NAZIS AND ANTI-SEMITES

by Colin Liddell

Is it possible to be anti-Nazi and anti-Semitic? This is a legitimate question because I know several cases of people who claim to be quite strongly opposed to Nazism, but are nevertheless clearly anti-Semitic.

The examples that I am aware of are Brutus, Iron Duke, and Dave Yorkshire, people with whom I have come into direct contact over the years. These three worthy gentlemen are quite clear that the problem with British nationalism is that it is tarnished with Nazism and associated with idiots like Mark Collett and Millennial Woes, who apologise to Germans for the war and basically think that Hitler did nothing wrong.

Indeed, the list of Anti-Nazi Anti-Semites could easily be expanded because a lot of people are quite happy with dog-whistling Anti-Semetic positions, but less willing to be called Nazis. J.F. Gariepy and Academic Agent spring to mind as other examples of this tendency.

Is this simply an "optics" divide?

If it is, it is understandable because the term "Nazi" is a more onerous term than "anti-Semite."

Thanks to its rather large and distinctive historical bootprint, the term "Nazi" evokes Auschwitz, the death camps, and the activities of the Einsatzgruppen (Mobile Killing Units); while being an "anti-Semite" could mean that you just don't like seeing Palestinian babies blown to bits (Thanks Bibi for making that gig a lot more acceptable).

But, really an anti-Semite and a Nazi are essentially the same thing. We can split hairs here, but basically Nazis believe that Jews are the source of most of the evil in the world and have hegemonic control of much of the world. Meanwhile, Anti-Semites "kind of, sort of" tend to believe the same thing.

Nazis will also radically filter for any data that supports their thesis, and, guess what, anti-Semites "kind of, sort of" do more or less the same thing. Sometimes less, sometimes more.

Tell a Nazi or an anti Semite that the Holodomor happened under the watch of a Politburo in which there was only one Jew among the 12 members, and they will simply ignore that, and instantly say that the local branch of the NKVD was "run by Jews," as if the local NKVD, rather than Stalin and his Politburo buddies, got to make those kinds of calls.

source

This is the kind of shit4brains thinking that destroyed the Alt-Right even before it got its big opportunity to change history in 2016. By that time the Alt-Right was already imploding into a shitcloud of ideological imbecility and weaponised dark energy. 

To be emphatic, you could, using this extreme filtering technique, even make the case that the Holocaust itself was an example of "White Genocide" committed by Jews!!!!

All you would need to do would be to point out that Ashkenazi Jews, the main victims of Nazism, were actually White, while also filtering out all the Aryan Nazis from your narrative and focusing primarily on the not inconsiderable number of Jewish or partially Jewish Nazis. You could then top this off by selecting data points that pointed to Goebbels and Hitler being "secret  Jews," while ignoring all the other evidence that Hitler was just a normal Austrian Christian with a bad case of insecurity, paranoia, a PTSD caused by his early life experiences. Any Aryan Nazi you needed in order to make your narrative work could be framed as a "dupe" or "race traitor."

You might laugh at this, but the Russians are currently trying to pull off a similar trick by presenting Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a some kind of Nazi leader....and there's also this:

Another classic trait of both the anti-Semite and the Nazi is the opposite of extreme filtering. Instead of filtering out data that doesn't confirm their emotionally predetermined narrative, they "overexplain" it, laying on way too much evidence to the ultimate detriment of their case.

The problem here is that evidence only works when it all points in the same direction without contradicting the other evidence.

With the Nazi and the anti-Semite, the evidence, like a magnetic needle, always points in the same direction, but unfortunately for them, the evidence doesn't always support the other evidence. In fact, quite often, the different bits of evidence contradict and step all over the other bits of evidence in a desperate rush to get to the same distant point.

A good example of this was gifted to me by my old friend Dave Yorkshire, who briefly popped up on a Stephen J James livestream the other night with the claim that the Jews, in the person of "Lord Rothschild", had bribed the British government to set up the State of Israel, while also claiming that the State of Israel was a "terrorist state" established through attacks on British servicemen in Palestine.

Comments like this tend to go unchallenged on live streams, which tend to be fast-flowing interchanges between people of limited knowledge of the various subjects touched upon, who also have little time to check or refresh facts. This is not to disparage people on livestreams, but to emphasise the inherent limitations of the medium as a means of getting to the truth.

But also sometimes you don't really need to look things up, because what Yorkshire was saying was obviously logically inconsistent.

Why would Israel need to be founded on acts of terrorism if the British government had already been bought and paid for by old moneybags Lord Rothschild? This obviously doesn't stack up.

Either the British government was bought off and there was no need for armed conflict OR the British government wasn't bought off, was trying to fulfil its responsibilities to the Palestinian Arabs, and some Jewish settlers felt there was a need for armed conflict and terrorist action.

This is clearly an "either/or" situation, not a "both" situation.

Let's call this second characteristic of the Nazi and the Anti-Semite "evidence jostling."

Both of these traits (extreme filtering and evidence jostling) reveal a blindness to one's own mental processes. Unfortunately such stupidity afflicts many otherwise intelligent people, which is why it is probably best to define Nazism or anti-Semitism not so much as an ideology but as a mental disease, unless, of course, the person is genuinely and deeply stupid.

If someone can maintain Nazi or anti-Semitic positions without relying on these two blatant signs of mental deficiency, then they are entirely welcome to their views. After all, I wouldn't want them to think anyone was unfairly persecuting them.

Many Alt-Righters won't get this.

____________________

Follow @cbliddell

Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia).