Truth Obligates - The Thinking Housewife

Truth Obligates  - The Thinking Housewife

February 28, 2017

GERARD MENUHIN was born in Scotland in 1948. He is the son of Jewish parents, the great violinist Yehudi Menuhin and British ballerina Diana Rosamund Gould. His brother is the pianist Jeremy Menuhin. Their grandfather was Moshe Menuhin, the great, great grandson of Shneur Zalman of Liadi, the founder of Chabad Hassidism and an anti-Zionist. Gerard is an actor, novelist and journalist, a graduate of Eton and Stanford University who lived in Germany and England as a child. In his latest book, Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil (2015), Menuhin rejects many of the official and popular accounts of World War II and thus has earned the hateful slur of “Holocaust denier.”
Menuhin is a courageous man — a cultured intellectual reduced to the most infantile, bigoted and deceitful characterizations by a herd of infantile, bigoted and deceitful propagandists. He is not a “Holocaust denier,” but a hero.
Perhaps only a person of Jewish ancestry could write so fearlessly on such a forbidden topic. His book is filled with important historical information from primary sources and daring opinions. Menuhin believes the war should not have been fought at all.
At times, his opinions are harsh, as Jews sometimes can be toward themselves, and I don’t agree with them all, but he is not a “Holocaust denier” and, in fact, there are no “Holocaust deniers,” at least not any that are taken seriously. No one sane questions the fact that hundreds of thousands of Jews died in concentration camps in Germany, a terrible disaster brought about toward the end of the war when the Allies bombed the supply lines into the camps, where Jews, whose leaders had declared war on Germany in 1933, worked in armaments factories and miserably awaited deportation. What Menuhin and many other abused, hounded and slandered historical revisionists do deny is that anywhere close to six million died, that gas chambers existed and that there was a plan to exterminate European Jewry. Menuhin has thus earned more slurs: “self-hating Jew” and “anti-Semitic Jew.”
A reviewer at Amazon writes:

Mr. Menuhin does more to honor the real victims of the Holocaust, than any other, since he shames the lies proliferated in their names, and restores their dignity and well earned memory. Furthermore, this is the kind of literature that will contribute to mitigating antisemitism, and not the EU Holocaust laws passed to penalize and imprison those who express those sentiments.

Another reviewer writes:

I have still not managed to finish the book. I had to stop several times because for an half-awakened, still half-indoctrinated German it was too much to take in. Many times I reread parts with tears in my eyes. Too many lies. So much hatred against us which we just ignored. So much destruction of our country, our culture our people we were told was deserved but in fact was just to crush our natural economic development. I now believe that our biggest weakness is our honesty. It makes us incapable to recognize the lies against us. A musician myself I am proud to say that I have met Yehudi Menuhin in person but I now believe that his son Gerard will leave an even deeper mark in human history than his father.

In writing his book, Menuhin fell into one of the most vilified of coteries. Who knows how long it will be before he is arrested and put in jail. In the Spanish Inquisition, people were incarcerated for telling lies. In the modern Inquisition, people are jailed for telling the truth.
He writes of his motives:

I, perceiving the truth about past and present events, merely tried to correct their interpretation, not realizing when I started, that any revelations I might experience and try to communicate in no way disturbed this sequence, could not upset its sway, and only endangered me and made me ridiculous to those in the know and, with the exception of a few, unintelligible to those who are not.

Yet, as the German saying has it: “Truth obligates; who keeps silent concurs.” (Wahrheit verpflichtet, wer schweigt stimmt zu.)

Peace between humans should be the norm on Earth. Yet to achieve this normal state requires all our energy. My father said:“Peace may sound simple—one beautiful word—but it requires everything we have, every quality, every strength, every dream, every high ideal.”

My father tried to generate peace with his music. I have inherited a duty to do the same in the only way I can.

Tell the Truth intersperses history with memoir. (His method is confusing at times.) Menuhin is an atheist. I don’t share his lack of regard for the faith of the ancient Israelites. He is not the only historical revisionist who does not believe in, appreciate or understand God’s former Covenant with the Jews. Nevertheless, despite this blindness, his book is a compelling account of an historical and personal awakening.
Here is an excerpt:

As the captive audience of my mother’s recollections of the Blitz, I habitually tuned out or deleted most of her repetitive anecdotes, out of resentment. I regret this now, as a clearer firsthand account of life in wartime London, however edited, would have been informative. But the very manner of my mother’s monologues hindered questions, which would have been considered mere interruptions of the scheduled broadcast.

