Sunday, February 19, 2012

How the Marxists indoctrinate…ctd…

The 'Nazi' obsessed Christopher Hale

Your kindly Old Uncle Victor has often recommended people read more books on History, Politics, Culture, Science etc in order to greater perceive the ‘big picture’ and understand things within the broader context of Human existence. However, after looking at some of the more mainstream books currently available on these subjects, he has recently become aware of just how problematical and fraught with danger this can be to the individual’s concept of reality and truth.

Even seemingly well researched books with ample indexes, footnotes, references and bibliographies can be virtually worthless for the purposes of honest scholarly interest and study because the writer has either set out to ‘prove’ an already preconceived version of events by merely collecting ‘evidence’ supportive of his own viewpoint or he is too timid and intellectually dishonest to challenge the Politically Correct presumptions of the academic establishment. In this process he has offered nothing new to the Historical debate. He is merely reinforcing existing dogma through slavish repetition augmented perhaps by the occasional tidbit of previously unknown trivia.

A good example of this type of presentation of ‘History’ is the 2003 book ‘Himmler’s Crusade’ by Christopher Hale dealing with the 1938 German National Socialist expedition to Tibet to study the possible origins of the Aryan people. At 592 pages including many illustrations, no less than fifty pages of notes, index and ‘select bibliography’ it appears, at least initially, as a rather lavish and well done production. However, upon closer inspection and particularly when browsing the index and the last chapter of the book entitled ‘Aftermaths’ one is instantly struck by the quite strident partisanship and overt prejudices of the author. He makes many unscholarly remarks that sound more like they came from the pages of gutter tabloids.

A quick Google search reveals a common thread in Hale’s ‘work’. He is not only clearly obsessed with ‘Nazis’ but is a self styled ‘debunker’ of what he sees as ‘Archaeological Fantasies’ and ‘Alternative History’. Like the so-called ‘skeptics’ (career contrarian cynics) we are quite familiar with in Australia he is cultist in his zealotry. One finds it somewhat bemusing to observe the utter lack of self consciousness and sense of irony in these twits as they fanatically work to ‘disprove’ virtually everything, blissfully unaware they are every bit as closed minded, and thereby ‘religious’, as the people they condemn and seek to discredit.

In accordance with the current unwritten rules of so-called journalism and research the German National Socialists are never described as such in his book but rather are tagged with the pejorative epithet ‘Nazi’ which in turn is often supplemented with words such as ‘evil’, ‘hateful’, ‘ignorant’, ‘cruel’ etc. The reader is surely familiar with this insidious strategy of persistent word association that drills into the subconscious of the recipient, planting the seeds of Pavlovian responses.

Words and phrases like ‘dangerously xenophobic’ when referring to, believe it or not folks, the Austrian writer (who Hale bitchily refers to as an ‘Hotelier’) Erich Von Daniken! This is an extremely unprofessional attitude for a man who (apparently) wants to be taken seriously as an Historical researcher. He also sneers at Savitri Devi (Maximiani Portas) and refers to her books as ‘repellent’. One seriously doubts he has ever read a sentence of her work, let alone one of these ‘repellent’ books. He also, predictably, summarily condemns the entire so-called ‘Holocaust Denial’ movement as having been ‘thoroughly discredited’ while offering not a jot of evidence or even the vaguest comment on what argument or research has been done to achieve this ‘thorough discrediting’ of such a massive review of History performed by hundreds of researchers and experts over decades.

Additionally, Hale appears to have chosen his words poorly in his attempt to smear the Historical Revisionists. Most readers will probably take his term ‘thoroughly discredited’ as meaning the Historical Revisionists have been shown to be liars and fraudsters, assuming the word ‘discredit’ is a descriptor for the process of ‘disproving’ a claim or theory. Without wishing to enter too deeply into the virtual minefield of semantics, for the gentle reader’s elucidation we have provided the following definitions that would appear to be the currently accurate meanings for these terms. Please note that the third definition point for ‘discredit’ indicates ‘rejection’ only and not disproval. Also note that points one and two refer to ‘damage’ and ‘cause’ that indicate deliberate connivance to defame and mislead rather than ‘prove’ or ‘disprove’ anything.

