Holocaust or Hoax?

The Arguments

by Jürgen Graf

An Introduction by Mario Consoli:

Revisionism and Pluralism

The following text is a free translation, somewhat abridged, with a few supplementary remarks, of the article "Nessun cambiamento senza vero pluralismo" (No Change Without True Pluralism), which appeared in the Italian publication L'Uomo Libero (Casella Postale 1658, 20123 Milano/Italy, issue 41 of April 1996.

The Throttling of Pluralism

An observant analysis of the political and cultural life in the Europe of the first half of our century will reveal a world of extraordinary dynamism and intellectual originality, in crass contradiction to the stagnation and sterile conformity of the past fifty years.

Brilliant, original thinkers were in no short supply. In Italy, thinkers such as D'Annunzio, Marinetti and his futuristic school, Soffici, Palazzeschi, Balla, Gentile, Papini, Prezzolini, Corridoni and Spirito, were active during the early decades; elsewhere in Europe, great figures like Pound, Gentile, Hamsun, and Celine achieved prominence. Opposition figures like Croce, Gramsci, and Sturzo were permitted to develop and disseminate new ideas, even in fascist Italy.

Antonio Gramsci, Chairman of the Italian Communist Party, was given a single cell in the prison of Turi (Bari), and had access to 700 books, including the complete works of Marx and Croce, as well as 400 bundles of newspapers. The philosopher Benedetto Croce was able to publish his newspaper La Critica throughout the entire fascist era until the second world war. At the peak of fascist power, Arnoldi Mondadori became the first publisher in Europe to issue the works of Trotsky; articles by the great theoretician of permanent revolution appeared in the daily newspaper Corriere della Sera (source: Fernando Ritter, Fascismo Antifascismo, Il Settimo Sigillo, 1991).

The ideas of Pareto, Spengler, Weber, and Sorel were passionately discussed; Pirandello celebrated his triumphs on the stage; youths participated in open demonstrations to the sounds of hymns by Mascagni and Puccini.

But where are the intellectual giants of today? Instead of thinkers, we are surrounded by hordes of mental pygmies without a single new or original idea -- men who scrounge a living by engaging in increasingly grotesque and hysterical attacks upon the men and ideals which governed Italy for twenty years and Germany for twelve years.

If one takes the trouble to overcome one's artificially induced reluctance and actually read the works of Mussolini -- his Labour Charter, the Doctrine of Fascism, his Dictionary of Politics; when we reread the works of National Socialism and compare them -- for content, depth of thought, originality -- with the programmes of the Old and "New" parties of today or the blabberings of the political leaders of today -- an incomparable difference in depth, in breadth, in philosophical conception, becomes immediately apparent.

How can one ignore the enormous progress in social justice which made fascist Italy a model for all of Europe? Many original, long-term solutions to social problems were developed throughout those controversial years. Public discussions of today never range beyond wage demands or protests against an unfair tax system. In the USA -- the country which has been held up to us as a model for the entire world for fifty years -- a man without a credit card has no rights. He cannot even be admitted to a decent hospital, and must be satisfied with a "training" hospital, where the staff are still in training and normal standards of hygiene are ignored. Just recently, we read of a girl who died after being refused admission to a New York hospital for lack of funds or credit references.

How one can people not be aware that the first ecological -- or "Green", as they are called today -- theories were developed by Walter Darre, Minister of Agriculture during the Third Reich, together with concrete and original solutions to environmental problems such as can be offered by no "Green" party or theorist of today?

Of course, it's no good sinking into the pathos and sentimentality of nostalgia; yet the facts cited above call for a profound analysis of the factors which destroyed the cultural and social inventiveness of the first half of the twentieth century, resulting in the cultural and political sterility of the Europe of today.

How did the ruling power cliques succeed so completely in reducing our entire existence to its purely economic aspects for fifty years, in compelling us to adopt a uniform, purely materialistic value system, without encountering any serious resistance? How did we all become the obedient servants of an international and multicultural New World Order? Why is there no longer any controversy, or conflict between contrasting values and ideals?