Associated topics included the “Wirtschaftswunder” years, the miracle of postwar German industrial reconstruction, to which my mother alluded during my parents’ few visits to my German school, in 1957. At nine, I was unsurprisingly unaware of this phenomenon, or of the incongruity of two advanced Anglo-Saxon nations destroying each other. About fifteen years later, I heard an irascible colonel on American radio voice a fitting verdict: “For the British and the Germans to be fighting each other was an inappropriate encounter situation.” All the Germans I knew were unfailingly pleasant and remarkable only for seeming each to possess the same model of shiny dark blue suit, in retrospect perhaps in itself an indication of their striving toward a return to bourgeois standards. The schoolchildren at Hermannsberg were also models of normality, in that, in their free time, they were chiefly occupied with games/sports, amusement, music and outdoor pastimes. That their ancestors and mine could have been incited to kill each other never occurred to me. The only reference to the war that I remember is of a glancing remark I overheard as I was drying myself after the morning shower, when two older boys were exchanging hearsay about the fate of German POWs in Russian captivity. Although it was typical of schoolboys’ gossip, the morbid subject naturally impressed me at the time.

Since then, I have learned much, some of it by reflection, some from books and records of and about the time, which by their copious footnotes and corroborative contents and cross-referencing, confirm that the sympathy I have always felt for this much-maligned and mistreated people is justified. In fact, I never gave the subject much thought, occupied as I was with my daily drudgery, until the Nineties, when, while I was ordering the contents of my deceased grandparents’ house, I chanced on a copy of the National Zeitung, the patriotic German newspaper to which my grandfather had contributed a column for several years during the Sixties. He had devoted his life, by means of books and articles, to supporting the Palestinians, among whom he had lived as a boy, during the first decade of the 20th century. A Russian-Jewish immigrant, he had experienced much kindness from the local Arabs and had taken stock of the attitude and expectations of some of the Jewish settlers.

The newspaper commanded respect, with its simple Maltese/Iron Cross logo and boldly independent informative stance. Although it entered my thoughts only intermittently, my ambition to communicate with its publisher and friend of my grandfather’s grew over the years, in measure as I was subjected to various revelations.

No mission to discover a universal truth inspired me, rather a wish to understand my times and the development of the world, in particular to explain to myself this catastrophic caesura during the1940s, a warp not only in time, but in Western European character, during which the fathers and grandfathers of my German classmates had allegedly done the unspeakable.

So hideous and shameful had been their crimes then that they had even acquired their own appellation.By inducing a particular bias into a hitherto neutral English word, a commodious new orthodoxy was invented, so powerful that its regular, ubiquitous invocation by the media had placed the entire Western world under its spell. How could this be?

Due to the exceptional nature of the twelve years of National Socialism, a large and growing body of lurid fiction and alleged fact has materialized, based on its dramatic superficialities rather than onany study or comprehension of its socialist policies, and inspired by a particular agenda. Sobriety rejects sensationalism. A perusal of reputable historical sources, some of them quite hard to find, helped me to form my own opinion. The most powerful persuasion, however, did not come from the rather dry accounts in my reading, but from the perfectly straightforward deduction that a people with the traditions and culture of the Germans did not almost overnight become barbarians and commit mass murder. Their military did not lose its humanity just because it was accustomed to obeying orders.

Most tellingly, the descendants of these reputed monsters could not have been the absolutely average children who surrounded me daily while I was at school in Germany, children who could have come from anywhere.

Three of the best known works on the Second World War are General Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe (New York: Doubleday [Country Life Press], 1948), Winston Churchill’s The Second World War (London: Cassell, 6 vols., 1948-1954), and the Mémoires de guerre of General de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 3 vols., 1954-1959). In these three works not the least mention of Nazi gas chambers is to be found. Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe is a book of 559 pages; the six volumes of Churchill’s Second World War total 4,448 pages; and de Gaulle’s three-volume Mémoires de guerre is 2,054 pages. In this mass of writing, which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one will find no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million” Jewish victims of the war. Robert Faurisson, “The Detail (the alleged Nazi gas chambers),” The Journal of Historical Review, March-April 1998 (Vol. 17, No. 2), pages 19-20)

[….]

The 6 million figure, in connection with the claimed suffering of European Jews, appeared regularly in North American newspapers of record at least since 1915 (The Sun, June 6, 1915), presumably to prepare the ground among emotionally labile readers for the time when testimony to support such a claim could confidently be manufactured. The use of “holocaust” in this context was introduced as early as 1936 (New York Times, May 31, 1936). [emphasis added] “Russian imperial leaders had long been suspicious of the Jews, and largely banished them to the so-called Pale of Settlement that was established in western Russia in the 1790s. Beginning in the 1880s, western media issued exaggerated reports of slaughters, pogroms, and assorted massacres among the Russian Jews there, whose aggregate numbersof victims were nearly always recorded—astonishingly—as ‘6 million.’” The New York Times carried periodic such reports. See, for example: January 26, 1891: “Rabbi Gottheil says a word on the persecution of the Jews: ‘. . . about 6 million persecuted and miserable wretches’.”),

September 21, 1891: “An indictment of Russia . . . a total of 6,000,000 is more nearly correct.” June 11, 1900: “[In Russia and central Europe] there are 6,000,000 living, bleeding, suffering arguments in favor of Zionism.” March 23, 1905: “We Jews in America [sympathize with] our 6,000,000 cringing brothers in Russia.”

March 25, 1906: “Startling reports of the condition and future of Russia’s 6,000,000 Jews. . . .” The situation led a former president of B’nai B’rith to a prophetic exclamation: “Simon Wolf asks how long the Russian Holocaust is to continue.” (November 10, 1905) (Inconvenient History)

Forty years before the Holocaust story gradually took shape in 1942, both the number and the precise terminology were used:

Startling reports of the condition and future of Russia’s 6,000,000 Jews were made on March 12 in Berlin to the annual meeting of the Central Jewish Relief League of Germany by Dr. Paul Nathan, a well-known Berlin publicist, who has returned from an extensive trip through Russia as the special emissary of Jewish philanthropists in England, America and Germany, to arrange for distribution of the relief fund of $1,500,000 raised after the massacres last autumn. He left St. Petersburg with the firm conviction that the Russian government’s studied policy for the “solution” to the Jewish question is systematic and murderous extermination. (New York Times, March 25, 1906) (author’s italics)

One does wonder who these “philanthropists” were, who sent the good doctor on his mission.

How dare the smooth talkers, the clever official blabbers, open their mouths and boast of progress. . . . Here they hold jubilant peace conferences in which they talk against war. . . . But the same righteous Governments, who are so nobly, industriously active to establish the eternal peace, are preparing, by their own confession, complete annihilation for 6 million people, and there is nobody, except the doomed themselves, to raise his voice in protest although this is a worse crime than any war. . . . (Max Nordau, Zionist Congress 1911, Basel/Perfidy by Ben Hecht, page 254, 1962; author’s italics)

***

The Appeal—To save Six million Men and Women in Eastern Europe from Extermination by Hunger and Disease. The Obligation—It is the duty of every person in New York to give the utmost he can spare to relieve the greatest need the world has ever known (advertisement, New York Times, May 5, 1920)

[…]

The Bible is full of “burnt sacrifices,” which evidently pleased God (e.g., Leviticus 1:14-17 details all the mumbo-jumbo pertaining to burnt sacrifices). Apparently, Jewish prophecies in the Torah require that 6 million Jews must vanish before the state of Israel can be formed: “You shall return minus 6 million.” Those 6 million had to disappear in “burning ovens.” So 6 million Jews had to be gassed and end up in burning ovens to fulfill the prophecies and satisfy the Talmud Torah dogmatists—a necessary adjunct to the financial entrepreneurs—of Israel’s legitimacy, according to their covenant with their God.

There have been—and indeed continue to be—many efforts to memorialize the Jews murdered in the Holocaust, but this effort of the surviving Hassidic masters stands out. The Zohar records that there are 600,000 letters in the Torah. Truth be told, our scrolls have far fewer letters—304,805 to be exact. Thus the number 600,000 cannot refer merely to a different text of the Bible, for the discrepancy is too great. The number 600,000 could therefore be considered a symbolic number.

One of the later mystics, Rabbi Natan Nata Shapiro of Krakow (Megaleh Amukot, 1585-1633) wrote that this number corresponds to the 600,000 Jewish souls that exist. Sure there are more people than that, but each soul can mystically animate more than one person. Moreover, the Hebrew name for Israel—Yisrael—is an acronym for Yesh Shishim Ribbuy Otiyot Latorah, there are 600,000 letters in the Torah. (Jerusalem Post, June 1, 2012) (author’s italics) So could the number 666 ‘be considered a symbolic number’.

The Bible declares: “Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred three score and six.” (Revelation 13:18) Useful superstitions about “The Beast” or Antichrist can thus be traced to this hokum around the number “6.”

All material evidence to the contrary is stubbornly declared insignificant, as was the exonerating evidence at the Nuremberg show trials. The only relevant fact is:

The holocaust dogma of Judaism is an article of faith and a doctrine of belief of Jewish religious history adjudicated by their rabbis according to Talmudic law and Kabalistic tradition. (Ben Weintraub, The Holocaust Dogma of Judaism: Keystone of the New World Order)

So we have “‘’faith,” “doctrine” and “belief.” What we don’t have is hard physical proof. “Faith means you don’t know,” as someone has said. If you don’t know that a crime has occurred, how can you punish someone for perpetrating it?

As Jewish jazz musician and author Gilad Atzmon says, “The Holocaust is a complete forgery, initiated by Americans and Zionists.“ (Ruhr-Nachrichten 2005)

More astounding because it appeared in a major mainstream French newspaper, as summary to a long pseudo-historical article under the general title “Menace negationniste” (“Menace of holocaust denial”), was the assertion:

Everyone is free to refer to this or that kind of explanation, everyone is ultimately free to imagine or to fantasize that these monstrous events did not take place.

Unfortunately they did take place and nobody can deny their existence without abusing the truth. One must not ask oneself how such mass murder was technically possible. It was technically pos-
sible because it took place. (Le Monde, February 21, 1979)

This pledge of allegiance to the faith was signed by 34 French historians, all presumably keen to keep their jobs. One assumes that they were also familiar with the French fantasist Rabelais, who com-
posed five satirical books entitled The Horrible and Terrifying Deeds and Words of the Very Renowned Pantagruel King of the Dipsodes, Son of the Great Giant Gargantua.

As “6 million” merely represents some token in Jewish dogma, some cabalistic hocus-pocus, there is no reason to attach any special importance to its numerical value. It is only rational to recall that there were never 6 million Jews under German control during the war.

The claim that 5.7 million Jews were murdered is not true. The number of Jewish victims can only range between 1 and 1.5 million, because there were not more Jews within Hitler’s reach. (Ferdinand Otto Miksche, colonel in the French army and a close aide to Charles de Gaulle, The End of the Present, Herbig, Munich, 1990, p.107)

Statistics for 1919 show 615,021 Jews in the whole of Germany. (Flächeninhalt und Bevölkerung, October 8, 1919) Official statistics and censuses before and after the war show hardly any changes in the numbers of Jews.

This was demonstrated by Swedish author Einar Aberg in 1959, who, citing official organs  of Jewry such as the American Jewish Committee and mainstream American publications such as The World Almanac, showed that they did not document a substantially sharp decline during the years of the war. It stated that in 1936 there were 15,753,633 Jews worldwide; while in 1949 there were 15,713,638.

These Holocaust deniers are very slick people. They justify everything they say with facts and figures. —Chairman, New Jersey Commission on Holocaust Education (Newark Star-Ledger, Oct. 23, 1996, p. 15)

An estimate based on documents held by the International Tracing Service of the Red Cross arrives at a figure of 74,000 deaths at Auschwitz, based on the “Auschwitz death books.” The death books themselves are wartime German camp records, which were captured by the Soviets toward the end of the war and hidden in Soviet archives, until released to the Red Cross in 1989 by Mikhail Gorbachov.

The International Red Cross made frequent visits to Auschwitz:

We had not been able to discover any trace of installations for exterminating civilian prisoners. This corroborates a report which we had already received from other sources. . . . (USA-Today, Friday, May 2, 1997, page 14A)

***

Furthermore, there exists since 1979 a document from the Bureau of Vital Statistics in Arolsen, which lists the certified deaths in each concentration camp of the Third Reich (total 271,304 cases of which 52,389 in Auschwitz). (Bureau of Vital Statistics Arolsen, case officer Herr [Redacted], Az. I/V-050-Schw. May 11, 1979)

[…]

In conclusive proof, both of the nature of Auschwitz concentration camp and of the implausibility of the charge that Jews were gassed there—or anywhere at all—the records of the Auschwitz Kommandantur (commander’s headquarters) appeared in 2000 (Institut für Zeitgeschichte, Munich, 604 pp.). Here are a few extracts:

Commandant’s headquarters order Nr. 9/40. Auschwitz, November 28, 1940. Communication with prisoners in protective custody. It must be yet again be affirmed that some SS-men still call the prisoners to the fence to give them shoes or items of clothing to be repaired. I must point out that such behavior is not only forbidden, but that it is also life threatening. . . . The Comman-
dant of Auschwitz concentration camp. Signed Höss, SS-Major.

***

Commandant special order 1/42. Subject: work on Sundays. If a prisoner is to produce a full amount of work, it is necessarythat he should also have enough strength, rest and readiness to approach each week’s stint. For this, he needs Sunday to rest. In this regard, it is vital to ensure that prisoners in future bathe once a week, and that the calm of Sunday be used to maintain clothes and all other items of daily use, which the prisoner needs for his personal care. Signed, Höss, Major and Commandant.

***

Sunday work for prisoners. I forbid the assembly of work details on Sundays for work that is not absolutely necessary or essential. Prisoners should report for disinfection, bathing etc. and with this to undertake the necessary change of clothes, bed linen and mending of clothes. (author’s italics)

Standortbefehl Nr. 51/43. Auschwitz, November 16, 1943.Häftlingseigentum. Prisoners‘ property. I have occasion to point out, for the last time, that prisoners’ property, no matter what it consists of, or where it is or is seen, must remain untouched. . . . I expect from every orderly, decent SS-member—and that will be the majority—that he keeps his eyes open and helps to remove swiftly

[Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil, Barnes Review, 2015, pp 7-14]

Menuhin responds to the idea that he is a “self-hating Jew:”

If you are Jewish yourself, and you point the finger at Jews for their skulduggery, you must either be insane or hate yourself, or possibly both, they say. You hate them, so you hate yourself. Hmm. The only sense I can make of this is that, having recognized the terrible harm Jews have done to the world and continue to do to it, some Jews hate themselves for being Jewish. Well, that may indeed be so.

