In an unusual development, two articles focused upon the events of World War II were tightly bunched at the top of our readership this last week, ahead of the regular collection of Coronavirus-related pieces.

Ranking first was an article by E. Michael Jones discussing the current HBO series “The Plot Against America,” novelist Philip Roth’s alternate history in which renowned American hero Charles Lindbergh successfully runs for the presidency in 1940, campaigning upon a promise to avoid involvement in the Second World War.  Although Roth portrays these events as a horrific upsurge of anti-Semitism, Jones instead argues that the novel demonstrates the extreme paranoia of many American Jews, whose understanding of the Jewish role in the cataclysmic events in the twentieth century is based upon Hollywood falsehoods rather than reality, and often actually inverted.

Running a very close second was Guillaume Durocher’s analysis of the doubtful reliability of much of our received history of that global conflict, and the importance of drawing upon first-hand accounts and primary sources rather trusting the conclusions of previous generations of mainstream historians.  This general theme drew well over 500 comments, totaling more than 75,000 words.

The next four pieces all dealt with America’s ongoing public health disaster, as underscored by a recent confidential report by the CDC, which projected that the death toll may rise to 3,000/day by the end of this month.

One of the leading figures taking strong issue with this conventional narrative is writer Andrew Anglin, probably the leading figure in the “Flu Hoaxer” community, which argues that the dangers of the virus have been wildly exaggerated by the media.  Last week, we have published a very sharp denunciation of his position by Brad Griffin, and Anglin now provided his own rebuttal, which drew over 400 contentious comments, totaling nearly 40,000 words.

Ranking this below was my own note of the sudden banning of our entire website and all its content by Facebook, a surprising and rather remarkable step given all the years of controversial material we had previously published without consequence.  Facebook has been under considerable pressure recently to block the publication of “Coronavirus misinformation” so one would naturally assume that was the reason.  Yet oddly enough, a Facebook report describing the current purge claims that we were banned because of our association with VDare, an anti-immigration website.  Since I doubt that more than 1% of our articles come from VDare and I can’t remember the last time that we featured an anti-immigration article, this seems an extremely doubtful and suspicious explanation, presumably invented to conceal the true motive.

If the CDC analysis is correct and fatalities rise to 3,000/day by the end of this month, it seems likely that total American deaths will soon afterward reach 150,000, perhaps continuing to steady rise during the rest of the year.  Meanwhile, our economy has been wrecked, with unemployment now at Great Depression levels, producing one of the greatest disasters in our entire national history.  Under these circumstances, the considerable circumstantial evidence that this horrific disaster may have been the unintended result of an American biowarfare attack against China (and Iran) is enormously explosive.  So it is easy to understand why pressure would be placed upon Facebook to block further distribution of my own article making that case, which had received large and growing readership, including on that social network.  Some of the key points are summarized in my discussion of the Facebook ban, which ranked fourth, while the continuing popularity of entire long article from several weeks ago kept it in fifth place.

Finally, Mike Whitney’s sixth ranking piece reaffirmed his support for the “Swedish approach,” which argues that our lockdowns are unlikely to succeed and that our best option is to attempt to reopen our economy, hoping to achieve “herd immunity” by having the vast majority of younger individuals successfully overcome what would be to them a relatively minor illness, while safeguarding the older and more vulnerable members of the community.