Racism, Anti-Semitism, Genocide, and Eugenics in the COVID Era

Tero Vesalainen/Shutterstock

Commentary

Over the past decade, I have attended in person or via Zoom a number of presentations by the Kupferberg Holocaust Center (KHC), which is located on the campus of CUNY Queensborough Community College. Overall, I have found these presentations to be quite informative from both a personal and a historical perspective.

Personally, I am an Ashkenazi Jew, whose family, in part, came to America from Belarus during the WWI era. I’ve come to learn that those members of my family who remained were almost certainly exterminated by the Nazis when they went into Greater Russia.

From an historical perspective, these programs have helped me to make sense of events that have occurred over the course of my 72 years on this planet, with a particular focus on the past 15–20 years. As a grandfather of four, I’ve reached the stage in life where their futures are my number one concern... and there’s plenty to be concerned about.

Over the past couple of years, the presentations I have seen have become, in my opinion, too caught up in left-wing/right-wing rhetoric, with a large majority of the slings and arrows directed at the right, such that the key historical lessons, in my opinion, have been missed. Given my belief that this country is divided in ways that have not been seen since the Civil War, this type of public discourse is only making matters worse.

In an effort to try and improve the level of dialogue, I have sent email communications to KHC on 2 or 3 occasions during 2023 focusing on areas that I believe required more discussion, and requesting that the email be forwarded to the presenter. In each case, I received a polite acknowledgement from KHC that my email had been received, and that it had been forwarded to the presenter. However, I received no further response from anyone.

This changed in early December 2023, when I watched a Zoom presentation: “Racism, Eugenics & Antisemitism: Connections between Jim Crow and the Nuremberg Race Laws.” The presenter was Tom White, Coordinator of Educational Outreach at the Cohen Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies, located in Keene, N.H. Having recently posted on Brownstone an article covering, among other things, The Belmont Report and The Nuremberg Code, as they relate to human subjects research, I thought that this topic would be right in my wheelhouse, and there might be some common ground for further discussion.

As I had done previously, I sent an email communication to KHC, asking that it be forwarded to the presenter. Here is that email:

“Dear Mr. White:

“The title of your recent presentation, Racism, Eugenics & Antisemitism: Connections between Jim Crow and the Nuremberg Race Laws piqued my interest due to my role as Chair of an Institutional Review Board (IRB). IRBs are charged with reviewing, approving, and monitoring all research in the US involving human subjects. IRBs are regulated by the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP), which falls within the Dept of Health & Human Services (DHHS).

“I came to this role as a retired physician with 19 years of direct patient care in a rural setting as a Board Certified Internist; 17 years of clinical research at a private-not-for-profit healthcare agency; and over 35 years of involvement in public health, and health systems infrastructure and administration.

“Now here’s the interesting part! OHRP regulations are based on two foundational documents: (1) The Nuremberg Code, which was an outgrowth of the atrocities committed by the Nazi doctors against Jews during the Holocaust, and (2) The Belmont Report, which was the outgrowth of Congressional investigations in the 1970s of the Tuskegee experiments, where poor southern Black men infected with syphilis were followed for 40 years without providing any intervention, even though effective treatments were developed early in the course of the ‘research.’

“The most important aspect of The Nuremberg Code is that there must be proper informed consent whenever medical research is done, and a key aspect of The Belmont Report is that bodily autonomy must be respected. The handling of the COVID vaccination rollout, a Phase 3 research product, violated both of these documents, which will ultimately be revealed to have caused incredible harm. In fact, I believe this will turn out to be the greatest medical atrocity in the history of this planet, worthy of the term: Medical Holocaust.

“As a result of my observations as an IRB Chair, I made some inquiries, and was put in contact with physicians with very high level expertise in the COVID pandemic. It led to the following post on October 22, 2023 that I wrote:

“It appears that my pursuits and yours have followed parallel and complementary tracks. As such, I was disappointed to see that your talk was generally geared towards taking political shots. I believe it would be much more fruitful to explore how the government, the public health agencies, and the administrative state discarded 125 years of policy and practice when dealing with airborne pandemics, and with a more than compliant media, used fear, division, deception, coercion, intimidation, and censorship (tactics that come right out of Hitler’s Nazi Party playbook from the 1930s) to create what has become a more and more totalitarian state in America.

“If you are interested in pursuing this in a way that can yield something of substance rather than noise, please feel free to contact me at any time.”

Approximately one week later, I received the following response from Mr. White:

“Dear Steve. Thank you for your thoughtful email. Please accept my apology for the tardiness of my response. I believe we have followed similar trajectories, but we differ in our opinions about COVID. That’s well and good. My focus was on asking how such ideas became mainstream and that does include the history of racism, prejudice, and its current iterations. I am attaching my essay on the topic to give you a broader insight into my thinking and welcome your insights and conversation.

“Tom

“Tom White

“Coordinator of Educational Outreach

“Cohen Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies

“229 Main Street

“Keene, NH 03435-3201

“www.keene.edu/cchgs”

Here’s the link to the essay, “White Purity, Eugenics Ideology, and Mass Murder.”

Needless to say; I was thrilled to have heard back from the presenter, and to have been provided with what I thought was a well-researched paper. As I read it, things jumped out at me that were so compelling that my written response came forth like a flood. Here it is:

*   *   *

Thank you for providing your paper, which added very useful details to your Zoom presentation. I will first respond to your presentation and paper before getting to COVID policy. In both cases, I will start with a statement that I believe we can both subscribe to; and see where it takes us.

Regarding your presentation and paper covering racism, eugenics and anti-Semitism, and the connections between Jim Crow and the Nuremberg Race laws; the point of agreement is that Woodrow Wilson was a racist, who, as you state in your paper, revived the KKK by having Birth of a Nation as the first movie ever shown in the White House, and re-segregating the nation’s Capital, which included the military just prior to US entry into WWI. It turns out that that’s not the half of it! Wilson wrote that resources spent on Reconstruction were wasted because of his belief that Black people were uneducable savages. While president of Princeton University, he made certain that no Black students were admitted. Once in office as President, Wilson named Josephus Daniels as his Secretary of the Navy, a Cabinet position, which he held for the entire eight years that Wilson was in office. This must have been his reward for leading one of the “Black Wall Street” massacres that have become more widely known in recent years. The massacre that Daniels engineered occurred in the early 1890s in Wilmington, NC.

It actually gets worse! Wilson was essentially the Founding Father of the Progressive movement in the US, and wrote the equivalent of the Federalist Papers for Progressivism during the early 1880s. Key elements of Wilson’s writings included his belief that in the years since the ratification of the Constitution, humankind (clearly only referring to White people) had advanced in knowledge, enlightenment, and character, such that the Constitution needed to be updated. I believe that the term, “living, breathing Constitution” was first expressed by him. Given that Darwinism was all the rage during that era, it’s a mere baby step to see Wilson as a White Supremacist, who would be attracted to eugenics. I can’t help but point out that in the 15 years after Wilson wrote this, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were born; the trinity who were largely responsible for the most murderous century ever; the 20th Century. For a number of years now; I’ve believed that the Democrat/Progressive connection is clear evidence that the Democratic Party never shed its racist roots. Having worked at an agency for 17 years where upwards of 85 percent of the healthcare professionals were Black or Hispanic; I’ve observed first-hand how this form of racism manifests.

Your presentation and paper chronicle the dominant role that Progressives played in furthering interactions between the US and Germany that resulted in the various atrocities that occurred in both countries. As such, I found your efforts to cast aspersions on conservatives/right wingers or your attempts to conflate or redefine leftist ideologies as coming from the right to be weak attempts to divert attention from the true villains in your well-documented paper. Despite what Wikipedia says, Hitler’s Nazism was NOT a rightwing ideology, even though I would agree that current day neo-Nazism is. The reason that Marxists hated and distanced themselves from Nazism was that it was a nationalistically oriented, rather than a globally oriented form of Marxism. As such, I reject any characterization of America First as being equivalent to National Socialism.

Similarly, what you describe as racist immigration policy by conservatives is actually seen by those groups, and by me, as the epitome of the Cloward–Piven strategy of deliberately overloading the social safety nets of a country in order to collapse the prevailing economic and governmental structure. This comes directly out of the Alinskyite/Progressive playbook. As with the collateral damage caused by COVID policies that I’ll touch upon later; the Cloward–Piven strategy, bad as the direct damage has been; has given us the fentanyl OD deaths, and the scourges of human and drug trafficking, with its attendant gang violence.

From a political perspective, these “migrants” are being brought in by Democrat/Progressive leftists for the purpose of providing them with mail-in ballots long before these folks are legally allowed to vote. The ballots will then be harvested by Democrat operatives, filled out by them, and cast. Alternatively, these ballots will be filled out by the migrant, knowing that it was through the Democrat/Progressive leftists that they got into the country, so that they would become reliable Democrat voters. This is what people like Tucker Carlson and Stephen Miller fight so vigorously against... so, to have them labeled as racists and White Supremacists by groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is rich, given some of the sordid activities of that group that have been exposed! As a Constitutional Conservative, I have no doubt that the SPLC would put me in the radical rightwing racist camp without giving it a second thought.

The final word on this matter, which I believe tells us everything we need to know as to the real “threats to democracy” is that the mobs currently spewing their anti-Semitic/anti-Israel hate are composed entirely of ‘woke’ Progressive leftists and jihadist sympathizers. Not one of these people has been identified as a White Supremacist, neo-Nazi, skinhead or KKK member, the usual rightwing fringe groups often used as convenient scapegoats when things get out of hand in the political arena. In fact; none has been identified as a pro-life religious radical, an ultra-mega-MAGA Trump supporter or even a run-of-the-mill Republican, groups who the left loves to conflate with the fringe groups I just listed. I find it shocking that this type of rhetoric actually has any currency in our society, but such is the state of affairs in 21st Century American political discourse.

Now let me move to COVID. In your previous email, you stated that you disagreed with my characterization of our pandemic response as a Medical Holocaust on a global scale. Once again, I’ll begin with an area of likely agreement and see where it takes us.

There is virtually universal agreement in this country that things did not go well in terms of our pandemic response. I’ll present three potential scenarios as to how that happened:

Scenario 1: We handled the pandemic as best we could; given the information we had at the time

Scenario 2: Things didn’t go well because the mitigation modalities put in place (lockdowns, masking, social distancing, and multiple mRNA jabs) were not sufficiently followed and/or enforced.

Scenario 3: Everything that was done was wrong; and was known to be wrong when implemented.

Given your stated disagreement with me regarding COVID, I would assume that you would fall in the Scenario 1 camp, and possibly the Scenario 2 camp, as well, as these two camps are not mutually exclusive; whereas I am firmly in the Scenario 3 camp.

While I did not set out professionally to obtain training, knowledge, and experience in all four major disciplines of the healthcare industry (hands-on patient care; biomedical research, public health, and health systems infrastructure and administration); the vagaries of my professional career exposed me to all of it; something that I’ve come to recognize has been the case for less than 1 percent of the physicians in this country… and I’ve been at it for just over 50 years.

On the other hand, if I were to ask you how much training, knowledge, and experience you have had in these four disciplines; your answer would almost certainly be: None; none; none; and none! Therefore, whether you recognize it or not; you have no foundational basis by which to know whether the information you’ve obtained and believe is valid. You have relied totally on the credentials, professionalism, honesty, integrity, and ethics of the people you’ve chosen to believe. As you document in your paper, that did not work out well (to put it politely) during the era when eugenics was in fashion.

Just as academia, the professional class (with physicians at the top of the list), and the top scientists and Nobel laureates were most supportive of Hitler’s Nazi Party; the same groups, with physicians once again leading the pack, were drawn into the policies and practices implemented during COVID, which were modeled after the mitigation strategies implemented by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). There is no dispute over this fact!

The public health agencies, in conjunction with other agencies of the administrative state, and supported by social and news media outlets used (1) fear; (2) division; (3) deception; (4) coercion; (5) intimidation; and (6) censorship to obtain the compliance (subjugation would be my preferred term) of the public at large, as well as healthcare professionals. As previously stated, these tactics were directly from the Nazi playbook of the 1930s, which your paper documents. As a result, 125 years worth of public health policy and practice developed to handle airborne pandemics, which as recently as 2017 had been reaffirmed by the World Health Organization (WHO) were cast aside.

Of note, the 2017 WHO document was essentially a restatement of policies/practices developed by Donald Henderson at Johns Hopkins back in 2006. The significance of this is that Dr Henderson, a physician and epidemiologist had previously led the team that rid the planet of smallpox, and when he died in 2016, he was leading teams that were on the verge of eliminating polio and measles from the planet. So, this was a healthcare professional whose recommendations legitimately carried tremendous weight! To repeat; all of it was cast aside for our COVID pandemic response.

Let me now be more specific about each of the six tactics listed above:

1. Fear: The public health establishment fanned the flames of the false perception that COVID was much deadlier, especially for people under the age of 50 than was already known prior to the lockdowns. This was totally contrary to the purpose of these agencies, which is to provide factual information that allows the public to make rational decisions. The truth was known from the outset; for people over the age of 75, especially with certain co-morbidities, COVID was significantly deadlier than annual flu. However, for persons under age 75, the risk from COVID was much less than from flu, while for children under age 18, the risk was close to zero; and was actually zero in some European Union (EU) countries that kept good records. This is why several EU countries never approved the mRNA jab for children under age 18. This knowledge was ignored in order to drum into children’s heads that they didn’t want to kill granny! To scare a child with that kind of rhetoric is child abuse; and it became the standard line.

2. Division: Masked vs. Unmasked / Vaxxed vs. Unvaxxed. Use of masks outside of healthcare settings was never part of airborne pandemic preparedness, because it was known that they don’t work; but it was pushed anyway. In addition, it was believed, and now confirmed that masking young children would cause considerable collateral damage in terms of acquiring language, contextualizing facial expressions, general socialization skills, and overall learning capabilities. These deficits will likely last a lifetime. As for vaccines; remember the expression: “Pandemic of the unvaccinated?” This was the result of deliberately manipulating data in ways that a 7th grader at grade level in math would have figured out within minutes, provided you can find such a student. Similar drivel was put out regarding red state/blue state political differences, left/right ideological differences, and I even saw a paper published in a respected peer-reviewed medical journal claiming that drivers who had been vaxxed were involved in less automobile accidents than those who were unvaxxed.

3. Deception: The definition of a vaccine had to be changed in order to call the mRNA jab a vaccine. It’s actually a gene transporter, and it never generated the type of immune response that qualified it to be called a vaccine. The jab was touted as FDA approved. Actually, it was FDA approved under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), which is a far cry from standard FDA approval. The jab was still a Phase 3 research pharmaceutical product, which meant that tenets of the Nuremberg Code (proper informed consent) and the Belmont Report (bodily autonomy), which I detail in the post I provided you, should have been in play, but were set aside. You mention informed consent in your paper, and actually cite the Belmont Report by name. Similarly, your paper states the following: “The postwar trial of Nazi doctors utilizes the only two ethical guides in the Western world on human research—both are German. In 1900 Prussia responded to public outrage at clinical trials on syphilis by passing Ethical Standards for Human Subjects Research in Prussia. In 1931, those standards are adopted by the Weimar Republic and include the need for patient consent. Despite this, medical professionals join the Nazi Party in high numbers.” By your own words, you very nicely connect the main thrust of your Zoom presentation and paper, covering events of 100 years ago, to my post regarding the whereabouts of the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP), as it relates to COVID policies and practices during the pandemic.

The following example of deception is indicative of just how brazen the public health agencies were (and continue to be), and the degree to which they were contemptuous of the public at large. Besides, there was an ideological agenda to push, and nothing must stand in the way of that! About 18 months ago, the Cleveland Clinic noted in a study done with other aims in mind that the more jabs a person received, the more likely that person was to contract COVID. The study was denigrated by the healthcare establishment because the finding was not something they were looking for. By that reasoning, we should demand that Alexander Fleming return his Nobel Prize for the discovery of penicillin, since that is not what he was looking for. It was Louis Pasteur, a pretty good scientist in his own right, who coined the term, “chance and the prepared mind” to describe how many, if not most of the greatest scientific discoveries occur serendipitously.

Actually, “scientific consensus” and “settled science” are the terms that should give everyone pause. Incidentally, the finding of more jabs; more COVID cases has been confirmed by additional research by the Cleveland Clinic, and the epidemiologic finding that countries with the highest vaccination rates have the highest number of COVID cases per 100,000 persons. You’d think that that would change public health policy, but it hasn’t. Not when there are profits to be made by Big Pharma, whose horrendous practices during the COVID pandemic I’ve not mentioned in this response to you, but is well documented in your paper in your description of the euthanasia programs in Germany 100 years ago. Some things never change, but for now, let the gaslighting continue!

4. Coercion: In order to travel; in order to dine at a restaurant; in order to attend school; in order to keep your job; you needed to be masked and jabbed. How 3rd Reichian! My wife and I never got jabbed because we made antibodies after infection in December 2020. However, that was not deemed sufficient protection, despite 2500 years of knowledge to the contrary. As a result, we could not dine in a restaurant in NYC for 18 months, and we live in NYC! Actually, had I been jabbed, I don’t think I would have dined in a NYC restaurant. As a Jew, my attitude was that next, I would have to wear a Star of David on my lapel, so that the establishment would have another reason to deny me service.

5. Intimidation: Physicians in certain specialties were informed that if they did not toe the diktats of the public heath (sic) establishment (I prefer to call them the public health Gestapo); their Board Certification would be in jeopardy. Similarly, the major healthcare systems that now employ most physicians in this country did the same, as did several state licensing boards. Based on this, the sacred doctor-patient relationship, which is at the core of quality patient care, was officially terminated by the government. Here’s a quote from your paper from eugenicist Paul Popenoe from 100 years ago: “Nazis are not racists, but progressive scientists.” When I read that, I couldn’t help but recall Anthony Fauci’s famous quote: “But they’re really criticizing science, because I represent science ...” Sounds like birds of a feather!

6. Censorship: The degree of success of the administrative state in squashing almost everything I’ve stated in tactics (1)—(5) above demonstrates how effective and brutal they were. For the overwhelming majority of the lay public, Elon Musk’s Twitter File releases became the only outlet for some of the truth to emerge. Of course, Musk will now get the Donald Trump treatment for having done that.

The collateral damage caused by these tactics in terms of death, disability, and ruined lives was orders of magnitude greater than the morbidity and mortality caused directly by the virus… and since it takes up to 5–10 years to know the full impact of a new vaccine; there are almost certainly additional shoes that are going to drop, particularly when you’re dealing with an entirely new biological platform.

Specifically, the public and healthcare providers were informed that the spike protein (which is actually a toxin) that was injected to generate an immune response would stay where it was injected and eventually become inactive. It was soon recognized that this was nonsense, and that the spike protein circulated quite freely and attached itself to just about every organ tissue examined, with particular affinity for myocardial cells. It also appears to be the case that the spike protein does not become inactive nor is it metabolized and excreted from the body, which means that vaccine recipients may have the spike protein circulating in their bodies for the rest of their lives.

Internationally, funds that had been effectively used to combat malaria, TB, and HIV in Africa were diverted to provide jabs to a population that, due to its youth, derived no benefit. The fact is; the mission of public health is holistic in its approach to overall health. As has been well documented, the public health response to COVID was laser focused on the virus to the utter neglect of every other element of public health. The whole world has paid a horrendous price!

The bottom line is that your work covering White Supremacy and the eugenics movement back then and now; and my description of actual COVID policy and practice are inextricably linked in terms of the types of intellectuals, professionals, and political leaders drawn to it, and the sick ideologies that would allow these things to be implemented. Your Zoom presentation and paper have confirmed for me the validity of certain concepts that I’ve formulated over the past 15–20 years that I was able to put to good use, along with my 50+ years of training, knowledge, and experience in healthcare, to properly evaluate the pandemic response. In fact, it likely saved my life more than once.

There is no getting around the fact that the root of these atrocities is Progressivism, as founded, expounded, promoted, and implemented by Woodrow Wilson, the most racist president in the country’s history, including those in office prior to the Civil War. Your paper leads one to no other conclusion. As such, we’re back to that oft cited expression: Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them… or; if you prefer: It’s déjà vu all over again!

Thanks again for the opportunity to give you my take, and I look forward to your response.

*   *   *

To date, I have received no response. This could be due to the fact that additional time is needed to address the numerous points that I have made, and I should wait a bit longer. On the other hand, I feel compelled to put this material out while the irons are hot! If a response is forthcoming, I will certainly compile a follow-up post, since my search for truth, wherever it leads, is relentless.

I’ll leave you with my final conclusion from having gone through this exercise: Woodrow Wilson was America’s Hitler... and his brand of Progressive ideology still dominates the left in this country. As such, the COVID response, which I continue to believe was a Medical Holocaust, is merely the most comprehensive dress rehearsal yet for the coming global totalitarian state. Sleepwalking through it is not an option!

From the Brownstone Institute

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.