EUGENICS: Israeli Researcher Claims Chemical Giant DuPont Colluded with Nazi Germany to Create Eugenics Programs (Archive)

Source – .blacklistednews.com

“…The researcher pointed out that DuPont executives began providing support to Adolf Hitler and the Nazis in the 1920s, well before the 1932 elections which led to the establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in the country in 1933,” Haaretz reports. “In addition to financial support to Hitler, executives allegedly provided financial support to extremist groups in the United States itself, and expressed an interest in causes taken up by the German fascists, such as eugenics and the theory of racial superiority”

Israeli researcher claims chemical giant DuPont colluded with Nazi Germany to create eugenics programs

A doctoral candidate at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem says that research he’s been conducting has led him to the conclusion that chemical giant DuPont had a well-established relationship with the Nazis in Germany both before and during World War II, and was working with the Hitler regime to develop eugenics programs against targeted enemies.

According to Nadan Feldman, as many as 150 United States corporations had similar such ties to the Nazis. But he claims that DuPont, like other drug and chemical companies at the time, were especially close to Hitler, working in lockstep with the political movement more out of a shared sense of ideology and belief, as opposed to simply for profit.

After poring through many years’ worth of financial and regulatory reports, including back-and-forth correspondence between DuPont executives and the Nazis, Feldman determined that “the main motive” of DuPont’s involvement with German powers during the 1930s and 1940s was simply to further the cause of the Nazis.

“The researcher pointed out that DuPont executives began providing support to Adolf Hitler and the Nazis in the 1920s, well before the 1932 elections which led to the establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in the country in 1933,” Haaretz reports.

“In addition to financial support to Hitler, executives allegedly provided financial support to extremist groups in the United States itself, and expressed an interest in causes taken up by the German fascists, such as eugenics and the theory of racial superiority,” the Israeli news outlets adds, noting that one of these executives was former DuPont president Irenee du Pont, according to Feldman.

DuPont partnered with IG Farben to share “critical knowledge for war production”

There were others involved in these Nazi partnerships as well, including the infamous IG Farben drug company, which would later bear the more well-known drug company offshoot known as Bayer.

According to Feldman, DuPont established a technology-sharing agreement with IG Farben that allowed the exchange of “critical knowledge for war production.” In turn, this allowed the Nazis “to start the war,” Feldman maintains, with the development of new technologies such as synthetic rubber.

This partnership between DuPont and the Nazis, and presumably IG Farben, lasted until 1943, which was well into World War II after Nazi Germany had already made considerable headway in taking over much of Europe. It also lasted beyond the point when the Nazis attacked the USSR, and even after the Nazis declared war on the U.S. itself.

“Ties were only formally cut after Germany confiscated the assets of U.S. companies in September 1943,” reveals Sputnik News.
Keep in mind that Bayer, which was created by IG Farben, purchased the world’s most evil corporation, Monsanto, back in 2016 for, get this, $66 billion. A $66 billion purchase in 2016, by the way, includes three 6s – which probably wasn’t an accident.

Did the U.S. government support DuPont and other Nazi-sympathizing companies during WWII?

What really bothers Feldman is his perception that many U.S. firms maintained relationships with the Nazis during WWII, “undisturbed and even with the tacit support of the U.S. administration despite the growing threat of Hitler’s regime to the welfare of Europe and the West.”

One of these companies was IBM, which reportedly developed the technology that the Nazis used to keep track of prisoners as they were shuffled around between concentration camps.

As we recently reported, IBM is actually now working on “new and improved” blockchain versions of these older technologies that the New World Order will presumably use to maintain ultimate control over people’s lives.

Other U.S. companies that Feldman says worked with the Nazis include Standard Oil, General Motors, Ford, ITT, and Union Banking, the latter of which is said to have helped Germany secure the loans it needed to fund equipment and supplies throughout the war.

“Without the mobilisation of corporate America for Nazi Germany, it is very doubtful whether Hitler could have started the war, doubtful whether he would have succeeded in rehabilitating the German economy – certainly not at the speed and strength he achieved in the ’30s,” Feldman contends.

Feldman also says he finds it “doubtful” that any historian, including himself, will ever fully understand how the corporate executives in charge of these companies “could give so much help to such a strong, cruel and fanatic enemy … It’s also doubtful whether we’ll be able to understand why every one of them avoided punishment.”

https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/72571/israeli-researcher-claims-chemical-giant-dupont-colluded-with-nazi-germany-to-create-eugenics.html

 

 

 

2 thoughts on “EUGENICS: Israeli Researcher Claims Chemical Giant DuPont Colluded with Nazi Germany to Create Eugenics Programs (Archive)

  1. I’ve read similar indictments before and find them easy to believe. Apparently Hitler’s rise to power was a result of World War I, when Germany was forced to pay reparations which it couldn’t afford without inflating the currency. This inflated the currency into worthlessness, so many Germans were suddenly desperately poor and looking for a hero to rescue them.

    In the beginning Hitler probably restored some national pride, and he was a masterful speaker who could mesmerize his audiences. Also, for a long time, few knew much about the horrors of the concentration camps. This only began to become evident later, but until that point, people were happy to look the other way.

