Here are some samples of what they were publishing prior to 1955. Just ask yourself if any of these are appropriate for little children. Also remember, back then people weren’t as overloaded with visual stimuli as we are today so these images would have a much more profound affect on the children who saw them:

Anyone who has had more than a passing interest in Comic books has heard this story, but the official version has never sat well with me as it has always struck me as someone disingenuous and misleading.

The media is always tinkering with the facts and trying to create a false reality that makes them look good, or at the very least like the hapless victims of narrow minded and viciously bigoted people. They love to lie, but when they can’t lie, or when outright lies are inconvenient due to an event being too well documented they will settle for putting a spin on the event, a spin that helps prop up their ongoing narrative of innocent jews under constant attack by brutal, animal like, snarling goyim. One instance of that that has always bothered me was the oft repeated story of how the Comics Code authority came into being.

Often when you hear this story related it will be by some fanboy who sneers at the idea that comic books could have been even partially responsible for juvenile delinquency. This reminds me of how Hollywood reacts whenever anyone suggests that their movies could have a bad influence on the behavior of certain segments of the population. I find it odd that when they do this no one brings up how these same people bring the full weight of the law down upon anyone who says anything less than flattering about certain protected classes of individuals claiming that they are concerned it might inflame passions against them. They even have a specific category of law that deals with this, these sorts of utterances are all covered by “Hate Speech” legislation and claim that saying such things are a violation of the protected individual’s civil rights, even when the incendiary speech is limited to documented and provable facts, like crime statistics and facts that conflict with the official holocaust narrative.

There was a case about 20 years ago when some WN was sued (I think it was Tom Metzger) because it was claimed that some of his “racist speech” inspired some kid to murder some black immigrant. Of course all the anti-White garbage shown in movies, on television, in rap music and even taught at Universities have inspired countless gruesome crimes against Whites, yet anybody who tried to sue any of the idiots spreading this evil propaganda would be at the very least ridiculed or at worse made the subject of a media fueled hate campaign. Just stating the obvious and saying everyone, including the blacks themselves would be happier and better off if they were all back in their native Africa can get you lynched by the P.C. mob these days.

OK. I’m getting side tracked so back to Bill Gaines and this Comics Code Authority business. The way the story is told is that in the late forties and early 50’s a psychologist named Fredric Wertham was whipping the public up to a frenzy of mass hysteria with a series of magazine articles and finally a book claiming that comic books negatively affect the behavior of young children.

Here’s the official story that’s been made available in dozens of websites and fanzines for the past 60 years:

“Horror. Crime. Science Fiction. War. Suspense. Oddball humor. Incisive writing. Eye-popping art. These are the elements that made EC Comics irresistible to readers of the 1950s. Their titles were produced by some of the finest creators the comic industry has ever seen, a who’s who of boundary-bursting, wildly innovative talents: Wally Wood,Harvey Kurtzman, Jack Davis, Will Elder, Johnny Craig, Frank Frazetta, Al Feldstein, Al Williamson, Joe Orlando, John Severin, Graham Ingels, Bernard Krigstein, and many others.

And when the bubble burst, and EC’s line of comics fell before a squalling mob of censors, Senators, sinister psychiatrists and simple-minded puritans….

-dark clouds loomed. A noted New York psychiatrist, Fredric Wertham, had been publishing anti-comics articles to great acclaim, writing for magazines such as Reader’s Digest and Ladies’ Home Journal, and his 1954 publication of Seduction Of The Innocent, a full-length book on the connection between comic books and social ills, made him the flashpoint for a nation already teetering on the edge of Joe McCarthy-inspired paranoia.

Anti-comic actions had previously been scattered, isolated events. Now, churches, scouting groups, schools, and charitable organizations around the country were hosting comic bonfires. And as EC was constantly pushing the envelope, Bill Gaines was caught right in the crosshairs of public opinion.

In the spring of 1954, the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency held a series of hearings on the effects of comic books, and Gaines decided that he needed to testify and stand up for his livelihood.

It didn’t go well. Gaines was suffering from a cold on the day of his testimony, and was under the influence of various medications. He showed up, read a prepared statement, fumbled when pressed for clarification, and stumbled his way through answering some very pointed questions from the presiding senators.

By the fall of 1954, a coalition of publishers formed a new trade group, the Comics Magazine Association of America. After some short deliberation, they instituted a new series of strict guidelines for their product, effectively self-censoring in hopes that the government would leave them alone. Rules included bans on words like “terror” and “horror” in titles, restrictions on visual depictions, and a note that all authority figures must be portrayed with respect — in short, rules that may as well have been written specifically to address EC’s house style. And while the Comics Code regulations came with no legal authority, the fact that the publishers in question also controlled newsstand distribution meant that Gaines had little choice but to comply.”

So, that poor little comic book publisher, all he wanted was to bring us quality stories and art, but he was ruthlessly shut down by narrow minded Philistines who were unjustly paranoid that these stories may hypnotize an entire generation into crazed criminals.  Notice the inflammatory, hyper emotional language that is used in this article, phrases like “Joe McCarthy-inspired paranoia”, and mentioning that he was trapped in the “cross hairs of public opinion”. They do this all the time. It’s a cheap trick to distract you from the facts of the subject at hand.

Well, just let me say here that I still enjoy these types of comic stories and I respect a lot of those old artists. They did do quality work, and a lot of those stories were really clever. EC comics are still to this day considered to be the best in that genre, but the one fact these “historians” consistently overlook is the audience, who was actually reading all those comic books? The great majority of the people who bought those comics were very young children. Children are very impressionable, are they denying that? I admit I enjoy them, but I’ve not been a preteen for quite some time now.

Little kids read comic books. They are made for children. They are small and very colorful. If he wanted to stay in business all he had to do was change the format. I’ve no doubt that that’s easier said than done, there would certainly be expenses involved. I’m not saying it would have been easy, but I find it interesting that this possible solution is never mentioned. Instead they always harp on how stupid the authorities and the public were being. By “the public” they mean the goyim as I’m sure most jewish parents didn’t allow their children to read that trash in the first place, just as now days, despite the fact they own all the television stations, most jews don’t let their children watch much, if any television. That’s for the entertainment of the livestock.

Of course, these chosen are artists when it comes to slander, and since the Code, as enforced by Judge Charles Murphy, cost Gaines so much money that it very nearly put him out of business, you know he just had to have the last word. Here’s the official story as told by all the fanzines and comic book websites:


“In one early confrontation between a comic-book publisher and Code authorities, EC Comics‘ William Gaines reprinted the story “Judgment Day“, from the pre-Code Weird Fantasy#18 (April 1953), in Incredible Science Fiction #33 (Feb. 1956). The reprint was a replacement for a Code-disapproved story – “An Eye for an Eye”, drawn by Angelo Torres– but was itself also “objected to” because of “the central character beingblack.” The story, by writer Al Feldstein and artist Joe Orlando, was “a strong allegory on the evils of race prejudice“, which point was necessarily “nullified if the lead character” was not black. Following an order by Code administrator Judge Charles Murphy to change the final panel, which depicted a black astronaut, Gaines engaged in a heated dispute with Murphy. He informed Murphy that “if they did not give that issue the Code Seal, he would see that the world found out why”, causing Murphy to reverse his initial decision and allow the story to run. Soon after, however, facing the severe restrictions placed upon his comics by the CCA, and with his “New Direction” titles floundering, Gaines “quit comic book publishing to concentrate on Mad“.”

Never mind the fact that this myth they are so fond of pushing, that blacks and Whites are exactly the same intellectually is nothing more than a lie, or foolishly naive at best, I don’t know what kind of proof Gaines has that this whole thing happened exactly as it’s being told, or even at all. Anyway, assuming the explanation given was the reason he allowed the story to be published, his cooperation didn’t do him any good since, in true tribal fashion, Gaines went back on his word and told the world this story anyway. So, even if it’s true it’s not a good reflection on Gaines.

Whatever happened there is not really important anyway. They are using the age old trick of publicly questioning the motives of their opponent and assassinating his character to divert attention from the real issue at hand. It’s called an “ad hominem attack” and it’s one of their favorite tricks.

All that smoke and mirrors aside, you can’t just allow strangers to recklessly influence your children without any kind of rules concerning what is and what is not appropriate. Am I the only person who doesn’t feel safe allowing a bunch of greasy, middle aged New Yorkers to show and say anything they want to to a bunch of young, naive and impressionable children? Everybody knows that the more sick and lurid something is, the better it sells. This is true across all age brackets. The comic book business, like any other, is fiercely competitive, so you know those people will be constantly pushing the limits, doing whatever it takes to get noticed just to survive. Without a very firm set of governing rules things could easily get very ugly. That’s pretty much the situation we have now, but this was in the early 1950’s so parents, churches and community groups were still a long way away from feeling buried and helpless and throwing up their hands in despair and surrender.

Anyway, EC publications did pull through because they changed the format of Mad into a magazine and focused on that. Also, a little over 10 years later another publisher, Warren Publications, was able to put out a whole series of horror and science fiction comics that were not affected by the Comics Code Authority because they published them as black and white magazines which were marketed to teenagers.

While on the topic of “unfair censorship” there is also the famous story concerning the Topps chewing gum cards, “Mars Attacks” where much is made of how they redid many of the cards after complaints from parents that some of the images were too gruesome for little children. This is told in a way that makes the company seem almost heroic and that the effort they put into repainting the cards was an act of selfless altruism, done as a public service. Funny how nobody wonders how they thought they thought that selling pictures of people being bitten in half by giant insects or having large sections of their bodies disintegrated by hideous, alien creatures to young children was acceptable in the first place. Especially back in 1962. People just weren’t anywhere near as jaded back then as they are now.  Bubblegum cards are also a form of media so I shouldn’t have to tell you who dominates that business.  Anyway, all this reminds me of a saying that is popular among the jewish people, “It’s much easier to get forgiveness than to get permission”. Obviously it has been 70 years of them pushing the proverbial  envelope a little at a time that has gotten us into the depraved swamp of sewage we are literally drowning in now.




Willam M. Gaines and the birth of the comics code authority


  1. Those opposed to censorship of any kind will laugh at the idea that media products have an influence on people’s behavior, and yet “subversive” one of the favorite adjectives critics apply to a film as a sign of approval. If a movie can’t possibly affect anybody’s behavior, then how is it “subversive”?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes, well, I’ve known a lot of these media dirt-bags personally and they know how suggestible the public is. They are the most manipulative assholes you can imagine.
      I’m sure that the only reason they get away with that shit is because they have the legal community sewed up too.
      Funny how movies and comics supposedly have no influence on anyone but according to them our blogs are spreading “hate”.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a 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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s