It is because there is no longer any pluralism of ideas.

Pluralism means tolerance, freedom, and respect for differences of opinion. Above all, it means the recognition that no idea may be permitted to crush other ideas out of existence.

The absence of true pluralism as it has come to exist over the past few decades is a totally new phenomenon in world history. This is the first age in history in which everyone has been compelled, in actual fact, to accept the same ideals, to agree with a uniform view of the world and of humanity.

The Crisis of Man and the State

Men once knew that the individual was no more than one link in a long chain. Many links preceded the invidual, many would follow. This sense of the continuity of human existence strengthened family relationships and forged communities, nations, and cultures together. The individual derived spiritual and moral strength from his awareness of that he was part of a whole. It provided a powerful incentive to create works which would survive the individual. Faced with the reality of death, the individual knew that life itself did not end with him. The individual on in his descendents, his community, in the people and culture of which he was a member.

The exaggerated individualism of our era has deracinated people, robbed them of their heritage, and condemned them to death as an actual fact. The notion of death as the end of all things is an entirely new phenomenon in human history. The spiritual world of our ancestors, who took the urns of their forefathers with them when they changed their residence, is light years removed from the mentality of contemporary society. In large modern cities, cemeteries are considered unpleasant reminders of the past, and may perhaps disappear in the not-too distant future.

When people tire of the glittering world of consumerism and materialism and ponder on the meaning of existence, they discover the emptiness of the surrounding vacuum. The result is overwhelming hopelessness, anxiety, and desperation. The suicide rate in Europe today, expressed as a percentage of the population, is eight times higher than a century ago.

The spectre which haunts us is most fittingly demonstrated by the United States, the nation which has been, and is, held up to us as a model for fifty years. According to a study by the US Department of Health, 566 out of 1000 Americans use mind-altering drugs today.

The ideal of material, individual, well-being has been deliberately promoted to such an extent that it has been elevated to the status of the true purpose of life; the inevitable result can only be an unbroken chain of catastrophes. The immediate moment is all that counts; no one cares about long-term effects. Nothing is ever calculated or planned long-term. Since everything is dictated by the mechanisms of the Free Market, the inevitable result is an exclusive concern for short-term benefits, regardless of any other consideration.

All the experts, in whatever field, are aware of the price which our descendants will be forced to pay for our blind addiction to short-term consumerism. Our descendants will have to live in an environment in which the quality of life will have deteriorated to an inconceivable extent, in which the balance of nature is irreversibly out of joint.

Yet no one dares resist. No one dares to challenge the basis of the axiomatic values on which the international New World Order is based: the Consumer Economy and the Delusion of Endless Growth.

Like the individual, the states of this Europe of the twentieth century which is now drawing to a close are blindly heading for catastrophe. The sovereign, independent State of today is nothing more than a memory of past ages. Military occupation of Europe by a non-European power is still tolerated -- fifty years after the end of WW II. An incident which took place recently in Naples is symbolic: two Lieutenants in the US Air Force stole a handbag from a passer by in the middle of the city centre. They were arrested by the Carabinieri and brought before an examining magistrate, who was then compelled to hand them over to the US military police under the terms of a humiliating "Agreement" between Italy and the USA (Corriere della Sera, 26 January 1995).

The Europe of Maastricht is the final abdication of all independent national states and independent peoples, in favor of a private, supranational financial power.

Privatization, carried out behind a smoke screen of fashionable financial theory and alleged to be necessitated by economic problems caused by public debt, has cast all pretense aside and is increasingly revealing its true nature, proving itself nothing but the uninhibited asset-stripping of national resources, the plundering of the Italian heritage in favour of foreign capital.

Willful, deliberate mass immigration -- quite apart from the political and cultural devastation which are the inevitable result -- is destructive in many immediate, practical respects: the Italian government should have intervened to put an end to it long ago, because it is engaged in a desperate struggle for the economic survival of its own people. But no -- while unemployment grows more and more serious, politicians blabber about creating jobs for immigrants. Immigrants receive free housing, free medical care, while countless Italian families cannot even find a decent place to live. All this is accompanied by shameless talk of the need to close hospitals for lack of funds.

The criminalization of Fascism and National Socialism

Most young people today know almost nothing about the history of the twentieth century; they know of figures like Hitler and Mussolini from hearsay only; they have no notion of the ideals which these figures represented, or the values which their political movements gave to the soul of Europe during the first half of the century.

Fifty years of brain-washing, falsification of history, cinema imbecility and television propaganda have caused people to equate those men and movements with brute violence, senseless bloodshed and fanaticism, in a word, with evil.

The concepts of "fascist" and "Nazi" have been emptied of all political, cultural, and idealistic content, and have become bludgeons to club down all opposition -- everyone, that is, who dares to speak out against internationalism and multicultural democracy.

"Fascist!" The very word is a deadly insult, destroying all possibility of free discussion in an instant. This is an insult which deprives the victim any right to take any part in open debate. "You're a fascist. Therefore, you are evil. Therefore, you have no rights. Therefore, you have no right to speak out or express yourself in favour of anything."

Ours is an age of a breath-taking technological advancement, opening up undreamed-of possiblities in terms of both information and mind-control. The cliques who control the cinema, television, and printed media can distort news and historical facts almost at will. They can manipulate public opinion to an extent incomparably greater than was ever dreamed possible through the control of newspapers and publishing alone, as the situation existed a century ago.

If an event receives no newspaper or television coverage, then it simply never happened; no matter how great its objective importance, its effects upon public opinion will be nil. Nobody notices; nobody cares. It disappears into an endless, silent void.

Almost nobody knows that on 25 October 1995, Franco Fredda and approximately fifty members of the National Front were sentenced to terms of several years of imprisonment by the Tribunal of Verona for completely non-violent political and cultural activities. With one single exception (Massimo Fini), not one journalist even mentioned it; not a single word of it appeared on television. That is "democracy": truth and reality are what the media make it.

On the other hand, if the media all unanimously report the same event, even if it is all lies, it takes root in the conscious and subconscious mind of the masses, absolutely regardless of truth, falsehood, or any other consideration. An example of this was the "eyewitness testimony" -- later revealed to be an impudent swindle -- of the "Iraki atrocities in Kuwaiti hospitals", or the fairy tale of the American "smart bombs" which allegedly spared women, children, and old men, and only killed soldiers. It is this sort of "news" which forms public attitudes on the Gulf War and the entire Middle East Question.

Through this incredible technology of manipulation, the victors of WW II have not only succeeded in preventing any re-birth of fascism and National Socialism, but they have succeeded in suffocating the traditional spiritual and cultural values which had characterized the intellectual and spiritual life of Europe for countless centuries.

The method they employed to achieve this objective was approximately as follows: all traditional European values, such as love of the earth, the homeland, the family -- heroism, honesty, consciousness of duty, and spirituality -- were simply associated, in the public mind, with fascism, Nazism, Mussolini and Hitler.

After this equation had become firmly anchored in the sub-conscious mind of the masses, the slightest increase in the volume of "anti-fascist" propaganda was more than sufficient to enable the ruling powers to smother any rebirth of the values which are so threatening.

By equating the defeated powers of World War II Europe with evil, they achieved far more than simply creating contempt for fascists and National Socialists. They destroyed the entire value system which had been responsible for creating a civilization whose greatness had been unique in world history for thousands of years. In destroying Mussolini and Hitler, they also destroyed Plato and Dante, Machiavelli and Nietzche, Caesar and Napoleon, Rome and the Holy Roman Empire.

Thus the trap closes.

Let us analyze a few of the fundamental dogmas of our time, so as to have a few concrete examples:

- the Free Market. This is not only THE prevalent economic doctrine of today, it is the ONLY economic doctrine accepted by ALL political groupings, from the Right to the Left. Concepts like "economic self-sufficiency" are inconceivable today;

- the Multicultural Society. No one dare express even the slightest criticism for fear of being attacked as "racist". A short time ago, the Italian government sponsored a television advertisement in which a soothing, but subtly menacing voice was heard to say: "We must get used to living in a multicultural society!". This is the world of 1984.

- individualism. This is not only the basis for the primitive consumer mentality of today, it has become the new morality, the new ideology of the masses, leading to countless other evils in turn: feminism, rising divorce rates, abortion, right down to the protection of the rights of drug dealers, perverts, and pornography producers. Even Satanists have rights, and are strictly protected: in the broadcast Adepti (Rai 2, 18 February 1996), several of shadowy figures were respectfully interviewed, including individuals who had forced minors into acts of sexual perversion.

This is the "pluralism" bestowed upon us by the democratic-capitalistic system as a blessing! Our society requires absolute subservience to these values, at the cost of ostracism or severe punishment.

Total conformity of ideas is the graveyard of the mind. It is the end station of history.

The Role of the official version of history

The writing of history is in the pitiless grip of the ruling cliques, to an ever greater extent than in politics and culture. No one is longer permitted to disturb the chorus of praise for the New World Order with the slightest criticism.

The worldview which justifies all this must, of course, be all one-sided: the good on one side, all evil on the other -- the wicked losers, by virtue of losing, are, of course, blamed for everything from starting WWII to committing every atrocity in the history of the world.

Since the Nuremberg Trials, the most effective instrument in the criminalization of fascism and National Socialism has been found to be the accusation of the Six Million Jews: the genocide of the Jews -- "Six Million" Jews treacherously murdered in diabolical gas chambers and turned into ashes. Six Million people -- a terrifyingly round number, impossible to forget. Men, women, the elderly, children, infants. All exterminated. And just because they were Jews!

The "Holocaust" today is a ball and chain, intended to remain welded to the ankles of the German nation for all time.

Of course, it is a fact that there were concentration camps in Germany, just as there concentration camps all over the world -- not just in Germany and Axis-controlled territories, but in many European and non-European countries as well.

How many prisoners of war were permitted to die in Soviet and Anglo-American camps from hunger and exhaustion? How many German prisoners of war were slaughtered AFTER THE END OF THE WAR? It's a six-digit figure! And what about the destruction of Dresden? What about the countless other terror attacks on German, Italian, and Japanese cities? What about Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What about the looting, the mass murders of the civilian population? What about the hundreds of thousands of Italian and German women and girls raped by the purveyors and representatives of Allied "democracy"? What about the Yugoslavian Communist stone quarries where thousands of Italians died in misery? Who weeps for them?

And how did the Americans deal with one of their noblest countryman, the poet Ezra Pound? "He was locked in a barbed wire cage without a roof and without a bucket for his human wastes; food was pushed in through the barbed wire; for days, he had to shield his head from the burning sun with his bare hands... After two weeks, they locked him in a cage of wood and iron measuring 2 x 2 m2 surrounded by a heavy metal grid. The roof consisted of a tar paper-covered boards and the floor of cement. He was hardly protected from the rain, and was illuminated day and night by large search lights. In November 1945, he was transferred to the USA and locked up in a common mental hospital for twelve years without any legal judgement..." (Pietro Ciabanetti, Coltano 1945, Mursia).

To criminalize entire nations and peoples requires a lot more than just a few individual crimes, such as spectacular reprisals against civilians, the suffering of concentration camp inmates, or Gestapo interrogation methods. Such things have always existed, everywhere, among the most diverse peoples.

As for the concentration camps, there were 1,255 concentration camps in post-war Poland alone. Most of them were filled with Germans; 99% of the inmates were civilians, women and children. Hundreds of thousands of them died (the Jewish writer John Sack says that there were "only" 80,000 deaths) (John Sack, An Eye for an Eye, Kabel Verlag, 1995).

And as for the mistreatment of prisoners of war, well, one need only mention one individual case among many, namely, the treatment of the German defendants at the Dachau Trial. According to the findings of an investigatory committee, they were "exposed to every kind of physical and mental torture: 137 of 139 suffered irreparable damage to the testicles" (Carlo Mattogno, Intervista sull'Olocausto, Edizioni di Ar, 1995.)

But all this is shouted down with screaming about the "Six Million Jews", allegedly killed in an ice-cold, deliberately planned programme of extermination, mostly in gas chambers.

Under the influence of emotional trauma induced by Holocaust propaganda, Europe permitted the Jews to set up their anachronistic State of Israel in the Near East, during which the Arab population was forcefully displaced or enslaved. The mere mention of the Holocaust is enough to induce international public opinion to permit the Jews to administer the occupied territories illegally, with brutal cruelty, even today.

Any pretence, no matter how thread-bare, is sufficient to bring the Holocaust into remembrance, day after day, in literature, science, art, and politics. Instead of slowing down or losing any of its brutal crushing force, the propaganda steam roller becomes more overpowering with each passing year. In more and more European countries, the Jewish version of the "truth" about the Holocaust is placed under a legal protection order, so that Revisionist works may be prohibited and confiscated on whim; this is being done with increasing frequency and violence.

The Holocaust must remain a myth, a dogma, exempt from all free historical discussion. If this dogma were to collapse, then the significance of all other aspects of relating to the Second World War would begin to crumble, and would have to be re-examined. The same is true in politics. It would at long last be possible to return to true pluralism in discussing the future status of Europe. Suddenly, it would no longer be dishonourable to engage in discussion with anyone -- even real fascists! Those values which imply the right of all peoples to protect their identity and independence -- in contrast to uniformity and tyranny masquerading as "multiculturalism" and "internationalism" -- would regain their honour.

It is hardly an accident that recognition of the reality of the Holocaust was the final and decisive tribute paid by Gianfranco Fini, leader of the post-fascist Alleanza Nazionale, as the price for permission to participate in the national Italian system. "The Holocaust cannot be erased... Unfortunately, it all happened", he said in the Fini newspaper Il Secolo di Italia of 9 February 1996.

The practical manner in which the orthodox view of the Holocaust protects itself from prying eyes, has been revealed with refreshing honesty by Alberto Tagliati, editor-in-chief of the newspaper Historia. In the June 1995 edition, the publication featured an interview with Prof. Luigi Cajani, under the title of "Una storia incancellabile" (History Cannot be Erased), which confirmed the orthodox view of the Holocaust. The initial intention was to publish a talk with the revisionist Auschwitz expert Carlo Mattogno face to face with the Cajani interview. Tagliatti then decided to print only the Cajani text, upon which Mattogno published his views in a text with the title Intervista sull'Olocausto, from Edizioni di Ar.

The following is Tagliati's justification for this procedure:

'History' he stated, 'is that which one era considers useful to hold true of another'. I do not believe that this opinion should be revised or corrected, less than ever with regards to Nazism. Of course, contemporary history has judged Nazism from a one-sided point of view -- that of the victors, that of Nuremberg... Fifty years after the end of the Second World War, by contrast, there are people who invoke a cold 'objectivity'... This pedantic attempt to square the circle reveals a sympathy with Nazism...." (pp. 22-23).

Have historians so debased themselves that they have become the mere lackeys of a ruling ideology? Have people really forgotten that the salient feature of European civilization has always been its painfully exact research, its concern and search for truth -- no matter how unwelcome it may be? Do people believed that the Second World War has succeeded in causing all European peoples to abandon their whole culture, their whole value system, all their traditional moral values, once and for all, and forever?

When Prof. Robert Faurisson's first revisionist texts appeared, 34 French intellectuals, under the leadership of the Jewish historians Pierre Vidal-Nacquet and Leon Poliakov, published an appeal on 21 February 1979 in Le Monde, the second sentence of which stated:

"We must not ask how such a mass murder was technically possible. It was technically possible because it happened."

A few of the standard criticisms made against the revisionists

We consider it necessary to mention and refute some of the standard criticisms of revisionism.

The first of these reproaches consists of equating revisionism with "Neo-Nazism".

This is an allegation which is as arbitrary as it is unjustified. Many of the most important representatives of revisionism are alien to the ideas of National Socialism and fascism in their manner of thinking, if not actually hostile to them. Their research is historical and non-ideological.