    Many American corporations apparently made lots of money off both sides in the war. Stockholders were happy then, as now, to see their dividends go up, and don’t want to know too much about how it happens.

  2. PEOPLE FORGET!
    People forget how bad things were before!
    From the 1960s onwards things began to improve in all aspects of life.
    Contraceptives helped stop the overbreeding of children.
    Women produced like cattle; 10,15, 18 children in many homes!
    The poverty and housing conditions were deplorable.
    And because of this poverty it created a cruelty in people!
    Violence in the homes caused terrible conditions, especially if alcohol was involved.
    And everyone kept quiet about it.
    The scars and brusies were put down to walking into doors or falls.
    If the dog or cat had a litter, they were put in a sack and thrown into a river or lake, by children.
    They talk about bullying today, but it was nothing compared to what went on before.
    Fighting in school was part of the curriculum.
    And what went on in the Mental asylums was on par with concentration camps.
    People with mental problems were treated as if they were demon possessed.

    FIXING THE MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM: SNAKE PITS, DUNGEONS AND BACK ALLEYS
    December 23, 2014
    Allen Frances, MD
    Written 70 years ago, Mary Jane Ward’s novel The Snake Pit had a profound impact on how our society regarded and treated people with severe mental illness. Based on her own experiences as a patient during an 8-month stay at the Rockland Psychiatric Center in Orangeburg, NY, Ward vividly described the dreadful overcrowding, understaffing, and dehumanization that was then typical of state hospitals throughout the country. The run-away success of the best-selling book (and the Academy Award–winning movie based on it) shamed many states into making dramatic reforms.

    Soon, deinstitutionalization was the big new idea-the way to provide a much brighter future for the most vulnerable in our society who had previously been so shamefully neglected. The new field of community psychiatry would liberate warehoused inpatients from antiquated, snake pit hospitals and provide them the dignity of out­patient treatment and decent housing. Patients would receive psychotherapy and psychosocial support and would benefit from newly available psychiatric medications. And, as an added bonus, deinstitutionalization would be cost-neutral because hospitals were more expensive than outpatient care.

    The dream has worked remarkably well in many other countries, but it has turned into a bitter nightmare in the US. State governments have reallocated much of the saved hospital funds away from mental health to reduce taxes or to pay for other items in their budgets. Com­munity mental health centers were either never realized at all or starved, or privatized and allowed to steer away from the more difficult pa-tients and focus instead on healthier, wealthier patients.

    De-institutionalization turned far too often into trans-institutional­ization-moving the patient from a snake pit hospital into a dungeon-like prison. The number of state hospital beds has been reduced from 650,000 to 65,000, but the number of prison beds housing the severely mentally ill has increased by a like amount. The crimes committed by mentally ill prisoners are usually trivial, nuisance offenses occasioned by lack of treatment and housing (eg, being noisy on the street, sleeping in public, smelling badly, stealing food).

    The police have been forced to assume the role of mental illness first responders. They find it a waste of time to take patients to emergency departments because there are usually no psychiatric beds available and at best an outpatient appointment may be weeks away. Jail becomes the default solution. Consequently, the low tolerance for disorder introduced by “broken window policing” has fallen most heavily on the severely mentally ill. No wonder police associations have become the strongest advocates for adequate psychiatric treatment in the community.

    I have been in both places and can assure you that the fate of psychiatric patients in prison dungeons is much worse than was their plight in snake pit hospitals. Our patients do not fit in well with the rituals of prison life. They disproportionately get assigned to solitary confinement, which can drive anyone crazy, but is particularly crazy-making for those who have severe mental disorders. I have seen cell after cell smeared with excrement and mentally ill prisoners shouting their lungs out or drugged into stupor. And, our patients are especially vulnerable to physical and sexual abuse. They are disproportionately represented as victims of the 200,000 rapes that occur in prisons each year.

    Then there are the back alleys. There are perhaps 300,000 home-less mentally ill persons in our country-most are homeless for the simple reason that decent housing is not available. The success of Housing First programs makes it clear that adequate funding for decent housing would dramatically reduce incarceration and facilitate the participation of these patients in treatment. Nothing could be dumber or less humane than states spending a fortune on expensive prisons and simultaneously badly shortchang-ing the much more cost-effective mental health and housing services that would make them much less necessary.

    Advocacy for the severely mentally ill has been fragmented and (judging by our pathetic nonsystem) largely ineffective. At this time, the US may be the worst place ever to be severely mentally ill. Some of this failure is inherent to the difficulty in getting our com­petitive, individualistic society to care about its most disadvantaged. But the advocates have also been divided by an unnecessary and harmful civil war between medical model boosters and recovery boosters. This is unnecessary because one size does not fit all (we need both models working in complementary harmony). And, it is harmful because the most severely mentally ill get lost in the shuffle. How can anything be more important than getting people who do not belong there out of prison dungeons and off back alley streets?

    It is too bad we do not have a Mary Jane Ward to get the public aroused. But thankfully we do have Psychiatric Times to facilitate a discussion of the possible solutions. How do we catch up with other developed countries to create a compassionate, cost-effective mental health system? Psychiatric Times posed this question to some of the leading experts in the field. We also hope that many readers will contribute their suggestions. After we have collected all the responses, I will try to find a middle ground that we can all support.

Leave a Reply to katharineotto Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s