On the Jeffish Question: Should the Bezosphere Be Nationalized?

Jeff Bezos

by Rainer Chlodwig von K.

“THE FIRST AMENDMENT to the Constitution of the United States of America – and American tradition – enshrines freedom of speech and freedom of the press,” begins Dr. Kevin Barrett in a recent commentary published in American Free Press:

Nowhere is this more evident than in the book publishing industry. Historically, few books have been banned or restricted in America for any reason other than obscenity or indecency, and even those restrictions have largely collapsed. […]

But since 2017 our tradition of freedom from book censorship has been annihilated. We are living through the worst-ever assault on the Bill of Rights. This crime is being committed by a monopoly in service to an organized crime syndicate. Amazon, under pressure from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and allied groups, has “kindled” the biggest book-burning bonfire ever. And the books Amazon is burning are not those brimming with obscenity. You can still buy the Marquis de Sade’s pornographic incitements to rape, torture, and murder, alongside thousands of similar abominations, on Amazon. What you can’t buy are scholarly books that carefully and dispassionately document facts that pose a threat to the continued reign of what certain hotheads have (not entirely inaccurately) called ZOG, the Zionist Occupation Government.1

“The current wave of Amazon censorship began two years ago with the wholesale banning of revisionist books about World War II,” Barrett observes:

On March 6, 2017, Amazon banned 68 titles from Castle Hill Publishers, which specializes in scientific and forensic historical investigations [into the “Holocaust”]. Germar Rudolf of Castle Hill asserts that his company was not the only one targeted, and that, in fact, hundreds of revisionist history books were banned that day.2

Other titles banned on this occasion include David Hoggan’s The Myth of the Six Million and M.S. King’s The Bad War3. Then, in August of 2018, Amazon banned the revised and expanded edition of Michael Hoffman’s study Judaism’s Strange Gods4.

“Its unmatched collection of available books comes close to fulfilling one of the original utopian goals of the very early days of the Computer Age,” reflects Ron Unz:

Over the last twenty years I’ve surely ordered many hundreds of volumes from that source, and reading them has played a huge role in transforming my beliefs on numerous important issues. For this reason, the growing wave of Amazon book-bannings carries very ominous overtones.

On February 19th, an article in Quartz denounced Amazon for continuing to carry “neo-Nazi and White Supremacist” books, and the following week most of the books in question were suddenly “disappeared” after many years of availability, in some cases apparently even vanishing from personal Kindle devices. […]5

In March of this year, “Amazon — which holds an effective monopoly on book sales in the United States — notified Professor Kevin MacDonald that two of his scholarly books, The Culture of Critique and Separation and Its Discontents, had been banned,” Barrett brings readers up to date on Amazon’s latest offensive against free speech and inquiry:

MacDonald reports: “In subsequent emails, they just keep repeating that these books were found to violate ‘content guidelines’, even though I pointed out that they were published 21 years ago by a respected academic publisher. No specifics. No appeal process.”6

MacDonald was not alone. Several titles from Counter-Currents, including Greg Johnson’s White Nationalist Manifesto and F. Roger Devlin’s Sexual Utopia in Power, were disappeared along with Jared Taylor’s White Identity and If We Do Nothing, plus several other new and old books on an assortment of race-related or anti-Zionist subjects7.

It is the banning of the latter, rather than the likes of George Lincoln Rockwell’s White Power, that Ron Unz fears “may have far greater negative ramifications.”8 “Amazon doesn’t just ban scholarly works by professors who advocate for white people,” Barrett explains. “America’s leading pro-black-people historical research team, the Nation of Islam (NOI) Research Group, has also been the victim of an Amazon book-burning bonfire.”9 Unz elaborates:

The ADL ranks as one of our most formidable Jewish activist organizations, and according to media accounts it has been playing a central role in efforts to censor “hate speech” on leading Internet platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Google’s YouTube. So it seems very likely to have also been behind Amazon’s recent purge, especially once we discover the nature of some of the more significant books now banned.

Such a role for the ADL is extremely unfortunate, given that organization’s long and very sordid history, which includes massive amounts of outright criminal activity […] In fact, if not for the very widespread cowardice and dishonesty of our establishment media, the ADL would have long since lost all shreds of public credibility, and indeed most of its top leadership might well be serving long sentences in federal prison. […]

In effect, the ADL seems to function as a privatized version of our secret political police, seeking to maintain the power of the interlocking Jewish groups which dominate our society, much like the Stasi did on behalf of East Germany’s ruling Communist regime.

But for me, the most remarkable ADL revelation came in a book I purchased last year on Amazon, a book Amazon has now banned from sale. It seems that the ADL’s very origin story of one hundred years ago, frequently mentioned in my introductory history textbooks and which I had never previously questioned, actually represented an absolute inversion of historical reality.

Unz refers to the Leo Frank case, explored in depth in the third volume of the Nation of Islam’s Secret Relationship between Blacks and Jews series — all of which are no longer sold by Amazon. The Anti-Defamation League came into existence for the specific purpose of defending this Jewish rapist and murderer — information that, if more widely disseminated, would further damage the already bruised and vulnerable reputation of this disgusting organization as well as that of Jews more generally, whom the ADL purports to represent. Unz continues:

Prior to the creation of the Internet and the establishment of Amazon’s book-selling operation, this fascinating history would have remained completely unknown to me. Given its influential political role in our society, the ADL must certainly be concerned if it became widely known that the organization was founded with the central mission of ensuring that no wealthy and powerful Jew ever suffered punishment for the rape and murder of a young Christian girl, nor for trying to orchestrate the lynching of innocent black men in order to cover his own guilt. […]