Revisionists have never wasted time arguing whether National Socialism was "good" or "bad", or whether Hitler was right or wrong. They have always tried to determine the simple facts and separate reality from myth.

Revisionists are repeatedly accused of "slandering the dead", of "incitement to racial hatred", or "trivialization of mass murder". A more illogical or nonsensical argument is hardly possible to imagine. How can one "justify" murder by attempting to prove that the defendant was innocent (for example, that the victim died a natural death or went missing or is still alive). How can research work intended to separate reality from legend be declared equivalent to "incitement to racial hatred" or "slandering the dead"?

When all else fails, we hear the following argument over and over again: even if the figure of Six Million is highly exaggerated, and even if, in reality, many fewer -- perhaps half a million -- Jews died in the concentration camps, that is a crime, too; in fact, it is no less monstrous, because "one single murdered Jew, one single Jew segregated on the basis of his Jewishness, cries out to high heaven" (Il Secolo d'Italia, 9 February 1996).

Of course, that is true; but, by the same logic, it is an argument which applies equally to all other races, religions, nationalities and beliefs as well. One might just as easily say that one single German, Japanese, or Italian civilian, one National Socialist, fascist, or revisionist murdered, beaten or jailed for his nationality, principles, or opinions "cries out to high heaven", too.

At the crossroads: terror or dialogue?

In addition to governmental persecution of revisionists, other methods are also resorted to against them: slander, exclusion from certain professions, and physical intimidation, not excluding murder. The following are only a few examples among many:

- in 1974, the French history teacher Francois Duprat was killed by a car bomb;

- on 4 July 1984, the independent Institute for Historical Review, active in California, was burnt down;

- in the same year, the revisionist professor Prof. Hermann Grive was murdered in Cologne;

- in 1989, Prof. Robert Faurisson was attacked and nearly beaten to death by a troop of thugs calling themselves the "Fils de la memoire juive" (Sons of Jewish Memory);

- in February 1996, the house of Prof. Renzo de Felice, the expert on fascism, was set on fire.

But there are also signs which give rise to hope.

Honest intellectuals are not prepared to endure these attacks on the freedom of expression and the freedom of research without protest.

Let us take, as an example, an appeal published by dozens of Italian scholars and intellectuals on 3 March 1994 in the left-wing newspaper Il manifesto, as well as in the June 1995 issue of the also left-wing publication La lente di Marx. The occasion for the appeal was the prohibition in France of the French translation of The Holocaust Under The Scanner by Juergen Graf. This is an excerpt from the appeal:

"An extremely alarming trend may be noted in Europe. This consists of deciding historical questions before the courts, which in turn is equivalent to an unacceptable interference of the justice system in politics and in the cultural and academic life of this or any other country. This is often accompanied by a hysterical, intellectually degrading campaign of media incitement. We believe that historical research must be free from all restrictions; that full freedom of thought must prevail -- in Europe just much as in Iran, in Germany just as much as in Italy or France. The truth or falsehood of an idea can be proven only by free and open scientific debate, not by the judgements of any court, or by crude mass media hate campaigns intended to serve political objectives."

The above are important statements which permit us to hope for a change in climate, even if the number of intellectuals who dare to voice support for such elementary principles in public, over their signature, is still too small to break through the wall of silence.

We seek absolute freedom of research, expression, and publication for revisionist historians and researchers, in the name of pluralism.

The harmonious cultural and political development of the European peoples can only result from a dispassionate, open dialogue, in which all topics can be examined and all viewpoints expressed without hinderance.

Revisionist researchers have published books, articles, interviews and documentation in support of their arguments. If these were false, if revisionist methods were erroneous, the result would have been devastating scientific rebuttal and expert reports in refutation. That the enemies of revisionism can produce nothing more effective against revisionism than physical and career assassination, police-state style brutality and repression, and hysterical media hate campaigns, reinforces doubt as to the correctness of the official version of history, lending credence to the suspicion that the intent is to suppress the truth by any means, including violence.

Back to table of contents
To the next chapter
To previous chapter
Back to archive