It still boggles my mind that people can talk about the Holocaust without saying the J-word. It’s like holding forth on the transatlantic slave trade and not once saying ‘people from Africa’. Or lamenting the nuking of Hiroshima and forgetting to mention Japanese people. And yet here we are, 80 years after the Shoah, surrounded by Jew-free yapping about that most calamitous event in history.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil Liberties
Commentary
EconomicsPolitics |
Samizdata quote of the day – Stealing the Holocaust from the JewsJanuary 30th, 2026 |
 9 comments to Samizdata quote of the day – Stealing the Holocaust from the JewsLeave a Reply |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
God, I’m tired of the “he didn’t specifically denounce X!” crap.
It’s become purely a gotcha play. You won’t find many more-rabid supporters of Israel (and thus, I guess from what I’m told, Jews) than me, and I have no need to hear the recitation of the Roll of the Dead every time there’s a mention of the Holocaust.
This must be proof that JD hates Jews, right?
One of these things is not like the others. If you’re going to lament the Japanese civilians killed by allied bombing why not the Germans also?
The nuking of Japan was a good thing. It gave them a way out because it was a very specific use of ultra-violence. If it hadn’t happened the invasion of the Home Islands would have made D-Day look like a Sunday School outing. The estimates for deaths of Allied personnel were horrific* but the deaths of Japanese civilians were staggering. Oh, and Joe was moving forces East with alacrity. He wanted a piece of the pie. Can you even imagine a Cold War with Japan split as Germany was? Just try.
*I once temped at NICO, Newcastle. The second largest office complex on the planet after The Pentagon. It wasn’t intended for that role. It was to be a hospital for the wounded from Operation Downfall.
george,
And will nobody mention the civilian contractors on the Death Star?
The establishment claim, when they mention Jews at all, that the Jews were murdered because they were “different”.
That is wild distortion – in reality the National Socialists (“Nazis”) did not murder people because they were “different” – they murdered them because the National Socialists claimed they were “exploiters and oppressors” offending against Social Justice.
To the modern establishment any inequality is proof of “exploitation and oppression” – and that is why, no disrespect to you meant, you are mistaken bobby b – it is important (not is not important) to mention Jews specifically when talking about the Holocaust. It is important because the Social Doctrine doctrine justifies plundering and murder of people who are richer than other people – or who are believed to be richer (even if they are not – for example I am NOT rich, indeed I am very poor – but the supporters of Social Justice still hate me, and, from their doctrines, RIGHTLY so).
Why, for example, is it morally good, according to the leftists who control the universities and so on, to rob, rape and murder Israeli Jews? It is morally good, according to the international “intellectual classes”, to rob, rape and murder Israeli Jews because they are (supposedly) “exploiters and oppressors” whose (relative) wealth violates “Social Justice” – and if asked for proof of all this, the left will show the supposed poverty of the “Palestinians” (a made-up ethnic group – hardly anyone used this term for Muslims before the 1960s, but that is another matter) and the supposed wealth and comfort of the Jews.
This can be applied generally – and is.
For example, those who hate Israel also tend to hate “whiteness” (regardless of the fact that most Israeli Jews are brown, and some are black) – “whiteness” being defined as such “crimes” as “punctuality” and “having a work ethnic” – it is clear from this that black people can be guilty of “whiteness”.
“Whiteness” supposedly justifies, robbery, rape and murder – in the name of Social Justice.
It should be stressed that this point of view is not that of a few freaks – it is the mainstream opinion in “intellectual” circles (the universities and so on) – and is held by some people of Jewish ethnic origin themselves (for example the leader of the British Green
Party – which is very popular among the “educated”).
The hatred of Jews used to be called “the socialism of fools” – because the same arguments that are used against Jews can be used against anyone who is declared a foe of “Social Justice” (i.e. plundering and tyranny – which is what Social Justice is), because they are better off, or more intelligent, or whatever – or are thought to be so.