The first “Jewish self-hater” may have been the Judean Jesus himself, the itinerant preacher who castigated the money-lenders, thus revealing to the Pharisees that he was not the useful leader they had been expecting, and sealing his fate. In my case, as I’ve said, not being actually a Jew according to their laws, I can’t hate myself for this. Hatred is, in any case, a consuming emotion and thus an unhealthy one. [p. 389]

Let reason be silent when experience gainsays its conclusions

Let reason be silent when experience gainsays its conclusions

Gender Ideology Harms Children - The American College of Pediatricians

Gender Ideology Harms Children

The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.

1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of male and female, respectively – not genetic markers of a disorder. The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species. This principle is self-evident. The exceedingly rare disorders of sex development (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs do not constitute a third sex.¹
2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.^2,3,4
3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V).⁵ The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.^2,4,5
4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. Reversible or not, puberty- blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child.⁶
5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.⁵
6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.^7,8,9,10
7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBTQ – affirming countries.¹¹ What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?
8. Conditioning children into believing that a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.


Michelle A. Cretella, M.D.
President of the American College of Pediatricians
Quentin Van Meter, M.D.
Vice President of the American College of Pediatricians
Pediatric Endocrinologist
Paul McHugh, M.D.
University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital


For a PDF version click here: Gender Ideology Harms Children.

CLARIFICATIONS in response to questions regarding points 3 & 5:

Regarding Point 3: “Where does the APA or DSM-V indicate that Gender Dysphoria is a mental disorder?”
The APA (American Psychiatric Association) is the author of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition(DSM-V). The APA states that those distressed and impaired by their GD meet the definition of a disorder. The College is unaware of any medical literature that documents a gender dysphoric child seeking puberty blocking hormones who is not significantly distressed by the thought of passing through the normal and healthful process of puberty.
From the DSM-V fact sheet:
“The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition.”
“This condition causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.”
Regarding Point 5:  “Where does the DSM-V list rates of resolution for Gender Dysphoria?”
On page 455 of the DSM-V under “Gender Dysphoria without a disorder of sex development” it states: “Rates of persistence of gender dysphoria from childhood into adolescence or adulthood vary. In natal males, persistence has ranged from 2.2% to 30%. In natal females, persistence has ranged from 12% to 50%.”  Simple math allows one to calculate that for natal boys: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 2.2% = 97.8% (approx. 98% of gender-confused boys)  Similarly, for natal girls: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 12% = 88% gender-confused girls
The bottom line:  Our opponents advocate a new scientifically baseless standard of care for children with a psychological condition (GD) that would otherwise resolve after puberty for the vast majority of patients concerned.  Specifically, they advise:  affirmation of children’s thoughts which are contrary to physical reality; the chemical castration of these children prior to puberty with GnRH agonists (puberty blockers which cause infertility, stunted growth, low bone density, and an unknown impact upon their brain development), and, finally, the permanent sterilization of these children prior to age 18 via cross-sex hormones. There is an obvious self-fulfilling nature to encouraging young GD children to impersonate the opposite sex and then institute pubertal suppression. If a boy who questions whether or not he is a boy (who is meant to grow into a man) is treated as a girl, then has his natural pubertal progression to manhood suppressed, have we not set in motion an inevitable outcome? All of his same sex peers develop into young men, his opposite sex friends develop into young women, but he remains a pre-pubertal boy. He will be left psychosocially isolated and alone. He will be left with the psychological impression that something is wrong. He will be less able to identify with his same sex peers and being male, and thus be more likely to self identify as “non-male” or female. Moreover, neuroscience reveals that the pre-frontal cortex of the brain which is responsible for judgment and risk assessment is not mature until the mid-twenties. Never has it been more scientifically clear that children and adolescents are incapable of making informed decisions regarding permanent, irreversible and life-altering medical interventions. For this reason, the College maintains it is abusive to promote this ideology, first and foremost for the well-being of the gender dysphoric children themselves, and secondly, for all of their non-gender-discordant peers, many of whom will subsequently question their own gender identity, and face violations of their right to bodily privacy and safety.
Please visit this page on the College website concerning sexuality and gender issues.
A PDF version of this page can be downloaded here: Gender Ideology Harms


References:
1. Consortium on the Management of Disorders of Sex Development, “Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Disorders of Sex Development in Childhood.” Intersex Society of North America, March 25, 2006. Accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.dsdguidelines.org/files/clinical.pdf.
2. Zucker, Kenneth J. and Bradley Susan J. “Gender Identity and Psychosexual Disorders.” FOCUS: The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry. Vol. III, No. 4, Fall 2005 (598-617).
3. Whitehead, Neil W. “Is Transsexuality biologically determined?” Triple Helix (UK), Autumn 2000, p6-8. accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.mygenes.co.nz/transsexuality.htm; see also Whitehead, Neil W. “Twin Studies of Transsexuals [Reveals Discordance]” accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.mygenes.co.nz/transs_stats.htm.
4. Jeffreys, Sheila. Gender Hurts: A Feminist Analysis of the Politics of Transgenderism. Routledge, New York, 2014 (pp.1-35).
5. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Association, 2013 (451-459). See page 455 re: rates of persistence of gender dysphoria.
6. Hembree, WC, et al. Endocrine treatment of transsexual persons: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94:3132-3154.
7. Olson-Kennedy, J and Forcier, M. “Overview of the management of gender nonconformity in children and adolescents.” UpToDate November 4, 2015. Accessed 3.20.16 from www.uptodate.com.
8. Moore, E., Wisniewski, & Dobs, A. “Endocrine treatment of transsexual people: A review of treatment regimens, outcomes, and adverse effects.” The Journal of Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2003; 88(9), pp3467-3473.
9. FDA Drug Safety Communication issued for Testosterone products accessed 3.20.16: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm161874.htm.
10. World Health Organization Classification of Estrogen as a Class I Carcinogen: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/ageing/cocs_hrt_statement.pdf.
11. Dhejne, C, et.al. “Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden.” PLoS ONE, 2011; 6(2). Affiliation: Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Psychiatry, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Accessed 3.20.16 from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885.

Books / Reading List

I have been meaning to keep a list of books TBR for a while. First post.

Summer Reading List

Posted on 2016-06-26 by Lawrence Murray

All right goyim, summer is here! Get ready for standard pool parties and of course, summer reading assignments. Here is a list of political and historical books I have found valuable and which could be considered part of an alt-right canon of sorts:
Patrick J. Buchanan, Suicide of a Superpower — Paleoconservative commentator Pat Buchanan has a number of titles dealing with American decline, but this one is the most relevant in my opinion. Much of his analysis of what is happening to the United States culturally and politically is very spot-on. The weakest point of the book is the emphasis on preserving the Christian identity of the United States, a statistical reality which will ironically survive the demographic changes Buchanan draws attention to elsewhere in the text. And considering how devoted the churches are to our colonization by the third world… He is still a very accessible author with good instincts about what is going wrong, but keep in mind that he gets to be a public figure because he stays just within the Overton window. Still a great read.

Guillaume Faye, Archaeofuturism — A French New Right author who I mentally refer to as William Fay, Guillaume Faye wrote Archaeofuturism almost twenty years ago. The book does not feel dated (except when he talks about 1980s far-right intellectuals in France and why they failed) and indeed many of his predictions are eerily correct, especially on Islamic terror (the book was published in 1998) and troubles in the eurozone. The French perspective is particular useful because they have no hangups about being critical of the United States, which is something we must be, and are based in Europe (obviously). If we are truly to build a nationalist order, the very American alt-right should remain informed of ideological developments in the homeland. Continental Europe and the Anglo-Saxon satellites have long seen the world very differently, and nowhere is this more obvious than in Faye’s zeal for European integration, an issue that remains deeply contentious.
David Hackett Fischer, Albion’s Seed  — I have written about this very long book before and I cannot recommend it enough. Fischer’s opus describes how four main ethno-religious and regional migrations out of the British Isles in the colonial period laid the foundations for the early United States. The history itself is interesting—I always wondered why astrology was more popular among Southerners and now I know why—but perhaps more important is the bigger picture, which is that the people you settle a land with are central to the culture that is created on it. This sounds obvious but has been buried by postmodern ways of thinking. While Fischer is largely fair in his assessment of the four regional cultures, I do feel he has a preference for the Puritan and Quaker societies over the Southern and Appalachian ones. For a more contemporary, shorter, and slightly pozzed version of this work, see Colin Woodard’s American Nations, which breaks the US into a whopping 11 deracinated regional cultures.
Gregory Hood, Waking Up from the American Dream — This is the newest book on the list, and one I recently reviewed. Hood is one of the most talented writers on the alt-right, and this book collects many of his recent essays related to issues of White identity and American politics. Hood offers a well-needed identitarian criticism of the American Dream, the conservative movement, and civic nationalism.
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Democracy: The God that Failed  — I only read this book after becoming a nationalist, but for the meme value alone this fairly brief and often repetitive anarcho-capitalist treatise against democracy is worth a read. Hoppe represents the remnants of right-wing libertarianism, and as such emphasizes that we do not have to tolerate every sort of degeneracy foisted unto us by equality, or equality itself. Nor should we tolerate neighbors we didn’t ask for and which have no ties to our communities. An ever useful observation of the increasingly defunct libertarian movement, however, is that people respond to incentives, which is why Hoppe believes those who impugn society need to be threatened with physical punishment, if not physical removal. Looking ahead, Hoppe sees the Holy Roman Empire as a potential model for a disintegrating United States—an outcome of free cities and a loose affiliation of statelets is often overlooked by doomists. Interesting read even if you have no background in LARPy ancapistani fantasies.
Greg Johnson, New Right Versus Old Right — The flagship book of Counter-Currents, NROR is a succinct introduction to what the North American New Right is about, its metapolitical aims, and the importance of identity. With a philosopher’s attention to logic, Johnson makes his case premise by premise for why we need a homeland and why we aren’t villains for wanting one. Perhaps most importantly, Johnson addresses the issues of the failed Old Right that many overlook out of their contempt for our present situation.
Kevin MacDonald, Culture of Critique — No list would be complete without this formational text. McDonald provides one of the most well-researched and well-written takes on the JQ that’s ever been penned. Read it.
Benjamin Netanyahu, A Place Among the Nations — I know this sounds like a bizarre choice to include, but bear with me for a moment. This is a book written in defense of the world’s most maligned extant ethnostate and settler colony by one of the most successful right-wing nationalist politicians in history. Zionism is a lot of things to a lot of different people, but one thing it isn’t is a failure. There is a lot of quality rhetoric and framing here that is worth learning from and even appropriating. The combination of history, romanticism, ethnocentrism, logistical awareness, and personal commitment that inform the likudnik worldview are all important to its enduring success in Israeli politics.
T. Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy — Almost nothing in this classic text is outdated. The predicted collapse of European imperialism, the rise of China and radical Islam, and the anticipated demographic pressure and migrations from the colored global south all came true. Another interesting facet of Rising Tide is that its narrative of Western decline predates WWII, which so many theorists tend to focus on. It was WWI that saw the huge use of colored levies in Europe and mass racial suicide first, both of which spiritually and materially broke Europe. Stoddard also makes the crucial distinction between rule and settlement of a territory, the idea of outer and inner dikes of our racial patrimony. A well-populated settler colony like the United States is an extension of Europe in a way that the British Raj was not. In our times, the outer dikes have been torn down and the inner dikes are undergoing the same process. If you read anything, read this.
Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf — There aren’t many books which can lay claim to having altered the course of world history, but this is one of them. AH isn’t a particularly great writer either, but the observations, insights, tactics, and paradigms in here are worth looking at. And like any narrative which has transcended time and history there is an impulse for the reader to fit it to their own circumstances. One might argue that the Austria-Hungary and Weimar Republic that AH railed against have met their match in the United States, which seems to combine the worst traits of both, minoritization of the core nation and entrenched social and moral rot. No matter how much of Mein Kampf or its derivative NS you agree (or disagree) with, I think it will have an impact on how you view the crises of our era. Many on the alt-right find it useful to be familiar with cultural marxism and its canon, but I think it also important to be familiar with what cultural marxism is a reaction against, national socialism, which itself was a reaction to judaeo-bolshevism. This struggle has  been going on for a long time.

No Right To Whites

No Right To Whites

Max Wifeschild


You don’t have the right to white people.
You don’t have the right to denigrate our history and traditions and then lay claim to what we’ve built.
You don’t have the right to ruin our children in your social experiments called public schools.
You don’t have the right to ruin our lives and livelihoods with your imported savages.
You don’t have the right to us.
We are going to determine our own future. We are going to determine our own lives.
Our lives are not improved with diversity. Our lives are not improved with multiculturalism. Our lives are not improved by those spreading these poisonous ideas. We are going to stop you.
We gave you our cities. We gave you our infrastructure. We gave you our neighborhoods. Now, you want our nations, children, and even our lives.
We are not giving you any more. Fuck you.
You don’t have a right to us. You can have your crappy culture. You can have your crappy communities. You can have your crappy way of life you made for yourselves. You can have your broken, backwards cultures that created your broken, backwards nations. But no, you can’t have us.
We are done with you and your enablers. We are not going to retreat any longer. Our numbers are growing each day with a righteous hatred of what has been done to us. We are going to fight and we are going to win

"Black Lives Matter" In One Graph

Via Intergalactic Source Of Truth

 

"Black Lives Matter" in one graph.

H/t: Maggie's Farm.

On Free Trade

See this Vox Day post:

The Libertarian Case for Free Trade

And please note that for the most of my short life I would have/did describe myself as a sort of Anarcho-Capitalist with Traditionalist leanings. (Warning: Language)

Fantasy and Reality, which will you choose? The life and preservation of the West and its cultures or universalism/internationism without self determination, which will you choose?

(warning: language)

This is all complete mental masturbation as there is no such thing as free trade except in the fantasy sense.

This simple truth kills the whole argument. Until there is a completely level playing field, there is no free trade.

As most countries view themselves as nation-states with national interests, it will ALWAYS be this way unless there is a One World Governmental body.

It seems that only the West is not allowed to seek its own best interests.

One side is playing the trade war and the West is lying down and spreading its collective legs.

When someone speaks the magic spell of free trade, they should be slapped accordingly. They are mentally masturbating to their own theoretical musings of a utopian/fantasy world and nothing more.

