Counter-Currents
Fun with Hate Speech, Or Academic Freedom for Me but Not for Thee
Derek Stark3,188 words 
Cary Nelson is a very smart man. He is an emeritus English professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne and was the president of the American Association of University Professors from 2006 to 2012. As much as anybody else writing about higher education today, he grasps the hair-splitting nuances of academic freedom. He knows where to delineate the boundaries between expressions that deserves protection and those that should be subject to professional or administrative control.
Subscribe here to keep reading
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
16 comments
Yet, despite his urging academia to cast neutrality aside and throw its reputation and resources behind countering so-called “white supremacy,”
Um, what the hell is he talking about? They did that decades ago, particularly (although certainly not exclusively) in the humanities and social “sciences.”
Yes, of course pro-white ideas have essentially banished in academia for several generations. But it is ongoing, in the present. Nelson is still–today–making the argument that no white advocates be hired in academia , and if they are already hired, that they be hounded off campus. What I was doing was showing Nelson’s duplicity: he wants institutional neutrality when Jewish interests depend on it, as with the BDS movement, and he wants the institutions to take a strong political stand against white interests, in a book published in 2024.
Hope that helps.
Does he ever make a serious effort to justify his stratospheric hypocrisy? Also, is he Jewish himself, or is he the biggest bootlicker this side of DC?
According to Inside Higher Ed, Cary Nelson was “raised in a liberal Jewish household.”
This was a fantastic article. It illustrates why Holocaust Revisionism should not be dismissed as “irrelevant” to White Nationalism.
In fact, the Holocaust is literally the “Third Rail” of the Jewish Question, which is inextricably tied to Race.
And “Hate Speech” is almost the definition of Orwellian.
🙂
Well heck – what a disgrace to his noble Hebrew ancestors! Shmucks like that are the reason why people don’t like Jews.
I agree, but the entire thing is such a hard knot to unravel. The vast majority of people get mad at you if you question the Holocaust like they used to get angry if you questioned their religion. It’s the true religion of our epoch, therefore. And then the issue is intertwined with the equally powerful concept of egalitarianism and also provides the moral necessity of egalitarianism.
I’m certainly not saying that the Big-H should be the opening pitch, but White Nationalists should be expecting this approach.
Should not the right answer always be the Truth? White Nationalists need never fear free-speech and the superior argument.
Case in point, I’m not a fan of Candace Owens, but she recently split from Ben Shapiro and Dennis Praeger over criticism of Israel.
Then she got banned from Australia merely for echoing the former President Jimmy Carter in suggesting that Israel’s occupied territory was run like an Apartheid state ─ and also for noting that Dr. Mengele’s medical experiments were bizarre propaganda, which is of course true.
And New Zealand follows suit because all nations in the gravitas of Globohomo circle the wagons, although NZ ultimately relented on the denial of Owens’ visa.
https://nypost.com/2024/07/10/media/candace-owens-calls-mengeles-holocaust-experiments-bizarre-propaganda-in-latest-antisemitic-scandal/
Scientists have to have Kosher views on Race. Historians have to have blind acceptance of the Big-H. And Israel and the Chosenites cannot be criticized.
Who are the Joos or anybody else that they cannot be criticized?
🙂
Um, they’re powerful?
“let the Wookiee win.” C-3PO
Jews might be “powerful” but the JQ and problem isn’t going away by osmosis.
Candace Owens gets a pass because she’s Black and a Q-tard conspiracy theorist.
This means that when push comes to shove, she denies that she denied that Dr. Mengele did medical experiments. (He certainly did. The question is what this really means, and noting that the propaganda claims are absurd.)
So she’s a Denier(tm) and banned from travel because she called this out before feinting back across the drawbridge to the Bible and a whackadoodle theologically-based anti-Semitism, whereupon the travel bans ease. Hoax integrity secure.
Questioning the Big-H and criticising Jews like anyone else is not anti-Semitism, and I don’t consider myself nor open-debate on any subject to be anti-Semitic.
I have no fear and hatred of Jews any more than dumb Christians or well-behaved Muslims that don’t try to invade our lands.
🙂
There’s a reason we all write under pseudonyms here.
I support that and have in recent years tried to be more careful about doxxing threats on forums that I have run or participated in.
Ultimately, however, science and impartial inquiry is not about avatars and sockpuppets. It was hard quoting as scholarly some scientific work done, for example, by Germar Rudolf decades ago when he was a fugitive in hiding from the Thought Police of the Fatherland. He was forced to author papers and reports of his research under pseudonyms and so forth at one time. That is not credible science nor historiography, and his inquisitors knew it perfectly well.
We can all do only what we are comfortable with. I have used my own name Online in many debates on such taboo topics as the Big-H for decades now. I was posting on CODOH as myself when it was just a bbs and even have a handful of book reviews and articles. I prefer to make my research available to others who are publishing or in forums. My approach might not work well in some countries, but so far the First Amendment is still the law of the land.