The Collins English Dictionary defines ‘Discredit’ thusly;
discredit vb (tr)
1. to damage the reputation of
2. to cause to be disbelieved or distrusted
3. to reject as untrue or of questionable accuracy
1. a person, thing, or state of affairs that causes disgrace
2. damage to a reputation
3. lack of belief or confidence

Whereas the same Dictionary defines ‘Disprove’ as;
disprove vb (tr)
to show (an assertion, claim, etc.) to be incorrect
disprovable adj
disproval n

On the surface it would appear to most readers, not versed in the cunning, manipulative strategies of the Jew controlled publishing houses and incognisant of the current Cultural Marxist hegemony in academia, that works such as this are invested with real authority and being also unfamiliar with the clever twisting of words, ideas and concepts are easy meat for the ZOG’s psychic vampires to zombify.

The reader would be spared the time wasting, turgid repetition of Marxist dogma and more immediately ‘entertained’ by reading the editorial column in any mainstream newspaper or watching the latest Spielberg production. The general effect upon the reader’s ‘knowledge’ would be quite similar.

In the last paragraph of the book hale makes yet one more arrogant statement that goes to the heart of his chutzpah. He states: “But, incontestably, the early Twenty First Century is a period of intense national chauvinism and ethnic exclusivity.” What? Not only is the statement ludicrously and patently untrue to any with functioning senses, it is in fact Globalism that is ‘intense’ at the moment, he states a broad sweeping OPINION and tags it ‘incontestable’. In sentences such as this he gives the game away entirely and even the most docile reader should have alarm bells ringing in their heads. It fits, perhaps almost too well, with one of the reviewer comments printed on the back cover made by a certain Patrick French of the Sunday Telegraph newspaper. French states: “His research is prodigious and chilling…a wide ranging book which offers a warning about the dangers of alternative history”

We here at WLT would certainly concur with at least the second part of that statement. However, it is the P.C. anointed version of ‘History’, in all its lurid glory, that we regard as ‘alternative’ in that it is ‘alternative’ to the truth. As for the first part of the statement it is entirely feasible that Mr. Hale really thought his own work was ‘well researched’, and perhaps it was, at least within the strict parameters of what is accepted today as permissible.

There are incessant smartarse comments (in parentheses) inserted by the author as well as words and phrases printed within sarcastic quotation marks that are obviously meant to convey ridicule when quoting or referring to people with whom he clearly disagrees or feels compelled to condemn and thereby overtly conform to P.C. values. In today’s Neo-Communist ‘Liberal Democratic’ Dystopia the writer must be very careful to never be neutral when it comes to dealing with Conservatives and Traditionalists, let alone Fascists and National Socialists, and to take every opportunity to make it clear where he stands ‘ethically’ and ‘morally’. This sort of blatant bias is not only permitted, it is compulsory.

Ernst Zundel is referred to as ‘virulent’, ‘notorious’ and ‘Neo-Nazi’. All terms cynically designed to give the impression that the aging, quietly spoken gentleman Zundel is some foaming hater, spewing evil lies and goosestepping about, while advocating war criminals and promoting genocide. It is all so shrill and hysterical particularly when one compares it to the genuinely scholarly works of real intellectuals like Professor Kevin B. MacDonald (The Culture Of Critique) and former professor Andrew Fraser (The Wasp Question). There is simply no comparison.

No effort is made anywhere in the book to present the beliefs and claims of the National Socialists in a cool and rational manner and to examine them logically and unemotionally. Rather, everything is laced with a simplistic “Racism’s baaad…m’kay!” attitude. Your Old Uncle Victor recommends the gentle reader exercise great care and caution when reading such material and to study contrary argument to the supportive references supplied or to perhaps even discard it out of hand as being clumsy enemy propaganda if it is too blatant in its bias. Certainly it is an acquired skill to suppress one’s instinctive credulity for the clever lies interwoven within the narrative (the ZOG hate mongers really know how to spin ‘em and to dazzle with colour and movement) while gleaning concepts, ideas and information that might come in useful at a later time but it is nevertheless essential to maintain this ‘sorting’ procedure lest one be bamboozled by the gruesome, shocking and melodramatic presentation of ‘Hollywood History’. Good luck.

No comments: