I read what was freely available for the article. It's interesting how with the way Hanson writes, he's implying that Jews were completely divorced from what the Soviet Union was at the time of WWII. Even if Stalin had purged all the higher ups who helped create the Soviet Union, the fall to Marxism was still initiated by "what [Hitler] called Jewish Bolshevism", which is probably why the dictator felt them responsible and wanted to eliminate their people entirely.
Well yes, that is the shibboleth required to be published. I find the writings of the Chief of the Army General Staff about liquidating civilian Russians to be more troubling.
I'm all about the debate itself. If there's points to be made, let's hear them. It's the constant seething and REEEing at the idea that the Narrative is being challenged at all is the scary part to me.
Not casting my lot with either side, but Victor Davis Hanson had a decent rebuttal (unfortunately half locked behind a paywall). This kind of sober tone should have characterized the response.
I read what was freely available for the article. It's interesting how with the way Hanson writes, he's implying that Jews were completely divorced from what the Soviet Union was at the time of WWII. Even if Stalin had purged all the higher ups who helped create the Soviet Union, the fall to Marxism was still initiated by "what [Hitler] called Jewish Bolshevism", which is probably why the dictator felt them responsible and wanted to eliminate their people entirely.
Well yes, that is the shibboleth required to be published. I find the writings of the Chief of the Army General Staff about liquidating civilian Russians to be more troubling.
I'm all about the debate itself. If there's points to be made, let's hear them. It's the constant seething and REEEing at the idea that the Narrative is being challenged at all is the scary part to me.