Jared Taylor’s support of the revisionists
As some of you may be aware, there was a falling out between the race realist community and the Jews in 2006, in part because Jared Taylor refused to choose between Jews and Nazis. One of the core issues that has dogged Mr. Taylor, from race realist critics such as Lawrence Auster and Ian Jobling’s Inverted World, has been Mr. Taylor’s refusal to take a position on issues such as Holocaust denial. In fact, Mr. Taylor eventually clarified his facile claims of ignorance on the issue, only recently taking a position that accepted the Holocaust as fact, but allowing for the possibility of inflated numbers, perhaps to keep his “revisionist” friends from feeling completely betrayed.
It does appear that Taylor would have preferred a much more ambiguous position.
In March 2001, Taylor penned an essay, “Return to the Dark Ages,” that focused on defending Holocaust “revisionists” in the name of free speech.
But Taylor not only dispensed with the usual caveats (and yes, a man friends with and who is defending Holocaust deniers does need the usual caveats), but he depicted those who broke the laws and engaged in aspects of Holocaust denial in suspiciously heroic terms. Because Holocaust deniers are such wonderful people.
Of Henri Groulès, Taylor wrote,
He has devoted his life to good works for the poor and for immigrants, and has a reputation something like that of Mother Theresa.
Awwwwww.
But Taylor is not only a freedom fighter for the underdogs of Holocaust “revisionism,” he also assesses that Holocaust revisionism need not, and indeed, does not, lead to hatred of the Jews just because they massively lie (in theory) about their European tragedy and manipulate it for the sake of Zionism. Such a connection is (apparently) ridiculous.
“…it is unclear just how disputing the existence of gas chambers or the number of Nazi victims incites hatred against anyone. People are not suddenly going to start hating Jews just because a pamphlet convinces them the Nazis killed only one million rather than six million.”
Taylor’s logic is strange in that he doesn’t even understand the possibility of nefarious motives behind Holocaust denial. He only recognizes the possibility of non-judgmental truth seeking.
The section on Holocaust denial was deleted from the Wikipedia page on Jared Taylor, and relegated to the discussion page. I don’t understand this decision. The discussion of Holocaust denial is itself an important part of the history of warring factions within the Amren camp, and I believe this essay reveals Taylor’s earlier concessions to the revisionist camp, in terms of his moral support for their goals, their character, and even their motives, without directly addressing the veracity of their claims.
5 comments
If you believe for one second a defender of Holocaust denial, then you’re dumber than the Hamas Minister of Health and Information who publicly condemned the denial of the Holocaust. Giving the benefit of the doubt may have been your honorable intention and you don’t really believe this guy as far as you can throw him, but Taylor is an idiot and then some. I can’t fathom why you’re interested in him.
As far as Wikipedia changes go, the place is a camp for Internerds who can’t get dates much less action who want to wield power like dictators. Many a time I’ve corrected articles for spelling, punctuation, facts (such as on some television program episodes, making the corrections based on DVR recording playing right then and there), and had most of them eliminated by people who squat there and style themselves in control of any given area.
So I treat Wikipedia with a grain of salt. I mean, they don’t even understand group behavior of electron conductance shells with respect to solitons.
Why does the whole world have to accept as an article of faith that exactly 6000000 jews were killed? Maybe it was 5999999 or 6000001?
And why should it be illegal to deny the holocaust, and legal to deny the sun comes up in the morning or that there ever was a world war?
I’ve talked to one or two holocaust deniers and it doesn’t necessarily follow that they hate jews. They have no problems with other peoples personal beliefs or traditions. They do have a problem with thought police, people attempting to forcibly impose their beliefs on others, or people milking the holocaust for propoganda.
“Maybe it was 5999999 or 6000001?”
That isn’t what we are talking about and you know it.
“I’ve talked to one or two holocaust deniers and it doesn’t necessarily follow that they hate jews.”
It does when they make a big public fight over it.
It does when they make a big public fight over it.
It doesn’t follow logically and it doesn’t follow factually.
You found some people who happened to fight about it and you’re extrapolating to the whole group.
Great article, Kvetcher! It is indeed very suspicious that Taylor refuses to repudiate Holocaust denial in this article before defending its proponents on freedom of speech grounds. It is equally appalling that he does not recognize the gravity of the deniers’ slander against Jews. Dwelling on Groules’ good works for immigrants and the poor is sickening.
I can’t decide whether Taylor is genuinely morally blind or is secretly, even unconsciously, attracted to evil. I was his employee at American Renaissance for nearly three years and I still don’t know.
Leave a Comment