Revisionism against the Golden Calf
At a time when many revisionists wonder about revisionism’s future, the Adelaide Institute (Australia) has had the idea of launching a survey on the subject via a circular email entitled “Doom and gloom amongst Revisionists?”.
For his part, Fredrick Töben, the Institute’s head, believes that in their struggle against the imposture or religion of the “Holocaust” the revisionists may gain some victories but not win the war, at least not in the Western nations. These are too imbued with Christianity, itself, at bottom, reliant on Judaism. He quotes Marcus Elie Ravage who, in an essay of 1928, ridiculed the Christians rebelling against the Jews while their God was that of the Old Testament and the son of that God was born of a Jewish mother.
Replying to F. Töben, Professor Faurisson puts forth another analysis.
Adelaide Institute <email@example.com> July 19, 2002
Subject: Re: Doom and gloom amongst Revisionists?
I think the answer can be inferred from Marcus Eli Ravage’s famous 1928 essay, “A Real Case Against the Jews”.
The following two paragraphs say it all:
(1) “If you really are serious when you talk of Jewish plots, may I not direct your attention to one worth talking about? What use is it wasting words on the alleged control of your public opinion by Jewish financiers, newspaper owners and movie magnates, when you might as well justly accuse us of the proved control of your whole civilization by the Jewish Gospels.”
(2) “Jewish artisans and Jewish fishermen are your teachers and your saints, with countless statues carved in their image and innumerable cathedrals raised to their memories. A Jewish maiden is your ideal of motherhood and womanhood. A Jewish rebel-prophet is the central figure in your religious worship. We have pulled down your idols, cast aside your racial inheritance, and substituted for them our God and our traditions. No conquest in history can even remotely compare with this clean sweep of our conquest over you.”
Until our culture can be redeemed from these Jewish values, no amount of rationality will ever prevail. I say this because the Jewish mentality – which governs most white people today thanks to Christianity – is profoundly irrational. It relies on sentiment, emotion, schmaltz; the rather sickening “poetry” of the Bible; and in the political sphere, victim politics.
All of this is reinforced, obviously, by the media on a daily basis, but the media is not the bedrock problem – it just reflects the fact that we are a conquered people and have largely adopted an alien people’s values for up to two thousand years.
The only way that rationality could ever prevail is if all this cloying Jewish sentimentality could be cast off utterly. And if that could ever happen, I believe that rational Revisionist historical proofs would be accepted practically overnight.
In short, the pre-requisite is that we need to get back to our own spiritual roots. Some of us may have a superficial form of the sheer courage of illustrious people of our Nordic race like the immortal Spartan, Leonidas; but that is pointless if our courage is serving other people’s aims. I’m not much of a fan of American popular culture, but I believe they once had a comic submissive negro figure called “Uncle Tom” – or something like that. Whatever his name may have been, he had internalised “Massa’s” values, so that even if he happened to be a brave individual his courage was effectively turned against his own rational interests. It’s like that with modern whites. Millions upon millions of heroic young men have died fighting for Jewish causes. At least Leonidas died – and rationally so – for the sake of his fellow Spartans!
In my view, Revisionism has easily won most of the skirmishes – but it can’t win the war, at least in white nations, because the majority of the population is still morally and spiritually and above all emotionally enslaved to the Jews.
Any comment from anyone, please?
FAURISSON <firstname.lastname@example.org> July 20, 2002
Our problem is not “the ‘Holocaust'”; our problem is “the Jews”.
I mean “the Jews” as I described them at the end of my Introduction to the four volumes of my “Revisionist writings (1974-1998)” (dated December 3, 1998) and in my article “The 14th Revisionist Conference in Los Angeles” (July 6, 2002).
I partly agree with those who think that the Christian religion is tied to silly and repugnant Jewish inventions and exaggerations. The Western civilisation having Christian appearances or language could be seen as “morally and spiritually and above all emotionally enslaved to the Jews” (Elie Ravage, as quoted by you). But appearances and language are not roots. What counts is not what I would call the Jewish or the Christian “cinema” (words, images and sounds).
What counts more than anything is a set of hard facts: the Golden Calf, the consumer society and consumerism, its seductiveness, its power, its tyranny. Christians and many other people cherish those values so much that they perceive Revisionists as a danger. But Jews, who for different historical reasons, have always been the best in worshipping and protecting the Golden Calf, feel and fear more than anyone that kind of danger. Hence their fierce battle against us.
Now, I wish to be clear about the Jewish “problem” or “question”. I do not want any harm to be done to the Jews. They even may keep their power, their possessions, their influence; they might keep their clever way of exercising tyranny by crying and whining as they love to do; they might continue to despise the goyim who do not obey them.
Not to be vague or unrealistic but precise and down-to-earth, I do not expect anything from the Jews.
What I would like the non-Jews to understand is that we, revisionists, simply demand the right to publicise our findings on the most specific of the Jewish inventions, i.e. their so-called “Holocaust”. We ask for the right not to be sued, sentenced, censored and physically attacked for publishing the conclusions of our researches. We want in fact very little but experience proves that, for too many non Jews, it is already too much: it is anti-semitism.
When I am asked: “Are you anti-semitic?”, my answer is: “No”. I am against people who have against me and my friends a privilege of persecution by prosecution. I would be “anti” any group of people other than the Jewish one who would sue me, get me sentenced, take my time and money, attack me physically, persecute my wife, my children, my grand-children, because I am publishing some historical stuff that they think is not kosher and that they are definitively unable to refute. The Jew Raul Hilberg himself capitulated to the revisionists when he had finally to come down, under oath in a courtroom, with his preposterous explanation of “the destruction of the European Jews” supposedly perpetrated by a German bureaucracy using “consensus mind-reading” or telepathy!
If, instead of having against me Jewish organisations, I had any other specific group or association ordering me to write this instead of that, I would react the same way. Nobody has the right to lobotomise any searcher as the Jews are trying to do with us.
As a Frenchman, I only ask the repeal of the Jewish “Fabius-Gayssot law”. The trouble is that, under pressure of the Jewish organisations, more and more countries are adopting a specific law against revisionism. Cynically the Simon Wiesenthal Centers and other Jewish organisations make them understand that, if they want MONEY, they have first to take special measures against the so-called “denial of the Holocaust”. But every country on earth begs for MONEY.
And this is how, in my opinion, we are getting back to the Golden Calf, and to the “doom and gloom” for the revisionist movement.
Best wishes. Robert Faurisson