Free trade is internationalism/universalism. All cultures will have to be subsumed for it to exist (the benefit of the free movement of labour)

Free trade is utopian mind bullshit. Free trade is anti-West. As a former AnCap, I can't believe how long it took me to see what an autiste I was in this. Now I look at those who still believe this bullshit and wonder how can the intelligent be so damn stupid. They are either too involved with the theory and not the real world, or this is the other side of the communist/marxist coin as a Hegelian mambo death dance for the West.

Also from the comments:

1. James Dixon:
Seriously? Is this the best case they have to offer?

Just one example: However, when you look at our deficits, when you look at it from any standpoint, you begin with the fact that the trade deficit of the US in total is 3% of gross domestic product.

First, it's 3% every year. Year after year after year. The effect is cumulative. Secondly, once a factory moves, it doesn't come back. Those jobs are gone forever. The jobs that supposedly replace it won't be in the same area. But I guess everyone is just supposed to abandon their homes and families and move wherever the the jobs are, and move again five years later when things change again, right?

Second: ...and say that libertarian principles dictate that we should have the freedom to trade, whether it be with a foreigner or with somebody domestic. Nobody has a right to interfere in our right to trade with whomever we please when we perceive mutual benefit.

Tariffs don't stop trade. They merely make you pay more for foreign trade. Just as local and state taxes make things cost more in a given area. It's a matter of how we choose to fund government that works to our best advantage. If we choose to do so via tariffs rather than other taxes, well, that's our decision to make.

2. Tim:
To address only one statement. The problem with losing 3% of jobs to free trade is that represents ONE YEAR. Next year, we have another 3% trade deficit, and there go .03x.97 jobs, and pretty soon the labor participation rate is in the .50s. Hmm, where is labor participation in the US? Oh yeah. If it was really free trade, that 3% would be dropping, and would have reversed by now. But when Mexico and China for example keep their wages and currency artificially low and weak respectively, then the bleeding never stops. In Mexico, the rich get very rich indeed, and the Mexican worker gets marginally better off.....and the American worker is hosed. The same for China, where to you think all those Chinese oligarchs got all those billions? Free trade can work...but only if it is really free trade...and it is still just a leveling between the partners. The United States was so rich we should have pulled Mexico right up to where we were...but in Mexico, the rich saw the benefits, and kept the poor poor, and after 20 years there has been no change....except the working class in the US has suffered.

3. dc.sunsets:
Concentrated benefit, diffuse cost is a problem everywhere, but note how "free trade" embeds it down to the level of the individual choosing where to buy toilet paper.

For 50 years (35 years on overdrive) people in the USA have borrowed in order to enter the marketplace.

The result?
1. GDP ramped higher because borrowing isn't backed out of its bottom line. Discussions of GDP today are rendered worthless, like discussion of the plot of a fictional universe novel.
2. The relative utility of being productive fell, because Say's Law (in order to consume, you must first produce) was placed in stasis...or bludgeoned into a coma, thus instead of production, people increasingly engaged in parlor tricks (the FIRE economy) as a means to great wealth.
3. Monetary wealth (US$) in the form of owning bonds began to FLOOD into the world, seemingly from nowhere. Perception of riches (by sitting on piles of IOU's) skyrocketed, encouraging a spending spree in one market after another.
4. Trade deficits exploded as Americans traded IOU-dollars to export-mercantilist foreigners for inexpensive (price-suppressed) trinkets from clothing to iPhones.
5. A sense of unlimited resources pervaded the entire West. Congress had no limit on spending because every bond issued by the US Treasury was deemed WEALTH so every time Congress pissed away another dollar on some boondoggle, the "economy" was richer by #1 the amount spent and #2 the amount of the bond that was issued to spend it.

Yes, this hammer is my only tool so every problem in today's world looks to me like a nail...BUT...every problem in today's world arises, if you peel the onion enough, from this putrid swamp of monetary con-artistry.

Free trade? Where, when "money" is so detached from production? Consumer sovereignty, when the cumulative "concentrated benefits/diffuse costs" end up being a vast NET CATASTROPHE for people in the USA due to stupid political edicts driven by a complete and total misunderstanding of what is really happening?

For nearly my whole life we've lived under a system of monetary dishonesty so profound and pervasive that it has befuddled the minds of nearly everyone, high and low. Karl Denninger's metaphor of the pond where lily pads double in sq.ft. is quite apt; Now, after 20 years of wage and price stagnation despite a quadrillion dollars in "new wealth" "created" by borrowing, the cracks are appearing in the columns holding up this vast house of cards.

Trade policies of the last 50 years helped HIDE the dishonesty by keeping prices of goods artificially suppressed. Immigration policies of the last 50 years helped HIDE the dishonest by keeping wages artificially suppressed.

And the ASSholes who benefited from this system to the tune of million-dollar yachts and beachfront condo penthouses want to keep the game going.

No. Shit.