The fact that certain quarters do try to shut up and silence Revisionists (or Deniers as the zealots call them) is something that White Nationalists should, in principle, fight tooth and nail.
If they can silence Holocaust Revision, then they can silence ANY investigation, and they can certainly silence Race Realism ─ or literally any idea ─ and turn it into a Monkey Trial farce.
One view represents a cautious and “revisionist” (and by definition never-ending) search for closer truth, and the other is a fossilized absolutist creed that seeks to crush dissent, dictate its dogmatic reality, and forcefully rejects anything in Denial(tm) of its canon.
🙂
My chief problem with Holo-denialist is they are also a quasi-religious cult. They are kind of obsessed with their subject and seem to think and post of nothing else. As with other cult-members they only read books on their pet topic and only visit websites that have something to do with anti-Holo denialism. They cannot imagine that anyone would not care about this subject and immediately see in every such person a traitor or a planted agent. This makes these people very difficult companions, and it is almost impossible to organize a political movement with them that does not remain a marginal refuge for eccentrics.
In any given subject field, obsessive people will be overrepresented in the discourse because they are the loudest and most persistent. This becomes more and more true the more taboo the subject gets, as taboos disproportionately suppress moderate voices and discourage people who are highly conscious of social norms. Highly autistic/eccentric people are obviously less affected by this and become a much more dominant element in the discourse than they otherwise would.
This is actually in argument in favor of discussing and trying to normalize taboo but important subjects like Holocaust revisionism. Because it liberates them from spergs.
This taboo will require more effort than others to break, as organized Jewry is far more invested in defending myths about WWII and Jewish Victimhood Exceptionalism than they are in defending myths about, say, race and IQ. However, time is on our side, as historical events tend to become less salient and emotionally charged as their chronological distance from the present grows. Younger generations already seem to be less invested in Holocaust mythology than their parents and grandparents.
Could you be a little more specific? Quasi-religious? Who are you referring to? Do any of these obsessive (and I’m assuming) excessively Online people that you imply have, for example, a college degree in History or some other credentials. Germar Rudolf is currently the most prominent Revisionist and a degreed chemist and former PhD candidate. Historians do specialize the deeper they get. That is how it works. Some of the better ones are non-academics. There are a lot of straw-man arguments that are built to describe Revisionists or “Deniers” as theologian Prof. Deborah Lipstadt calls them. She doesn’t understand the slightest thing about historiography. It is like the “Science is Real” guy carrying a protest placard at a Trump Rally but not having a clue how to explain the Scientific Method.
🙂
What’s a phd candidate?
Speaking for myself, I read intensely on the topic for about six months, verified some primary sources for myself, made up my mind and was done with it. I consider it a bit of a time trap and an unproductive (and especially depressing) topic.
Degreed Chemist Germar Rudolf was kicked out of the PhD program at the Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart and denied his doctorate for investigating the work of Fred Leuchter and Prof. Robert Faurisson on the crematorium morgues and fumigation chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau to assist the defense in the Thoughtcrimes trials of publisher Ernst Zündel in Canada in the 1980s.
Herr Rudolf found serious technical problems with their work on the Leuchter Report and cleaned it up ─ for example with a Leuchter Reports (Critical Edition) (banned by Amazon but available from CODOH) that includes extensive technically-competent commentary.
If memory serves, Rudolf got involved as a forensic chemistry expert in the early-1990s to assist the defense of exiled ex-Nazi politicians Gen. Otto Ernst Remer and Luftwaffe Col. HaJo Hermann, who were being threatened by the Bundestablishment Inquisition for not aping the official postwar historical narratives.
Rudolf eventually was forced into exile himself and ultimately extradited back to Germany in 2005 to serve several years in prison for Thoughtcrime, and the legal harassment continues today. Until recently, Rudolf was on track for U.S. citizenship and would then have First Amendment protections unless this can be blocked somehow and he can be extradited to Germany again where he would no doubt, like Ernst Zündel, serve more prison time and legal harassment until his dying breath.
Thoughtcrime is something that White Nationalists should take seriously. It has to be fought, and it is not going away.
Staying in Kosher-approved territory is surely safer, but ultimately it will not help. Thoughtcrime can effectively be defined in any way imaginable, and if given sufficient teeth, then ultimately any idea can be called Hate.
All everyone needs to do is to unashamedly support free-speech. And especially if it is unpopular, because anybody can be wrong.
You don’t need to dive into the weeds on Revisionism and the Big-H if History or some other discipline is not in your wheelhouse.
All one needs to understand essentially is a phrase coined by the late Revisionist and Columbia-educated engineer Friedrich Paul Berg who defused the noise and emotion of the big-H with the simple maxim:
Nazi Gassings Never Happened! Nobody Was Gassed!
If that statement is true, then somebody lied bigly. That is by definition saliently important to our civilization and society.
And nearly a century after these watershed events, free-speech is more important than ever.
🙂
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.