Holocaust denial
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-04-2015, 08:26 AM
RE: Holocaust denial
(27-04-2015 08:18 AM)BnW Wrote:  I'm not trying to be a dick, but a topic to discuss why a minority of people would have a contrary opinion on a specific historical fact is bizarre and raises questions about where you are heading with this. Out ability to answer this is equal to our ability to determine why some people don't like tomatoes. You can't really get into someone's head like that.

The whole thing just struck me as very odd. But, don't let me stop you.

You're not? Then maybe I have problem with catching meaning. I do understand that such topic could cause controversy or make one question intent of OP but I think it is legitimate question even if answer could be only speculative. I think post of morondog is good example of satisfactory answer.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-04-2015, 09:13 AM
RE: Holocaust denial
(25-04-2015 05:39 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  I'd like to know if you think that notion of Hitler lack of involvement could be somehow classified as Holocaust denial?

It might be used in an attempt to buttress a Holocaust-denial claim, but in and of itself it doesn't deny the Holocaust. It denies Hitler's knowledge of it. Wrongly, I should add.

As to why people deny the reality of the Holocaust, it's because they know that the bigotry they espouse -- which is too often a murderous bigotry -- they know that that bigotry is immoral and repulsive to most people; they know that the Holocaust is the strongest example of the dangers of bigotry; and they deny the Holocaust in order to convince themselves that they are moral, that their ideology cannot be deadly, and thereby to sell their bigotry to others who are ignorant of the masses and masses of evidence demonstrating the factuality of the Endlosung
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
27-04-2015, 09:14 AM
RE: Holocaust denial
Two words, Mein Kampf

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
27-04-2015, 09:18 AM
RE: Holocaust denial
I doubt that there are any cases where Stalin was the one who actually pulled the trigger or killed anyone, probably very little if any documentation of him even ordering it. I don't seem to see anyone who is arguing against "Stalin was an evil fucker".

People pick and choose weird shit to deny, if they feel that it somehow benefits them. So, those against Jews deny the Holocaust. Why? If is self-serving.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
27-04-2015, 09:24 AM (This post was last modified: 27-04-2015 09:30 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: Holocaust denial
(27-04-2015 09:13 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(25-04-2015 05:39 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  I'd like to know if you think that notion of Hitler lack of involvement could be somehow classified as Holocaust denial?

It might be used in an attempt to buttress a Holocaust-denial claim, but in and of itself it doesn't deny the Holocaust. It denies Hitler's knowledge of it. Wrongly, I should add.

As to why people deny the reality of the Holocaust, it's because they know that the bigotry they espouse -- which is too often a murderous bigotry -- they know that that bigotry is immoral and repulsive to most people; they know that the Holocaust is the strongest example of the dangers of bigotry; and they deny the Holocaust in order to convince themselves that they are moral, that their ideology cannot be deadly, and thereby to sell their bigotry to others who are ignorant of the masses and masses of evidence demonstrating the factuality of the Endlosung

As for denial wrongly isn't even needed. I do not have doubts about Hitler involvement.

As for the second part I couldn't agree more.

(27-04-2015 09:14 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Two words, Mein Kampf

Certainly, but one could question if he had such plans back then (not that actually make difference). If I recall corectly new biography of his by Volker Ullrich wrestle with the issue.

(27-04-2015 09:18 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I doubt that there are any cases where Stalin was the one who actually pulled the trigger or killed anyone, probably very little if any documentation of him even ordering it. I don't seem to see anyone who is arguing against "Stalin was an evil fucker".

People pick and choose weird shit to deny, if they feel that it somehow benefits them. So, those against Jews deny the Holocaust. Why? If is self-serving.

As for Stalin it seems there were cases when he killed personaly - S.S. Montefiore "Young Stalin" - after all he was member of violent revolutionary group. And arguing about him being evil is being done in Russia, or rather pointing to his achievements and saying that all the suffering was the collateral damage.

As for the second point I agree.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-04-2015, 12:26 PM
RE: Holocaust denial
(27-04-2015 09:24 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Certainly, but one could question if he had such plans back then (not that actually make difference). If I recall corectly new biography of his by Volker Ullrich wrestle with the issue.