However, it is still important to stress the Jewish nature of the Holocaust.
The National Socialists were not sending anyone thought to be wealthy to the gas chambers – they were mainly (not totally – but mainly) targeting Jews for the gas chambers, as exploiters and oppressors, violating Social Justice.
That the BBC, and the rest of the “educated” establishment (including those of Jewish ethnic origin) particularly view Jews as exploiters and oppressors (and not just in the Middle East – everywhere) is important.
On J.D. Vance – yes it was odd (indeed just wrong) of him to speak in this way, but I do not believe this proves he is a supporter of “Social Justice”, i.e. the plundering and murder of Jews – or other people.
I do NOT believe that he is.
Indeed, robbing us of our most valuable asset! (sorry, I’ll try to be more serious next time…)
@NickM, January 31, 2026 at 8:24 am
I think that the revisionism about using the atom bomb on Japan started immediately after they were used. You need to look at the casualties that occurred from late 1943 onwards when the Japanese changed their tactics from Banzai charges to well prepared and equipped defences in depth (Peleliu, Iwo Jima, Okinawa etc.) and ask “are these casualties acceptable?”. The Japanese knew that the Allies would not give up and that the invasion of the home islands was inevitable so they were reserving their forces for that battle. And you need to understand that the Japanese thought that their Emperor was descended from the Gods, that Japan itself was sacred ground and that the mindset of their society was that they were obligated to defend the Emperor and the country.
I know that the Japanese air force put up a poor showing leading up to the end of the war BUT they had reserved over 5000 aircraft to use in Kamikaze attacks (Kami = God(s), Kaze = Wind, the divine wind that saved Japan from the Mongol Invasions in 1274 and 1281) on the invasion fleet, then the whole population was trained and expected to kill at least one American with anything from a sharpened bamboo spear to the crude last ditch rifles that they were churning out. There are many videos on Japanese civilians committing suicide by jumping off cliffs on Okinawa rather than surrender to the enemy. An alien mindset to a westerner but extrapolating the behaviour of the Japanese on Okinawa and Iwo Jima in particular, to the home islands was ominous. Truman was, from what I have read, in two minds about whether to use the bomb or not. The deciding factor was the estimated casualties expected in landing on the home islands – which was put at 1 million just to get ashore with a likely total of about 7 million and with the terrain, likely another 10 years of guerrilla warfare to finally reach a conclusion.
There was only ONE batch of Purple Heart medals produced during WW2 in anticipation of the invasion of Japan and now, thanks to Japan surrendering, 80 years later, the Americans still have plenty left even after all the wars (WW2 in Europe, Korea, Vietnam, both Gulf wars etc.) have only used up a few.
Any country that puts the welfare and lives of their enemy over the lives and welfare of its own troops is collectively insane. It was the Emperor that commanded the Japanese people to surrender and stop fighting which ended the war, persuaded, no doubt by the devastation that the two bombs produced. It saved the Japanese people from annihilation and extinction. In other words, in my opinion, it was the correct and justified decision
On Japan – it should be pointed out that conventional bombing killed more people than the atomic bombing did. And a conventional invasion would have killed MILLIONS of Japanese. Vast numbers of leaflets had been dropped on Japanese cities telling people to evacuate – but the Japanese government would not allow people to leave, because, if they had allowed it, the Japanese arms industry (their ability to fight) would have collapsed.
On Germany – “Bomber” Harris was correct when he pointed out that exact bombing was not possible, not on the scale needed to end the German ability to fight, “if you want me to destroy factories and military depots – I am going to have to destroy whole cities and towns and the people in them”, and the Cabinet (Churchill, Atlee, all of them) said, in effect, “Yes – do that”.
Bomber Command had a very high casualty rate – very many of them died, it was NOT a one sided fight (they were killed by ground fire and enemy fighters) – so to compare them to extermination camp guards is absurd (indeed demented).