Great quote about degeneracy and state of Berlin that pushed people towards Nazi party:

https://imgur.com/a/NUTOSsC

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4892584&forum_id=2#42893878)

"Magnus Hirschfeld coined the term transsexualism,[8] identifying the clinical category which his colleague Harry Benjamin would later develop in the United States. Transgender people were on the staff of the Institute, as well as being among the clients there. Various endocrinologic and surgical services were offered, including the first modern gender affirmation surgeries in the 1930s. Hirschfeld also worked with Berlin's police department to curtail the arrest of cross-dressed individuals, including those suspected of wearing certain clothing in connection with sex work, through the creation of transvestite passes issued on behalf of the Institute to those who had a personal desire to wear clothing associated with a gender other than the one assigned to them at birth.[9][10"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_f%C3%BCr_Sexualwissenschaft

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4892584&forum_id=2#42893900)

Always be closing (degeneracy)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4892584&forum_id=2#42905560)

---

The book had many negative reviews. Historian Noel Malcolm described it as a "strangely childish book"[3] and journalist William Grimes in The New York Times as a "self-important, hand-wringing, moral mess of a book."[4] Christopher Hitchens accused Baker of ahistoricism and wrote that numerous passages in the book served as a reminder of how "fatuous the pacifist position can sound, or indeed can be."[5] Louis Menand wrote that each of Baker's themes is a "legitimate matter of debate" but criticized the selective use of primary sources as a "tabloid technique" of emotional manipulation.[6] Piers Brendon criticized the book for misleading the reader by taking quotations and details out of context.[7] Time magazine's review was also critical of Baker's style: "facts, even tragic ones, require context and interpretation. They don't speak for themselves. That's why we need historians."[8] British historian Dominic Sandbrook referred to the "mendaciousness, even fraudulence, of this extraordinarily self-righteous book" and contended that many of Baker's assertions, such as that Franklin Roosevelt conspired to provoke the Japanese into bombing Pearl Harbor, were not new and had been refuted long ago by scholarly historians.[9] In a very harsh review, literary critic Adam Kirsch was especially critical of Baker's use of Nazi propaganda: "by reproducing Nazi language uncritically, Mr. Baker effectively endorses it. This is never more shocking than when he quotes Joseph Goebbels's description of Churchill.... A book that can adduce Goebbels as an authority in order to vilify Churchill has clearly lost touch with all moral and intellectual bearings. No one who knows about World War II will take Human Smoke at all seriously."[10] Conservative political commentator R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., awarded Human Smoke his J. Gordon Coogler Award for Worst Book of 2008.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Smoke

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4892584&forum_id=2#42904521)

The military is amazingly pozzed for an organization that is essentially 0% Jewish, very white Southerner, and has so many blacks that performance would be (prolly is) extremely degraded if they did not ensure that dumbs stay low in rank.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4892584&forum_id=2#42893926)

Jews are definitely more lib than regular Christian whites but I definitely wouldn't say it is an exclusively Jewish problem.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4892584&forum_id=2#42897398)