All you can do as a historian is to wrestle with the issue, since there's no evidence to support one theory or the other. Hitler lived in Vienna between 1907 and 1913 and scraped by by painting postcards. For quite some time he lived in a men's asylum for the homeless and there he socialised with a number of jews. He also did business with jewish shop owners as Brigitte Hamann found out for her book "Hitler in Vienna".

His antisemitism seemed to have developed during the first war, even though his commanding officer was also a jew. In "Mein Kampf" he paints a persona of himself, but it's safe to assume that he already was antisemitic at that time.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like abaris's post
27-04-2015, 12:49 PM
RE: Holocaust denial
(27-04-2015 12:26 PM)abaris Wrote:  
(27-04-2015 09:24 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Certainly, but one could question if he had such plans back then (not that actually make difference). If I recall corectly new biography of his by Volker Ullrich wrestle with the issue.

All you can do as a historian is to wrestle with the issue, since there's no evidence to support one theory or the other. Hitler lived in Vienna between 1907 and 1913 and scraped by by painting postcards. For quite some time he lived in a men's asylum for the homeless and there he socialised with a number of jews. He also did business with jewish shop owners as Brigitte Hamann found out for her book "Hitler in Vienna".

His antisemitism seemed to have developed during the first war, even though his commanding officer was also a jew. In "Mein Kampf" he paints a persona of himself, but it's safe to assume that he already was antisemitic at that time.

What Hitler write in "Mein Kampf" should not be fully or even at all trusted, it wasn't honest autobiography. As for his antisemitism Ian Kershaw author of "Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris" write that Hitler's hate of Jews probably started in Vienna as Hitler himself stated later, but this was personal hatred rather than something else. Ideological antisemitism was supposed to soldify in 1919 (Ian Kershaw Hitler: 1889-1936 page 59 of polish edition).

As for evidence, rather that saying that there is none I would say that there are none of which we currently know. New documents apparently are still being found, or at least that is the claim of Volker Ullrich author of newest - I think - biography of Hitler.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
27-04-2015, 07:05 PM
RE: Holocaust denial
My understanding of Hitler's anti-Semitism, largely garnered from Shirer who is admittedly not a perfect source, is that Hitler's bigotry started in Vienna, but was magnified and flourished under his admiration of and correspondence with Houston Stewart Chamberlain, amongst others, after the Great War.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2015, 12:16 AM
RE: Holocaust denial
(27-04-2015 07:05 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  My understanding of Hitler's anti-Semitism, largely garnered from Shirer who is admittedly not a perfect source, is that Hitler's bigotry started in Vienna, but was magnified and flourished under his admiration of and correspondence with Houston Stewart Chamberlain, amongst others, after the Great War.

By Shirer you mean William Shirer and his book "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich"? As for Hitler anti-Semitism it could start in Vienna steming from his lack of success, according to Kershaw it was personal hatred at first, need to blame others for failures.

As for Chamberlain I agree, though he was probaby not only source of Hitler incrased anti-Semitism. One could think that war also have something to do with it, as Jews were blammed for supposedly avoiding the fighting, which Hitler as - strange it may seem - good soldier - through sources vary - did not like.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
28-04-2015, 01:06 AM
RE: Holocaust denial
Hitler's anti-Semitism wasn't in a vacuum AFAIK from what little I've read. The culture in a lot of Western countries including USA and UK was that Jews were nasty and not to be trusted. My thought is that Hitler's ideas were able to gain traction because he didn't have to convince people to hate Jews much, he just had to give it some kind of bullshit justification why everything was the Jews' fault and therefore they should be made to pay, e.g. by having their goods confiscated.

Then appeal to superiority complex by telling people that they are naturally better than that guy over there, even if that guy over there (e.g. Einstein) was manifestly more talented and successful than them, that makes people feel good. And to prevent the cognitive dissonance that the guy they have been told to hate is clearly just another regular guy like themselves, it's nice to send the aforementioned guy off somewhere else where they can't see him...

It's very nice easy basic politics. And it's being repeated elsewhere. E.g. in South Africa we have several populist politicians who've been telling the poorer classes that "Hey, by the way, the reason you're poor is 'cos of the foreigners, the amaKwereKwere..." It's the low road, the path of evil... but it doesn't stop people from taking it.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: