On March 23 1943, Richard Korherr, SS statistician, sent a report to Himmler concluding that 2.4 million Jews had been killed. The rate of Jew killing didn't slow down until the defeat at Stalingrad, a few months before that, but after that it's not like it stopped entirely. Therefore, there really is no way you can put the figure at less than 3.5 million. The correct figure is probably between 4 and 5, though 5-6 is also within the range of the possible. But after many decades of Holocaust revisionists doing their level best, saying 'one to four million Jews' is simply ignorance at this point.
Removing neither the Palestinians or Jews from the West Bank would end the conflict. This is very easy to prove with one word: 'Gaza'. Perhaps you meant Mandate Palestine, but that's not true either, unless whoever is removed disappears into the ether.
That's nice to know. Have not seen that discussed in the revisionist circles.
>But after many decades of Holocaust revisionists doing their level best, saying 'one to four million Jews' is simply ignorance at this point.
I do not deny otherwise; in the post I was fairly clear that it was not an issue I was that interested in on a personal level. I sometimes try to force myself to do all the dirty work of reading books/articles on the topic but it never works.
David Cole is certainly not the foremost Holocaust historian. I think he reads German, but he relies on translated documents for the most part. His major advantage is that he is a Holocaust Revisionist, and knows intimately the arguments of Revisionists and Deniers from the inside.
Like David Irving before he lost the plot, his basic approach is a strict Rankean 'docs or it didn't happen' method. I think that this is unreasonable when dealing with wartime atrocities, but what is really amazing is that even with this strict approach they still got to a figure of 3.5 million. Some of the documents they used didn't come to light until the 1990s (completely contradicting the theory that the Holocaust was Soviet propaganda).
> On the point about lack of evidence for economic inequality being bad. Peter Turchin and Seshat database has good evidence for this. IIRC you mentioned you found his work boring lol.
I think his stuff is unfairly shutdown because its conclusions have most appeal to MAGA-communist-ish types.
I think economic issues have the most unhealthy discussion on online RW spaces in general. Too many people just asserting that central banks are bad etc. Interestingly, the H1B debate might br changing this somewhat.
That's like saying engaging in repeated behaviors according to a pattern means you have a personality. Technically true in a weak sense, but not in the least instructive.
Maybe I'm just new to your blog (or didn't read carefully enough) but whenever someone proclaims their ideal race quota without disclosing their own race, it feels like there could be some conflict of interest making their quota based on a less than objective analysis.
You never see anyone advocating for their own expulsion from the USA just to be logically consistent with the political opinions they profess on their blog, for instance.
Obviously how you identify is your own business, but if I were in charge of sorting people into different categories I'd think someone of that extraction would pretty clearly be white.
Yeah, that was confusing. I can see a logic where 'marriage' encompasses only heterosexual union including natural conception; and [something else] encompasses lifelong partnership with intent to raise kids not produced 'naturally'. Basically, creating a distinction between Marriage Type 1, "Marriage" Type 2, and Not Marriage At All. Somewhat reasonable scheme in that society / the state / the community has a stake in reifying and regulating all those different types relationships, albeit in different ways.
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2019/09/23/gay-genes/ "So gene influence homosexuality, but then they influence everything. Does it look as if the key causal link ( assuming that there is one) is genetic? No, but then we knew that already, from high discordance for homosexuality in MZ twins."
dont think the genetic evidence suggests it. Look at others that also have loose genetic influence but clearly caused by a pathogen: peptic ulcers (H Pylori), or MS (epstein barr) and so on. I suspect in our lifetime we'll find the culprit, some childhood infection that in X% of cases zaps a cluster of neurons in the brain of some men making them gay.
Very little. There’s a lot of anecdotes (which should not be dismissed out of hand, but are not necessarily good evidence). The statistical story is fairly clear — if the risk exists it is miniscule.
Increases in autism diagnosis mostly (if not wholly) reflect changes in diagnostic criteria, so that traditional anti-vax argument also does not work.
Generally, I am more skeptical of vaccines than I am of other medical interventions because there is a strong political/ethical incentive to inflate the efficacy of them and deflate the risks because of herd immunity.
The solution for religiosity to me would be an introduction of the state cult, which seeks to cultivate civic and national virtue through participation and ritual. The central deity would ideally be Spinozan, but this is secondary to the glorification of its “saints” (important philosophers, national heroes, martyrs, scientists etc.) through celebration and myth; with the end goal being fostering world acceptance, as opposed to world denial.
On March 23 1943, Richard Korherr, SS statistician, sent a report to Himmler concluding that 2.4 million Jews had been killed. The rate of Jew killing didn't slow down until the defeat at Stalingrad, a few months before that, but after that it's not like it stopped entirely. Therefore, there really is no way you can put the figure at less than 3.5 million. The correct figure is probably between 4 and 5, though 5-6 is also within the range of the possible. But after many decades of Holocaust revisionists doing their level best, saying 'one to four million Jews' is simply ignorance at this point.
Removing neither the Palestinians or Jews from the West Bank would end the conflict. This is very easy to prove with one word: 'Gaza'. Perhaps you meant Mandate Palestine, but that's not true either, unless whoever is removed disappears into the ether.
>Korherr report
That's nice to know. Have not seen that discussed in the revisionist circles.
>But after many decades of Holocaust revisionists doing their level best, saying 'one to four million Jews' is simply ignorance at this point.
I do not deny otherwise; in the post I was fairly clear that it was not an issue I was that interested in on a personal level. I sometimes try to force myself to do all the dirty work of reading books/articles on the topic but it never works.
"Have not seen that discussed in the revisionist circles."
*Shocked emoji*.
In general, the man to go to is David Cole. He sums up the main evidence here: https://bestservedcole.substack.com/p/counter-currents-calls-me-out-for
This is my first time hearing of him, but I don't get the impression that he speaks German and 1873549 + 633300 > 2.4million.
The Korherr report is a good source though.
Fair point as to the Maths.
David Cole is certainly not the foremost Holocaust historian. I think he reads German, but he relies on translated documents for the most part. His major advantage is that he is a Holocaust Revisionist, and knows intimately the arguments of Revisionists and Deniers from the inside.
Like David Irving before he lost the plot, his basic approach is a strict Rankean 'docs or it didn't happen' method. I think that this is unreasonable when dealing with wartime atrocities, but what is really amazing is that even with this strict approach they still got to a figure of 3.5 million. Some of the documents they used didn't come to light until the 1990s (completely contradicting the theory that the Holocaust was Soviet propaganda).
Stalin actually suppressed casualty reports, trying to reduce the total to 3M while driving up ethnic Russian casualties.
9 million Americans didn't die from COVID, though. 1.2 million died over 4 years. The 4chan post is off by a factor of 10.
Also: "gay adoption: sure. Gay marriage: no." Never heard of that before.
Yeah, also noticed the gay one. What's up with that?
> On the point about lack of evidence for economic inequality being bad. Peter Turchin and Seshat database has good evidence for this. IIRC you mentioned you found his work boring lol.
I think his stuff is unfairly shutdown because its conclusions have most appeal to MAGA-communist-ish types.
I think economic issues have the most unhealthy discussion on online RW spaces in general. Too many people just asserting that central banks are bad etc. Interestingly, the H1B debate might br changing this somewhat.
JFC this is a comprehensive list of topics to even have opinions on.
Having preferences on political questions means you have an ideology.
That's like saying engaging in repeated behaviors according to a pattern means you have a personality. Technically true in a weak sense, but not in the least instructive.
Maybe I'm just new to your blog (or didn't read carefully enough) but whenever someone proclaims their ideal race quota without disclosing their own race, it feels like there could be some conflict of interest making their quota based on a less than objective analysis.
You never see anyone advocating for their own expulsion from the USA just to be logically consistent with the political opinions they profess on their blog, for instance.
I don't identify strongly with any race.
In terms of genetic admixture I am ~40% English, ~10% Scotts-Irish, ~21% Spanish, ~13% Amerindian, ~7% Jewish, ~7% Basque, and ~2% Black
Is this an implicit accusation of Jewishness?
It was indeed. Are those 23andMe results? Mine were over 99% European with trace Amerindian.
Ancestry.
My surname has already been doxxed -- it's Jewish, but I was raised Mormon.
My condolences for the doxxing. And maybe the Mormonism too.
Obviously how you identify is your own business, but if I were in charge of sorting people into different categories I'd think someone of that extraction would pretty clearly be white.
The phenotype is another story. I look like an Iranian/Syrian/Iraqi.
You should get a gun (or several) and shoot it. It makes you fun and cool.
Yes gay adoption/surrogacy no gay marriage?
Yeah, that was confusing. I can see a logic where 'marriage' encompasses only heterosexual union including natural conception; and [something else] encompasses lifelong partnership with intent to raise kids not produced 'naturally'. Basically, creating a distinction between Marriage Type 1, "Marriage" Type 2, and Not Marriage At All. Somewhat reasonable scheme in that society / the state / the community has a stake in reifying and regulating all those different types relationships, albeit in different ways.
Erm, the remigration one needs to happen. At least in Europe, don't care how.
Edit: The Russia take is also unjustified and Mearsheimer is not the guru most pretend he is. Ziggerism is cringe.
on male homosexuality have you considered Cochran's hypothesis? https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/greg-cochrans-gay-germ-hypothesis-an-exercise-in-the-power-of-germs/
Does not check out with genetic evidence, see homosexuality GWAS
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2019/09/23/gay-genes/ "So gene influence homosexuality, but then they influence everything. Does it look as if the key causal link ( assuming that there is one) is genetic? No, but then we knew that already, from high discordance for homosexuality in MZ twins."
dont think the genetic evidence suggests it. Look at others that also have loose genetic influence but clearly caused by a pathogen: peptic ulcers (H Pylori), or MS (epstein barr) and so on. I suspect in our lifetime we'll find the culprit, some childhood infection that in X% of cases zaps a cluster of neurons in the brain of some men making them gay.
What evidence you have vaccines cause autism
Very little. There’s a lot of anecdotes (which should not be dismissed out of hand, but are not necessarily good evidence). The statistical story is fairly clear — if the risk exists it is miniscule.
Increases in autism diagnosis mostly (if not wholly) reflect changes in diagnostic criteria, so that traditional anti-vax argument also does not work.
Generally, I am more skeptical of vaccines than I am of other medical interventions because there is a strong political/ethical incentive to inflate the efficacy of them and deflate the risks because of herd immunity.
happy new year, seb!
do you like russia, or do you just not care about ukraine?
imho, minimum wage is so low right now that it doesnt even matter if we have it or not; everything is so expensive
>do you like russia, or do you just not care about ukraine?
Neither -- I view America as the aggressor here.
cost of living vs min wage over time
https://inflationchart.com/life-in-minwage
“Birth control… I’m flirting with the idea of banning it”
Would love to hear why.
These answers seem more centric that I thought they would be.
The solution for religiosity to me would be an introduction of the state cult, which seeks to cultivate civic and national virtue through participation and ritual. The central deity would ideally be Spinozan, but this is secondary to the glorification of its “saints” (important philosophers, national heroes, martyrs, scientists etc.) through celebration and myth; with the end goal being fostering world acceptance, as opposed to world denial.
You're not white?