Strangely enough, the only response to my request came from IceViking, the blogger who originally brought Mr. Willd’s writings to my attention.
In his latest post, IceViking has translated another article by Jan Milld. This one establishes to my satisfaction that Mr. Milld not in fact a Holocaust-denier, though it does not (in my humble opinion) demonstrate a lack of anti-Semitism.
The relevant quotes are translated from an article in Blågula Frågor, reviewing another author’s book. Here’s the first quote:
Before we proceed — to avoid misunderstandings — what the revisionists have claims on is only regarding the three above points. Adelskogh: “What the revisionists on the other hand don’t deny is that the Germans subjected ethnic minorities, especially Jews, to persecution, deprived them of their property, expelled them, put them in concentration camps and forced labor.” Obviously the revisionists also don’t deny that millions of Jews were murdered, through executions or systematic hardships.
OK, that’s clear. Whatever he may feel about the Jews, Jan Milld is obviously not denying the series of atrocities that we now know as the Holocaust.
And here’s the second quote:
– – – – – – – – – –
What is clear is that certain power groups have an interest in that we all feel guilt towards Jews in general. It opens up possibilities of economic extortion and it helps the ongoing aggressions against the Palestinians . It can also be connected to Swedish critique of immigration and be used as mental oppression. [emphasis added]
The first part of this is true, to some extent: any philanthropic body that is organized around a particular grievance has a vested interest in seeing that grievance continue. If environmental degradation ceased to exist, Greenpeace and the Sierra Club would have to invent it, or face institutional death.
So the Jewish groups that organize around anti-Semitism have a vested interest in the sympathy and guilt felt by non-Jews towards the Jews — that’s true, but it’s a commonplace truth. And, more importantly, the Jews don’t have to do anything special to generate these conditions, unlike the environmentalists who invent and inflate environmental damage. Millions of people all over the world are all too ready to hate Jews without any additional prodding whatsoever.
In my experience, anyone who talks about Jewish “aggressions against the Palestinians” is either an anti-Semite or a leftist, or both. Maybe customs are different in Sweden, but from my vantage point it still quacks like a duck.
And anti-Semitism is unfortunately so widespread in Europe (not to mention in the USA) that it’s probably not even worth a discussion.
Mr. Milld made another point with which I whole-heartedly concur:
But there is also another — and important! — aspect to all of this. Questions about history and politics should be able to be discussed openly, facts should be able to be questioned by science. If a prohibition of thoughts is established in a certain area this can begin to spread, and then a society is in danger.
I’m in complete agreement.
A note to readers: Opinions found in the comments do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the owners of this blog. Discussion is left open to all points of view, provided that commenters obey the rules.
A note to commenters: If you want to voice your opinions here, I insist that you abide by the rules, namely that comments be civil, temperate, and respectful of others. If the thread degenerates, as previous ones have, into sneering, name-calling, and off-topic digressions and arguments, then I will close the comments.
If I were a government agency, this would be called censorship, but I’m not, and it isn’t.
These are just the rules we apply here at Gates of Vienna, where we have an irrational preference for reasoned discourse.