough to engender some suspicion. Every time another “Holocaust Denial” story hits the daily news and someone loses their career—and is often JAILED—for doing what any honest reporter or researcher should be doing in the first place, I’ve noticed that we never get to hear a squeak about what these reputed Holocaust Deniers are specifically alleging or denying.
1) He’s saying it didn’t happen.
2) Because of Schindler’s List, we already all know it happened, so there will be no further discussion, and if you want to test what happens if you TRY to discuss it, we suggest you look at how we just ruined this guy’s life.
The Chomskyites and Rage Against the Machine homos always insist that Rich Dead White Men Who Won Wars Write History, but they seem to allow for glaring exceptions for this rule if the war was remotely racial in nature. Therefore, you don’t ever hear them willing to challenge the officially sanctioned versions of World War II and America’s Civil War—instead, like almost everyone else, they swallow the “We were fighting the RACISTS, so these were GOOD wars” party line without daring to question specifics.
I’ve stated it many times—I admire the Jews. I value intelligence, inventiveness, and humor, and Jews dominate these fields like blacks rule the NBA. I don’t have the skimpiest nugget of anti-Jew hatred clogging my heart. I’d have no emotional motivation for wanting to deny them their suffering. I’ve known enough Jews that I can declare almost as irrefutable fact that their suffering is very important to them.
What DOES bother me, though, is when someone dictates to me that ANY historical, social, or scientific fact is SETTLED FOREVER and MUST NOT BE QUESTIONED. That should be a red flag for anyone with a remotely skeptical or inquisitive mind.
So regarding the Jewish Holocaust of World War II, I feel I haven’t read enough, from both the Elie Wiesels and the David Irvings, to give you my take on what I suspect actually happened. I will be reading a lot more on the topic, and I’ll let youse know. Can’t be more fair than that.
But back to my first question, which I think is the most important—”WHICH Holocaust?” Referring to the massive extermination of Jews by Germans in World War II as THE Holocaust is a sneaky semantic trick that tends to imply it was the ONLY large-scale slaughter of humans, for reasons ethnic or otherwise, in human history.
I was baptized Catholic and spent my first sixteen years under the impression that I was Catholic. According to Pope Pius XII, the Nazis took out three million Catholics during the Holocaust, but you don’t hear ME crying about it!
And didn’t nine million or so Germans bite the dust during World War II?
And twenty million Russians?
And didn’t Mao and Stalin tag-team about a HUNDRED MILLION dead bodies?
And what about the Armenians?
And the Cambodians?
And the British and Belgian and French records in Africa?
And what the British did to the Irish for the better part of a thousand years?
And what the Spaniards did to the New World?
Does it make you racist to even SUGGEST there were other Holocausts?
I’ve already denied the existence of what is commonly understood as a “Holocaust Denier.”
I will now posit the existence of another breed entirely—those who DENY THE OTHER HOLOCAUSTS, or who for some reason think it’s racially insensitive to even TRY and draw similarities.
It’s a logical, although ubiquitous, fallacy to say the mere mention of these other Holocausts somehow mitigates or underplays the significance of The Jew One.
Let’s say, for the fucking sake of convenience, that The Jew One’s tally was EXACTLY six million—not a body more or less.
I know a little about math, and talking about the 1.5 million people slaughtered during The Armenian One doesn’t magically subtract a single digit from the official figure of six million for The Jew One. Nor does a discussion of an estimated 120 million corpses as a result of The Communist One impinge on the figure of six million for The Jew One. We’re talking about SEPARATE EVENTS.
The only direct logical inference you can make from the statement that other Holocausts happened is, “More people died in more large-scale murderous campaigns throughout history than we tend to be talking about these days.” Only a fool would think you’re trying to say, “The Jews didn’t have it so bad.”
It continues and invites response on his Net Jerk Lounge. Responses to this piece can be found here.