Homo Sapiens 1900 (1998)

A somewhat tedious history of the eugenics movement by The Architecture of Doom-director Peter Cohen.

Google videos link; Wikipedia; IMDB.


Eman said...

Thank for posting this -- it was indeed tedious, but interesting.

I wonder if Peter Cohen's next film will focus on the use of eugenics by Jews? Israel is a worldwide center of eugenics and the study of human genetics, and modern Jews are currently the primary users of eugenics. For instance, Jewish organizations based on eugenics such as 'Dor Yeshorim' (in Israel, the USA, and elsewhere) have tested millions of Ashkenazi Jews in order to prevent genetic disorders due to too much Ashkenazi inbreeding: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dor_Yeshorim

Maybe you could do a post on the Jewish eugenic organization 'Dor Yeshorim' in order to bring that info to a wider audience?

Anonymous said...

Speaking of Jewish eugenics, have a look at John Glad's site.



Anonymous said...

Wait...Peter Cohen's a Swedish jew? Aren't the philo-semites always telling us there are no jews in Sweden?

Anonymous said...

Aren't the philo-semites always telling us there are no jews in Sweden?

According to the jews/philo-semites, not only are there no jews in Sweden, but Sweden apparently exists in such a perfect bubble completely shut off from any and all external influence (and has been for decades), that it serves to disprove any and all "anti-Semitic" claims about Jewish influence and power in the West and the world.

blue anonymous said...

Plodding, yes, but very worthwhile.

blue anonymous said...

By the way, I saw Architecture of Doom about a year ago - it is also on google, and it is fantastic. Much better than this movie, though the subject matter is not as interesting. I'm not much of a historian, so I can't say whether the history was highly on target.

Robert8 said...

The movie's too long for me, but to resume and extract the juice of all that, I will try to quote the incredibly lucid french writer L.F. Celine:

"When the french people decide to set an antisemit league, its president, vice president and secretary will be jewish"

"quand les français décideront de créer une ligue antisemite, le président, vice président et secrétaire seront juifs"

blue anonymous said...

Can anyone recommend any objective, well-documented histories of the Nazis or the commie revolution in Russia? I think Peter Cohen's two movies fit this description, more or less. I would really like to understand the 20thC down to the quark level. I'm no Nazi hugger but I admire their classical revival, Nietzschianism, and eugenic realism. I'm less charmed by the mass murder and gonzo military aggression. I recognize the severe faultiness of postwar America and its deep connection to our extreme overreaction against Nazi ideas, and I wouldn't be able to put up with something corrupted by that kind of bio-irrealist schlock. Yet I would also prefer not to read something by a nazi sympathizer.

Anonymous said...

commenter blue anonymous - have you ever heard of the website Occidental Dissent? I think you'd like it - http://www.occidentaldissent.com/

lenny said...


Healthy skepticism of any ideology is a good thing. There were certainly many faults with Nazism. But I will take issue with one thing you said:

You mentioned "mass murder" as a defining characteristic of the German government 1933-1945. I assume that by this you mean the gas chambers and all that. I don't know if you've done any reading on this subject, but the idea that millions were gassed by the Germans has been thoroughly refuted. Scientific testing has completely demolished the already-suspect gassings myth.

Revisionist scholarship suggests that there were likely something approaching but not reaching 1 million Jewish deaths in territory under German control, 1941-1945. Many wof these Jewish deaths were in semi-ad-hoc massacres on the eastern front. Many of the rest came in the disastrous final months of the war, when infrastructure collapsed and basic food and medicine didn't reach the prison camps (during this era, many German civilians in their homes likewise suffered food deprivation and disease). Those horrific photos of piles of starved bodies? Terrible, but actually more of our fault than the fault of any SS men: It was our planes that bombed out their train networks, preventing supplies reaching those people. Disease ran rampant, people started losing lots of weight, and they started dying.

But before I make this too long, I will sum up:
-The number of people in prison camps "gassed" by the Germans was ~0.
-There were never any plans by the German government for the general extermination of any group of people. There were public plans to depatriate all Jews from Europe. The exterminationist fantasists claim that these publically-known plans were full of "code words" for killings, which is absurd. As Faurisson has said, the exterminationist thesis has devolved to "genocide by telepathy". ;-D
-The number of Jews that died of all causes 1940-1945 didn't exceed 1million in the German sphere, with hundreds of thousands more dead in the Soviet sphere (200,000 died in Soviet military uniforms in the field alone; some unknown comparable number died after relocation to poor conditions in Siberia, in 1941-1942 evacuations).
-The above statistic (~1.5million Jewish dead, of whom over two-thirds died in German hands) is a catastrophe for the Jewish race, considering fewer than 10million Jews in Europe in the 1930s, yes, but proportionally they lost a slightly lower percentage of their people than did the Germans in the same period. The Germans lost well over 15% of their entire population, dead, 1939-1949. Millions of military deaths, the deaths in the firestorms caused by bombing, the deaths from the miserable conditions of the late war and postwar period, and especially the Soviet-caused deaths: The arbitrary mass killings in the chaotic/lawless months of 1945 in the Soviet-occupied areas, the mass-killings of eastern-Germans whose home-provinces were annexed and all Germans expelled, the post-war dieoff from starvations (German civilians through 1949 in the Soviet sector averaged under 1,000calories per day) and untreated disease, the plague of suicides by young German women who had been gangraped by Soviet thugs [egged-on to do so from on high...See the fanatical-Jew Ehrenburg's publications, literally urging mass-rape as a noble action and the Soviet soldiers' right. It was used as a tool to break the Germans' spirit.] The fate of Germans 1945-1949 is actually worse than the fate of Jews in the period before that, and is actually much worse when you consider that the Jews got an ethonstate of out of their suffering, whereas the Germans got nothing but a bad case of Cultural Pessimism along with the rest of us.

See here for the full story: http://www.exulanten.com/hell.html

blue said...

I don't much doubt your points on the suffering of Germans. That tallies with what little I know. Also, railroad bombings leading to starvation in concentration camps against German will is very plausible.

However, would you say your "no gas" revisionism (or maybe cyanic gas was just used for de-lousing) is a conspiracy theory? I'm using that term literally. I don't mean it's a wackjob theory everyone should scoff at unthinkingly, I just mean that it literally requires hundreds or thousands of people to conspire eternal silence, and stick to it even though all (or at least very many) are each individually capable of blowing the whole scheme.

I doubt you would propose that there was a centralized conspiracy where every member was in contact with the elite heart of the conspiracy. But do you propose a loose conspiracy where everyone sort of "coordinated," without following leaders, to a lie-belief that they don't believe sincerely? Or do you believe in a Chomskian "manufactured consent" phenomenon where masses were sincerely converted to a view concocted by a very small consciously-lying group? I acknowledge of course that the reality could be mixed: partly a conspiracy and partly a manufactured consent.

But no matter what else is true, the model is "at least partly conspiracy" if the number of insincere adherents is large. That's because, if you believe there are a large number of insincere espousers, we have to ask why there is no effective apostacy, and why this case is apparently the only successful (large) conspiracy in history. Broken conspiracies include the Lincoln administration assassinations, the Catalinian conspiracy - I'd probably have a lot more if I knew history. (I don't consider "conspiracy" to apply to anything that's not about pretty damn hard facts; eg, the anti-white propaganda in our public schools I consider a manufactured consent not a conspiracy.) It's possible that a few holocaust apostates could be disbelieved, but each additional one increases the overall credibility. They may be execrably suppressed as speech criminals in Germany, but are they elsewhere? We have to wonder why there aren't at least a few apostates who had enough standing to get serious attention. Or is the mainstream view so fundamental to the postwar political religion that apostate are just ignored? In that case, where's the "great work" of the revisionists/denialists/whatever that totally blows away mainstream cant like so much chaff, a la Nietzsche or Mencius Moldbug? (Sorry n/a! I know you don't like him.) Where's revisionism's "Bell Curve" or "The g Factor," those works which render IQ group-equalitarianism both laughable and contemptable? What's the one integral block of 300 pages -- well documented so I can randomly dig up 3% of the references to see if the author deals with them fairly -- that I should read if I want to risk being "converted?"

Anonymous said...

Blue, Actually it is very simple.

There is no real explicit collective lie. Obviously the internees were very fearful and in such an environment where there were many thousands upon thousands of people in one, its is all too easy for rumors, myths, and exagerations to get started. Think of just among your friends; how many tall tales have you heard? It is psychological; people like to tell big stories to elevate their importance and stature among their peers.

One guy says he saw something, others then match their expectations and observations to the explanation, and thus you have a running story that really isn't true, but isn't an explicit lie. No one person has comprehensive knowledge or even claims to - lacking comprehensive knowledge, people have to fill in the blanks based on what other people claim which in of itself is based on something someone else said. Add the fact that the Jews have knowledge of historical persecution and keen awareness of hatred directed at them by the Germans and you have the receipe for a collective delusion.

Here is a convincing example - the Jews-into-soap myth. It became almost universal knowledge that Jews were being turned into bars of soap, based on the observations and paranoia of a few Jews. Yet today, we know without a doubt that the story is absolutely false. Yet many 'survivors' repeat the same lie over and over again, 100% convinced that it is true and that what they "saw" or "heard" proves it.