Hoffman to Faurisson, Nov. 20, 2003
Thank you for your rejoinder this date, to my letter of Nov. 19,
"The Revisionism of the Future: Human Rights, not Reich." Your
rejoinder contains a helpful and welcome clarification of what you meant
in your note of Nov. 18 about fear of Judaic people.
I will not address at this time your defense of your use of the term
"the Jews." As with my campaign against adoption by
revisionists of the Orwellian "holocaust" neologism, my points
with regard to the phrase, "the Jews," are mostly centered on
concerns of epistemology and psychology, and to further advance and
defend these somewhat rarified issues is beyond the scope of this
letter. Hence, in response to your rejoinder, I will address the
On Nov 20, 2003, at 10:30 AM, FAURISSON wrote:
"I feel sorry for you, Michael. While reading some of your writings
I have often thought: 'Jews should make Kamerad Hoffman Chief Rabbi
I am wondering which writings of mine have earned for me the ignominious
title in your eyes of "honorary Chief Rabbi," when all my life
I have fought rabbis and written an entire book exposing them
("Judaism's Strange Gods")?
If you have "often thought" this terrible thing about me, why
did you greet me so warmly and effusively at the 2002 IHR conference and
praise my newsletter there before others? Why did you wait until now to
make this scurrilous charge?
In the eyes of Christopher Hitchens in the "New Yorker," and
Elinor Langer in her book, "One Hundred Little Hitlers," I am
the chief neo-Nazi, and to you I am the chief rabbi. There was a certain
Breton who once wrote, "The total contempt of all humanity is
extremely pleasant to me."
While being insulted as the "chief rabbi," and simultaneously
attacked by the actual rabbis, who maintain a half-dozen websites
devoted to attempting to refute my book, "Judaism's Strange
Gods," one must ask, where is the "exactitude" in that?
On Nov 20, 2003, at 10:30 AM, FAURISSON wrote:
"May I expect you to defend the human rights of those persecuted
for their ideas?"
To put this question to me is disingenuous, since I have never failed to
defend the human rights of anyone, including you, Ernst, Ditlieb and
dozens of others. I spent much of the month of September, 1989
publicizing the assault on you and protesting to the French police,
French government and Le Monde. Perhaps you have forgotten? For the
record: I am for human rights, but not for any attempt to resurrect the
Third Reich under the guise of human rights ("Rights, not
Reich"). I believe you are in error when you assert:
"Now re Horst Mahler: by 'Reich' he means 'German Reich' or 'German
Nation' and not 'Third Reich".
Even if you are correct and Mr. Mahler is in no way alluding to the
Third Reich, his use of the word Reich is a public relations disaster.
You harken to the victories of Ernst Zundel while proclaiming your
indifference to public relations concerns:
"Anyway, must I repeat that I do not care about his real or
supposed political ideas...I have no idea what will come of that League
initiative. I do not care if it is called "Nazi".
Perhaps it is natural for a professor of literature to think in this
naive way, but Zundel was far more canny and public relations were
foremost in his mind. From his "cool blue hard hat" to his
offer to go to synagogues to meet and debate, he undercut the
stereotypes, rather than compounding them merely for the sake of a
Like Chomsky, I will defend the rights of anyone persecuted for their
ideas, and this includes the human rights of Horst Mahler, in so far as
he does not advocate the abridgment of the human rights of others.
Moreover, I am one of those who are persecuted for their ideas, in case
you have not noticed. I must have many locks on my doors, special
security lights and so on. You may recall that a Zionist mob chased my
wife down a street in New York and tried to kill me at a cable TV
meeting. I am on the hit list of the JDL, among others. I get death
threats directly from the Israeli state. You might wish to type my name
in the "search engine" at Amazon.com and read the reviews for
my books and then you will get an inkling of this. I never know when
some berserk Zionist will crash through my door. So, to insinuate that
Michael Hoffman is someone who is sitting in his ivory tower, preserved
from the clamor and violence of persecution, where he leisurely decides
whether he will lend aid to the persecuted or not, is a strange image.
Who will defend me from persecution? I can think of some revisionists
who are among my persecutors, if libel may be considered persecution.
I will not join Mr. Mahler's organization, not just because of his
invocation of "the Reich," but also due to his statements
about "Jews," which he e-mailed me today:
"In this war every single Jew stands in the frontline of the enemy
in order to uphold the Auschwitz lie."
This disgusting statement is on the level of Streicher and Goebbels. It
is so infra dig, it sounds more like something the Wiesenthal Center
would falsely attribute to a revisionist spokesman. These are exactly
the words they will put into the mouth of the actor who plays the
revisionist in the next television docudrama about us, only thanks to
Herr Mahler, the quote won't have to be fabricated!
For you to lend your name to an organization that is led by someone who
spouts such wild, racist invective, is most unfortunate. It is a
catastrophe for the movement of WWII revisionism to adopt racist
positions similar to those of our racist enemies. As Nietzsche warned,
"Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a
And please Robert, do not say any longer that you do not know what Mr.
Mahler's views are ("It does not imply that I agree with Mahler's
political statements, of which, in fact, I am not really aware").
While a "revisionist anti-defamation league" is a splendid
idea, to be effective in Germany it must be led by someone whose human
rights credentials are beyond reproach. I continue to insist that
neo-Nazism does the work of the Cryptocracy. In 2002 it was revealed
that the leaders of the NDP party in Germany were members of the German
secret police. Neo-Nazism is very useful to the Establishment. If
revisionism is headed in that direction it is headed for shipwreck.
Michael A. Hoffman II
See Faurisson's letter