THE MONGOLOCAUST

Genghis the Menace

Today is Holocaust Memorial Day, and we are being reminded once again that killing large numbers of people, especially Jews, is a bad thing. 

It looks like someone is really worried about our ability to understand how bad this is, and, like most of you, I will try not to take that implied affront personally, especially as it was my nation that did more per capita to help out those Jews. Also, it would be nice if people were allowed to discuss this part of history without being fined, jailed, deplatformed, etc.

The main problem with the Holocaust narrative is that it kind of steals the limelight from all the other mass brutalities perpetrated by man, which does a lot to breed distrust and hatred of the group involved.

Actually that's two problems, namely, other atrocities are comparatively ignored and the Jews are resented for pushing their pile of corpses to the front of the queue. 

I think the way forward is to widen the historical lens a little and remember that man's inhumanity to man is not always driven by German or Christian hatred of Jews. 

I won't mention the Holodomor, as there is enough "plausible deniability" in the general crappiness of communism to provide plenty of wriggle room. This also applies to the Chicoms, the North Koreans, and other Commie or Commie-inspired regimes. In fact, there is even a little bit of that in the Holocaust as the National SOCIALISTS, as Socialists, were also sub-optimal at maintaining supply chains, which is another reason they lost the war.

Calm down, not actual human skulls.

But another reason I don't want to bring up the Holodomor is because Nazi apologists try to pass it off as a purely Jewish enterprise in an attempt to justify (while also denying) the Holocaust. 

There are some obvious problems with that narrative due to the fact that the Soviet Union at the time was ruled by an ethnic Georgian Christian with the assistance of a 12-man Politburo that had only a single ethnic Jew in it. In short, the trouble with the Holodomor narrative is that it's hard to tell where the real horror lies and where the retardation begins. 

But there are plenty of other, much clearer mass atrocities that we can focus on. One of the most interesting is the Dzungar genocide that occurred following their defeat and conquest by the Qing Chinese in the 1750s. The Qing Emperor at the time is now a revered historical figure in modern day China, which is keen to emulate his success at subjugating its outer territories. 

"Show no mercy at all to these rebels," he instructed his generals in dealing with the conquered people. "Only the old and weak should be saved. Our previous military campaigns were too lenient. If we act as before, our troops will withdraw, and further trouble will occur. If a rebel is captured and his followers wish to surrender, he must personally come to the garrison, prostrate himself before the commander, and request surrender. If he only send someone to request submission, it is undoubtedly a trick. Tell Tsengünjav to massacre these crafty Zunghars. Do not believe what they say."

The result of this and other orders -- as well as the economic disruption that inevitably follows these kinds of extreme measures -- was an 80% reduction in the Dzungar population (around 500,000 to 800,000 corpses). The depopulated areas were then resettled by a mix of peoples, including one group that contemporary China is now accused of "genociding," namely the Uighurs. 

This is as much a picture of birds as it is of skulls.

But don't feel too bad for the Dzungars, as they were a Mongolian people. When it comes to out-and-out genocide, few people on earth can compete with the Mongols. According to History.com just one Mongol leader, Genghis Khan, was responsible for the deaths of as many as 40 million people:

While it’s impossible to know for sure how many people perished during the Mongol conquests, many historians put the number at somewhere around 40 million. Censuses from the Middle Ages show that the population of China plummeted by tens of millions during the Khan’s lifetime, and scholars estimate that he may have killed a full three-fourths of modern-day Iran’s population during his war with the Khwarezmid Empire. All told, the Mongols’ attacks may have reduced the entire world population by as much as 11 percent.

A later Mongol leader Timur was a comparative "sweetheart" by comparison, killing a "mere" 17 million people or around 5% of the world's population. 

As a percentage of the World's population, the number killed by the likes of Hitler and Stalin is rather tiny. In 1939 the total World population was around 2,300,000,000. Normie figures for Hitler and Stalin are around 21 million non-combatant deaths, which includes people who died from "foreseeable" factors, like poor sanitation, malnutrition, etc. But, even if we multiply that figure by three to reflect combatant deaths, that just gives us around 2.7% of the World's population for these two 20th century monsters. 

Yes, when we discuss historical genocide, Hitler's particular feud with the Jews and Stalin's reign of terror come far behind the Mongolocaust.