The true circumstances surrounding the establishment of the ADL is not the only work of serious historical scholarship to have suddenly been removed from Amazon’s shelves, and most of the others seem to follow a very consistent pattern, certainly suggesting the hand of that organization and its kindred spirits.10

“Though I do not agree with MacDonald or NOI about everything, I cannot help but recognize that their banned books feature high-quality scholarship,” Barrett adds:

The same cannot be said of the rabidly Islamophobic books of Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, and a long list of other Zionist-funded propagandists who together make up the $50-million-per-year Islamophobia industry. Though almost uniformly characterized by poor scholarship and reckless animosity to the people they write about, these authors are not only allowed to sell their deceptive and hateful wares on Amazon [along with no shortage of corporate anti-white invective] but are relentlessly promoted by Zionist big money. In other words, essentially the same organized crime syndicate is forcing Amazon to ban dispassionate scholarly works as “hate”, while simultaneously spending hundreds of millions of dollars promoting actual hate propaganda sold by the boatload on Amazon.11

Earnest discussions of the plausibility of antitrust action against the Amazon behemoth began to appear in 2017, particularly after an article on that topic appeared in the Yale Law Review. “Clearly, the rising crescendo or rhetoric warrants attention, as do the routes of potential exposure,” writes Carlton Getz at Seeking Alpha:

In fact, Amazon’s potential antitrust exposure is not limited to the more commonly known monopoly argument, where buyers must deal with a single seller, but also on the lesser-known monopsony argument, also a potential antitrust violation, where market power is defined by multiple suppliers having to deal with a single dominant buyer. In fact, from a historical perspective, large national retailers of a scale that attracts antitrust concerns are typically more susceptible to monopsony claims, since, although there is a broad selection of sellers in a market, a dominant retailer may be able to exert such significant pricing power and control over suppliers as to distort the market, even if that price distortion ultimately benefits consumers.12

Amazon’s delivery of goods is, as Tucker Carlson recently pointed out, dependent upon public infrastructure like highways, for example13, so that its market dominance and plutocratic ascendancy have been built largely on the backs of those whose access to the marketplace of ideas the company seeks to restrict. “Our Constitution, and the tradition of liberty it enshrines, is being shredded,” Barrett concludes:

But there is a simple solution: Force Amazon to respect the Bill of Rights. Like Facebook, Twitter, and Google, Amazon has a monopoly in the digital public square. It is a de facto public utility not a private company. If Jeff Bezos keeps spitting on our Constitution, we must nationalize Amazon — and try Bezos for treason.14

What does Skynet say?

* * *

Rainer is the author of Protocols of the Elders of Zanuck: Psychological Warfare and Filth at the Movies


  1. Barrett, Kevin. “Amazon Bans More Books by Respected Scholars”. American Free Press vol. 19, no. 13-14 (March 25-April 1, 2019), p. 10.
  2. Ibid., p. 11.
  4. Hoffman, Michael. “Revisionist History Books Banned by Amazon”. The Unz Review (August 25, 2018):
  5. Unz, Ron. “American Pravda: Amazon Book Censorship”. The Unz Review (March 11, 2019):
  6. Barrett, Kevin. “Amazon Bans More Books by Respected Scholars”. American Free Press vol. 19, no. 13-14 (March 25-April 1, 2019), p. 10.
  7. Johnson, Greg. “Counter-Currents Bites Back against Censorship”. Counter-Currents (March 2, 2019):
  8. Unz, Ron. “American Pravda: Amazon Book Censorship”. The Unz Review (March 11, 2019):
  9. Barrett, Kevin. “Amazon Bans More Books by Respected Scholars”. American Free Press vol. 19, no. 13-14 (March 25-April 1, 2019), p. 10.
  10. Unz, Ron. “American Pravda: Amazon Book Censorship”. The Unz Review (March 11, 2019):
  11. Barrett, Kevin. “Amazon Bans More Books by Respected Scholars”. American Free Press vol. 19, no. 13-14 (March 25-April 1, 2019), pp. 10-11.
  12. Getz, Carlton. “Amazon’s Antitrust Problem”. Seeking Alpha (October 23, 2017):
  13. Tucker Carlson Tonight (April 4, 2019):
  14. Barrett, Kevin. “Amazon Bans More Books by Respected Scholars”. American Free Press vol. 19, no. 13-14 (March 25-April 1, 2019), p. 11.

* * *

Source: Aryan Skynet

Previous post

“The Great Replacement” Means the Extermination of the White Race Through Mass Immigration

Next post

Regime Holding "Hearing" on White Nationalism Tuesday

Notify of
Inline Feedback
View all comments
9 April, 2019 7:03 am

Thankfully, I have switched to other online bookstores. I have disliked Amazon since 8 years ago. I have heard how they pay very little to their developers and treat them atrociously. It’s a revolving door, with that said they probably hire the cheap developers and their technology will become stagnant and crappy like Dell computers. Those Dell people are lazy and unproductive, nobody in Austin wanted to hire them, (stereotypical of the Hindus, and blacks) the whites were soft with haughty attitudes. Bye, bye Amazon.

9 April, 2019 5:28 pm

I collect books even if I don’t read them because I instinctively don’t want them destroyed. The evil Narzies only burned books symbolically. Citizens were still allowed to buy and own books even if the Narzies disaproved of them. The evil Narzies did not search people’s homes. When evil Narzies collected books for bonfires they took soft-cover versions rather than the more expensive hard-cover books. They burned one of each book, not all copies of that book. I don’t believe a private organisation like Amazon can be forced to carry particular books but they can be by-passed. Create a Samizdat system to protect books and at least record the names of these books so that they can be remembered. Record the names of those who banned them so their hypocrisy… Read more »