Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Thursday, March 19, 2020

The Nazis and Abortion: What are the Facts?

The Nazis and Abortion
What are the Documented Facts?

By Michael Hoffman
Copyright ©2020 by RevisionistHistory.org

According to the Guttmacher Institute, in 2017 alone, 862,320 unborn girls and boys were killed in the USA by abortion. That’s 2,363 killings per day. The shedding of this innocent blood is a curse on America. Jesus said, “Whatever you do to these, the least of my brethren, you do to Me.” (Matthew 25:40). 

Heedless utopians have imagined that America’s wealth and technology would shield it from the consequences of the mass murder of the most helpless and voiceless human beings, whose humanity is denied by neo-Nazi radical feminists and their enablers, just as Rabbi Moses Maimonides in his Guide of the Perplexed, denied the humanity of black people. 

According to the infernal praxis of dehumanization, America can slaughter thousands of children — “useless blobs,” every day— business as usual — and life will still be resplendent for the perpetrators and their tens of millions of accomplices in the corporate board rooms, government and the media. The Guttmacher Institute estimates that by the time they are age 45, twenty-four percent of all American women will have had an abortion. We reap what we sow. God is not mocked! He will purge this land of the blood of His millions of innocent ones who have been sacrificed to Molech. 

On Mar 19, 2020, at 8:11, Brian Ruhe stated:
Michael, Why do you write:"neo-Nazi radical feminists and their enablers"? You know these are Jews and neo-communists. You know Hitler was opposed to abortion. Why do you undermine your credibility to those who have admired your work for so may years? Is there a motivation behind your reckless actions? Brian Ruhe

The Nazis and Abortion: What are the Documented Facts?

Dear Mr. Ruhe: Don't attempt to hoodwink me with your irresponsible neo-Nazi propaganda. You haven't done your homework. You don't have the documentation and you lose the debate.

According to you, radical feminism is an entirely Judaic and “neo-communist” enterprise. According to you Neo-Nazism is opposed to abortion. Wrong on both counts. 

The incessant immunizing of non-Jews against culpability for the evils which they have massively condoned, aided and participated in, is a serious flaw in the thought processes of the far Right. Irish-American Margaret Sanger was a pioneer in the eugenics movement in the U.S., which is at the root of the Planned Parenthood abortion mentality, and which presaged and complimented the crime of Nazi sterilization of “inferior” people.  

The Nazi mentality is not limited to a time or a place. Wherever we discover a savage reduction of the humanity of any person there we find a revival of Hitler’s ideology, and abortion is the most heinous of all such savageries. Nazism is intrinsically marked by irreformable distinctions between humans and "sub-humans.”

There is a special component to Hitler’s National Socialism which is not negotiable or reformable: Nazism is founded upon a two tier system of human and less than human, and the criterion is racial. The less-than-human person can’t stop being Judaic or Slavic. Like the unborn baby in her mother’s womb, they are targeted because of what they cannot alter. In this important respect, radical feminism resembles Nazism.

With regard to the Nazi movement in Germany, are you aware of the existence of what the Nazis termed the Office for the Promotion of Population Policy and Racial Hygiene? On June 22, 1933, the Nazi Minister of the Interior introduced legislation for the forced sterilization of dehumanized persons.

On July 14, 1933 the Nazis enacted a law, which took effect, January 1, 1934 for the purpose of preventing the future propagation of "lives unworthy of life." 

Among the categories of persons “unworthy of life” subject to be sterilized were chronic alcoholics, epileptics, manic-depressives and the mentally retarded. Before you cheer the latter category, consider that Hitlers top aide, Martin Bormann, advised the hygiene courts that “political behavior be considered in making a diagnosis of mental retardation.” Implacable foes of the Nazis were thereby potentially subject to categorization as “retarded” and sterilization.  By 1937 Nazi authorities had sterilized approximately 225,000 "lives unworthy of life" inside Germany.

It is beyond ridiculous to suggest that Hitler's Nazis were not involved in the dehumanization of people: the mentally and physically disabled, Judaic and Slavic people. Dehumanization is the root and branch of abortion and the root and branch of Adolf Hitlerweltanschauung. Do not pretend you are not cognizant of this fact.

Now let us turn specifically to the Nazi laws and directives on, and practice of, abortion. The Nazi legal machinery was intended to protect "the Aryan race" from being aborted. The law had no other intent and certainly not, as you would seem imply, to protect all human beings from dehumanization and the scourge of abortion. 

For example, on September 8, 1933 the Nazi Berlin Council of Physicians stated that "proceedings will be taken against every evil-doer who dares to injure our sacred healthy race."

There were no “proceedings" legislated to protect "Jews," Slavs, or the mentally or physically disabled from being aborted. How could there be, when the disabled and “retarded” were to be sterilized.

Paragraphs 219 and 220 of the Nazi penal code, promulgated May 26, 1933 appear to refer to a universal ban on abortions in general. It is entirely deceptive. We know from the minutes of the meetings of the aforementioned Berlin Council of Physicians that a loophole was created whereby Nazi "medical specialists, appointed in each municipal district of Berlin, were to review every case in which an attending physician deemed an abortion necessary." 

If you had some grasp of this history, you would know that Nazi permission for “abortions for eugenic indications” (the euphemism for abortion of Judaic and Slavic infants, among others), varied from one “hereditary health court” to another, and that certain hereditary health courts held that such abortions were “exempt from punishment.”  

Furthermore, following a Nazi legal ruling dated July 18, 1935, the dehumanization represented by sterilization was permitted to be combined with the dehumanization of abortion: sterilization and abortion could henceforth be performed concurrently. 

Dehumanized Judaic people were not protected by or included in the Nazi laws contra abortion. 

Their dehumanization had been legislated into German law by the Reichstag (passed unanimously) on September 15, 1935. The “Law for the Protection of German Blood and Honor” (so-called “Nuremberg Law”), banned marriages between German-Judaics and German gentiles. Judaic genes were officially deemed unfit for marriage with non-Judaic Germans.

In line with this officially legislated loss of fully human status, abortions among Judaic women in Nazi Germany were allowed under the rubric of “a racial indication,” consistent with National Socialist anti-Judaic ideology. By March, 1939, six months before Hitler was to invade Poland, a Nazi policy directive noted that “restrictions on abortion does not apply to Jews.” 

Repeatedly in Nazi law and jurisprudence we see that the intent of Nazi anti-abortion law was for one purpose alone: outlawing that which “impairs the vitality of the German volk” (cf. the law promulgated March 9, 1943, subparagraph 5 to paragraph 218). 

Nazi law contra abortion was never intended to apply to or protect unborn Judaic, Polish or Slavic babies from abortion. Russian and Polish women were often “persuaded” to request an abortion.

By Directive of March 6, 1941, Polish farm workers (male and female) were prohibited from sexual relations with Germans under penalty of death. Furthermore, women toiling in Nazi labor camps were permitted abortions (cf. the secret Circular from the Reich Health Ministry of April 5, 1943, allowing female Ostarbeiterinnen to procure abortions on demand).

Claiming that Hitler banned abortion is just the kind of precipitate generalization that gullible Right wingers have imbibed, “Wow, Hitler, was opposed to abortion. He couldn’t have been so bad after all.” 

If there is any mental incapacity nowadays it is among those Nazi-sympathizers who continue to believe only what they want to believe, and then become infuriated at those who pursue the path of revisionist history that demolishes their mythical notions with facts from the documentary record

My readers depend upon me to attempt, to the best of my ability, to furnish them with the truth, and by the grace of God, I will continue that endeavor without fear or favor.

Michael Hoffman is the author of many books Adolf Hitler: Enemy of the German People. He edits the periodical, Revisionist History®, published six times a year. 

Michael's essay, Documenting Hitler: Our Dissenting Enterprise is available online as a public service.

On the Contrary is made possible by donations from truth seekers.


The Militia Guy said...

Hang in there, Mr Hoffman. Christians are exposing the Hitlerites and neo-nazis.

I am sparing you the vomit of the email exchange I am having with the usual suspects who attempt to waste my time. E.g., Please see below an email informing me that I was "done in the Nat community" (sic)

I was grieved to hear it. LOL

From: mchunterphd@protonmail.com
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2020 19:01
To: nlandholt@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: The Greatest Story Never Told
Religious judeo xtian BS to cover your shortcomings. You are done in the Nat community

Sent from ProtonMail mobile

Bill Rogers said...

Mr. Hoffman,

I'm largely in agreement with you. But I nevertheless find it odd and too in keeping with the interests of the cryptocracy to condemn the ideology you oppose as "Nazi." As you yourself indicate, the "Nazi" ideology and mentality long predate Hitler's Germany. So why condemn them in terms that suggest they were in some way unique to the Nazis? The Bolsheviks were enthusiastic proponents of infanticide ("abortion") and the associated nonsense rationalization for it invoking "women's health" that we see today. The liberal West was, before WW2, full of those eagerly pushing coercive eugenics and infanticide. The cryptocracy today wants to conceal all of this and pretend that coercive eugenics originated with the Nazis, and to also deny any association, historical or otherwise, between abortion and coercive eugenics. The cryptocracy thus seeks to deny its own complicity in these evils by isolating them to one failed regime from which it (falsely) seems distanced.

The cryptocrats and their servants selectively condemn as "Nazi" evils that are and were far more widespread and historically deep (while pretending some evils such as infanticide aren't evil at all or are even virtuous). I see no reason why we should follow their approach.

Bill Rogers said...

Mr. Hoffman,

Thank you for your reply.

I'm confused by your use of the word "Nazi" at this point. Do you believe that "Nazi" but not "neo-Nazi" should always indicate racism? I ask because in your post the phrase "neo-Nazi radical feminists" appears. But radical feminism is overwhelmingly associated with anti-racism and other movements definitive of contemporary leftism. In your reply to me you suggest that Nazism always has "racial motives."

My assumption was that in using "Nazi" you had in mind an anti-life ideology that could be expressed in a variety of ways, including abortion and coercive eugenics, as this can be found in feminism, historical Nazism, Talmudism, etc. and you've labeled all of those as "Nazi."

Michael Hoffman said...

Dear Mr. Rogers

As noted in the essay, this is my understanding of Nazism:

"The Nazi mentality is not limited to a time or a place. Wherever we discover a savage reduction of the humanity of any person there we find a revival of Hitler’s ideology, and abortion is the most heinous of all such savageries. Nazism is intrinsically marked by irreformable distinctions between humans and 'sub-humans."

Bill Rogers said...

Mr. Hoffman,

Thank you again for responding. But surely Bolshevik ideology involved "savage reduction of the humanity" of countless people? One could say they were utilitarian but surely that'd also apply to the feminists you call neo-Nazis.

Michael Hoffman said...

Yes, I agree, for whatever reason, Soviet Communism dehumanized people and afterward killed or imprisoned them.

But we’re going in circles here. I have failed to persuade you that there is a special component to Hitler’s National Socialism which is not negotiable or reformable: Nazism is founded upon a two tier system of human and less than human, and the criterion is racial. The less-than-human person can’t stop being Judaic or Slavic. Like the unborn baby in her mother’s womb, they are targeted because of what they cannot alter. In this important respect, radical feminism resembles Nazism.

Whereas with Soviet Communism, one can stop being a capitalist, or in different times women can be encouraged to bring their babies to term, on grounds of state utility: war-time needs, or demographic disaster.

Bill Rogers said...

Mr. Hoffman,

You've given a satisfying answer to my inquiry, and I thank you for your time. I greatly appreciate and admire the work that you do. May God bless you.

Jim Rizoli said...


I've Been a follower of yours for years, but would like to know is, would being a strong catholic have any bearing or prejudices of how you view Hitler, NSDAP etc.
You seem to have great dislike for Hitler. I would like to see your soul searching be that diligent in exploring your own church's teachings,treachery's,and shortcomings.
Talking about calling the kettle black. This is why many of us revisionist have abandoned you, your too catholic promoting, at the expense of honest and open discourse.

Jim Rizoli

hthor said...

It seems to me that you are too extreme and hateful in how you read
only negative meanings into german national socialist policies. Your position
is very similar to jewish propaganda in WW2 which turned out to be mostly lies!

Michael Hoffman said...

To hthor

Your argument as it now stands is without substance.

You dismiss my documentation by employing personal attacks, accusing this writer of disseminating "jewish propaganda." How so? Provide specific examples.

To persuade people it is not enough to make pronouncements predicated merely on your ipse dixit. Why should anyone believe you when you have offered nothing substantive in which to to sustain your disparagement of the truths I have articulated? The evils of Nazi abortion policy were real. Moreover, it is the progenitor of the massive denial of human rights to unborn human beings nowadays.

Dave Robinson said...

What concerns me about Mr Hoffman is his belief in the Holocaust. If he can be in such serious error regarding that obvious jewish lie, it casts suspicion on his academic credentials.