One of the striking facts about Holocaust mythology is how seemingly educated people cling to it with all the faith they can muster. The reason that so many educated people apparently genuinely believe in it, I would suggest, is that, despite their intelligence and education, they retain an infantile vulnerability to the power of the most mind-numbingly stupid myth of all, the struggle between the forces of good and evil.
The Holocaust legend capitalises on susceptibility to the most simplistic of worldviews. In the Holocaust fairy tale, the Nazis are as evil as can possibly be. There is therefore no story that can be told about them, however defamatory, that is not accepted by the Holocaust-indoctrinated public as a priori true. There is a narrative necessity for this, because, unless the Nazis are depicted as the ultimate in evil, the idea that any human beings would deliberately exterminate millions of innocent people in gas chambers lacks all plausibility.
But the absurd and defamatory caricature of the Nazis upon which the Holocaust narrative depends is only half the problem. Bizarrely, the fairy tale assigns Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin the incredibly unlikely role of the good guys. Now there's a glaring problem here, since they were all powerhungry psychopaths with extensive histories of lies, deception, and mass murder. By any standards, they rank among the most evil people in history. Machiavelli would have been embarrassed to have been in their company for even a minute.
So how did these moral cesspits get to be the 'good guys' in this fairy tale? Only because they were fighting the REALLY, REALLY, REALLY BAD guys. This is a strange variation on the fairy tale, in the sense that it wasn't actually GOOD guys fighting the bad guys - rather, the BAD guys were so VERY, VERY, VERY BAD that the VERY, VERY, VERY BAD guys fighting them came out of the whole thing looking a tad little less bad in the end (provided you believe that the former really did try to exterminate the Jews). The Holocaust story is therefore enmeshed in the narrative of the struggle between the forces of evil and marginally-not-quite-as-evil. OK, the Allies were kinda good because they were not so evil as the Nazis, right?
A very mixed-up morality tale we seem to have here.
However, as Noam Chomsky has written, 'It is only in folk tales, children's stories, and the journals of intellectual opinion that power is used wisely and well to destroy evil. The real world teaches very different lessons, and it takes willful and dedicated ignorance to fail to perceive them.' Such Manichaean fairy tales as those which are told ad nauseum about the Nazis simply do not belong in the real world, and it is a sign of the intellectual degradation of our times that such a fairy tale as the Holocaust not only passes muster as history, but is shoved down our throats at every opportunity by governments and media.
The salient question, therefore, is this: Why do leftists and radicals and other people who are generally highly critical of the use of power by the Empire - as we can describe the Judeo-Anglo-American axis of evil - against smaller and weaker states not critical about that use of power when it was directed against the Third Reich?
The reason is that the Third Reich was BAAAAAAD (in the fully Michael Jackson sense). This means that everything was justified, including the mass murder of the German working class, something that Social Democrats and Communists would normally have a problem justifying. But, you see, there are no moral limits or restrictions as to what can be done to states which have anti-semitic legislation on their books, are there?
The melodramatic photograph shown below, which purports to depict the shooting of a Jewish woman and child by a German soldier during World War II, obviously panders to the infantile desire to depict the war as a struggle between the elemental forces of good and evil. Unfortunately for those who like their history reduced to goodies and baddies, the photo is a fake.
