What makes someone a Holocaust denier?

[Behind the Aegis]

Ultraconservative Catholic bishop Richard Williamson apologized to the pope this week for his "imprudent remarks" concerning the Holocaust but did not recant. The bishop accepts that some Jews died in concentration camps but claims that fewer than 300,000 were killed, rather than 6 million, and he denies that the Nazis used gas chambers. To be a Holocaust denier, do you have to deny the whole thing?

There's no single definition of Holocaust denial or "revisionism," but scholars generally agree that it means claiming that the Nazis had no official policy to exterminate Jews, that the gas chambers are a myth, or that the figure of 6 million murdered Jews is a gross exaggeration. At the extreme, denial can mean hiding or suppressing evidence of the Holocaust by destroying gas chambers, as the Nazis did at the end of World War II, or by burning documents. But denial can also take the form of relativization—saying that, yes, the Nazis killed Jews, but the killings of Gypsies, Poles, and Jehovah's Witnesses were just as bad.

That said, there are plenty of aspects of the Holocaust that are still hotly debated by historians without charges of denial being tossed around. One is the exact number of Jews killed. Most historians agree it was somewhere between 5 million and 7 million. (Solid documentary evidence exists for about 5.3 million deaths.) But the numbers vary because of the circumstances under which some of the killings occurred. For example, no one knows precisely how many Jews were evacuated when the Soviet army retreated from the western regions of the USSR under German attack, or whether they were killed. Legitimate debate also continues over how widespread Jewish resistance was against the Nazis.


http://www.slate.com/id/2210632?nav=wp">more...

[Skittles]

1. I've wondered about this too

my guess is they simply despise Jewish folk

[Behind the Aegis]

2. Some do.

Rarely does one see Holocaust denial for any group other than Jews. There was one asshole here who was a HD when it came to gays (long since tombstoned) and once, I was reading an anti-Semitic site and saw a piece on denial of Roma deaths because they aren't "real." (:wtf:) Most of the time, however, HD revolves around Jews.

[readmoreoften]

3. Actually, people deny that gays were killed all the time.

Lively's "Pink Swastika" book is online with praise from US conservatives in the front matter. I consider that holocaust denial as well.

[Baby Snooks]

9. But they were guilty victims...

The homosexuals were criminals under German law. So they were "guilty victims" and until recently not really acknowledged by anyone except the survivors. They didn't matter. Neither, really, did the gypsies.

People say it can never happen again. It will happen again. You can look at the divisiveness in this country over "gay rights" and "illegal immigrants" and see how easily the seeds are sown.

In any society where "hate speech" is allowed there is the danger of another Holocaust. We not only allow it, we protect it.

The German people deny knowledge of what was happening. The German people knew. They fostered the climate of hate that allowed it to happen.

As did the Vatican. Which makes this all the more reprehensible.

[CTyankee]

15. Please understand that an excess of civil liberties did not cause the Third Reich.

What did it was an unwillingness by the Weimar Republic to enforce laws protecting people from violence. We have laws against threats to harm people. there are exceptions to the First Amendment's free speech guarantees.

[Baby Snooks]

17. So did Germany....

The Reich merely removed the constitutional protections for Jews. As for our having laws against threats to people, there are probably a couple of hundred thousand victims of domestic abuse/violence and stalking victims who would dispute that. I am among them.

[CTyankee]

18. Again, the Weimar Republic did not protect people's safety, happening before the Reich

and in fact helping them to get power.

What you must have gone through is horrible. I have heard about these situations, and they are depressingly common, where people have wound up murdered. It does not mean we should give up First Amendment rights. It does mean we have to hold our law enforcement agencies responsible for keeping people from harm.

[readmoreoften]

31. Do you think the US government protects my safety?

Hell, it's in the Republican platform of Texas that some physical 'taunting' might occur naturally since I 'taunt' Republicans through my very existence. In most states I can be fired for being gay. Please. There's little protection for us.

In fact, when I was driving across Tennessee towards Blue State Country, we broke down and the assisting officer took a step back and said "What kind of people ARE you?" when he saw me and my girlfriend.

Law Enforcement can go either way with us.

[CTyankee]

37. I cannot blame you for being weary and cynical. You might consider a move?

I mean, seriously, you and your girlfriend would be welcome in Connecticut, where we have the most progressive marriage equality situation in the entire country. I live in New Haven, the cultural capital of CT where people with racial, religious/nonreligious, sexual orientation differences flourish. But we've been losing population because of a shifting economic base. Eventually it will improve. There are also wonderful places in Massachusetts, another progressive state.

Noplace of course is entirely free of discrimination, but there is much less here, much more acceptance, much more appreciation of civil liberties.

We're a nice bunch, if I do say so myself...:hi:

[LeftishBrit]

5. I think it's usually even more than 'despise'....

it's alleging that Jews are cheats who are getting or trying to get the world's sympathy on false pretences, in order to push some evil agenda. The equivalent is true of the smaller but significant number of people who deny that gays were killed in the Holocaust; they see gays as cheating about the matter in order to push the 'homosexual agenda'.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

7. It's all set out in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Of course, since the Jews control the media and high finance, you'll never see that view popularized :sarcasm:

[baldguy]

4. Denying people were killed when they were.

Did a true Holocaust really happen? Or was it merely an atrocity? If "only" 300,000 people were killed it was a horrific idea in itself - but what about the other 5-12 million others? They didn't just move away, and they weren't killed in combat. Did they just evaporate?

That scale of human carnage doesn't come about without a systematic, organized effort. "Holocaust" is a good word to describe it.

[Xenotime]

8. Is there proof they even existed?

The number sometimes change, too, when people tell a story over and over again.

[baldguy]

10. Birth records in churches & synagogues

And the empty city neighborhoods, towns and villages.

There are the mass graves at the death camps.

[Maru Kitteh]

36. They were my fucking relatives AND YES THEY EXISTED.

My great uncle watched his wife split through her pubic symphysis to the tip of her chin, and then he was shot for calling the man who did it a pig. My Aunt watched this happen to her parents.

All of the things I want to way would get my post deleted, and I want people to see your post for what it is.

Wallow in it.

[NNN0LHI]

6. Not to change the subject but how many Americans admit over a million Iraqis have been killed?

I don't think the history books for our current students in high school even mention the millions of Vietnamese that the USA killed at all either. As if it never happened.

Even Obama recently made mention of the great people who pioneered our west (actually slaughtered Indians and stole their land) as some great group of tough Americans. He must watch a lot of John Wayne movies? :shrug:

I realize this issue effects you personally as it should but this happens all too often. Pisses me off too.

Don

[EstimatedProphet]

11. Did you mean to say this?

But denial can also take the form of relativization—saying that, yes, the Nazis killed Jews, but the killings of Gypsies, Poles, and Jehovah's Witnesses were just as bad.

[LeftishBrit]

13. I think what the article means here...

is that some people make the argument, "Oh but as others were also killed, the Jews don't have a right to complain!" Not that the Holocaust *didn't* also involve some non-Jewish groups or that their murder doesn't matter. I agree that it could have been put a bit better.

[EstimatedProphet]

16. I wondered whether that was what was meant

Because unfortunately, as it reads right now, it says that discussing anything but the Jews being killed is somehow minimizing what happened. Which is a view that I find sickening.

[Orsino]

12. Fascist sympathies?

Denial of the guilt that falls on all other nations that failed to act in time? A general distrust of the written word? :shrug:

[KharmaTrain]

14. It's Not Denying...It's Dimishing...

I've heard several play the "middle ground"...including, sadly, some Jews...who will say the Holocoust happened, but it was "no big deal". Some will minimize the numbers...trying to claim that not all 6 million were "really Jews" (not observant) or of other groups. Others will try to compare that to the genocide in Kampuchea or Rwanda and diminishing the impact that way. In most cases, it's always used to push a political agenda...or even some latent anti-semetism. It's as if the Holocoust is being overplayed by others or used as a political weapon and this is their attempt to disarm.

Cheers...

:hi:

[Behind the Aegis]

21. I call them "Holocaust minimalists."

That is something which is becoming more and more popular.

[H2O Man]

47. Interesting.

I think it is a form of denial, that seeks to diminish the number of victims, and thus the humanity of those excluded from their count.

A repulsive lot, the deniers/diminishers.

[anonymous171]

19. The usual claim is that it wasn't intentional genocide.

You know the whole "Jews were really just interned and died in those camps from starvation, disease, etc" story.

[spanone]

20. just guessing, but 'denying the holocaust' ???

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

22. Whoa whoa whoa. Wait a sec. Wait a goddamn fucking sec.

"But denial can also take the form of relativization—saying that, yes, the Nazis killed Jews, but the killings of Gypsies, Poles, and Jehovah's Witnesses were just as bad."

I'm giving you the benefit of doubt and assuming that, by that, you mean that many more Jews that members of other minorities were killed (an undeniable truth) and therefore the killing of the Jews was worse than the killing of, say, the Gypsies. Because there were more of the former.

And NOT...

Because killing N Jews is worse than killing N Gypsies or N Poles or N Communists or N Jeovah's Witnesses or N gay persons.

I DO assume correctly, don't I?

[EFerrari]

23. The article isn't terribly well written. I think the writer meant that

some deniers discount Jewish deaths by pointing to other deaths (maybe just as some racists discount their racism by claiming white men also suffer from discrimination?). So, if everyone suffers, by this logic, the suffering was no big deal. :shrug:

[budkin]

24. Simple. They hate the Jews. That's it.

[Junkdrawer]

25. Why is it that just before Israel does something awful....

"thoughtful" posts are made in GD about antisemitism or holocaust denial?

[Behind the Aegis]

26. I am not sure what you are trying to say.

Are you surprised? Not surprised? Confused? Being sarcastic? Why is 'thoughtful' in quotes?

[LeftishBrit]

29. Just *before* Israel does something awful? Do you have a crystal ball or something?

Assuming that you meant to say 'after', what would you think of someone writing:

'Why is it that just after Al Quaeda does something awful....

"thoughtful" posts are made in GD about Islamophobia?'

Or


'Why is it that just after Mugabe or another African dictator does something awful....

"thoughtful" posts are made in GD about slavery and racism?'


Or


'Why is it that just after Russia does something awful....

"thoughtful" posts are made in GD about McCarthyism and the anti-Communist witch-hunt?'

Antisemitism and the relatd problem of holocaust denial are real problems in the world; and cannot be dismissed on the basis of whatever Israel may or may not do.

[Warren DeMontague]

30. It's part of the Gimungo Zionist Conspiracy, silly!

The Elders are very, very, very, very concerned about criticism of Israel on DU. It's a serious threat to their plans.



....:eyes:

[Alamuti Lotus]

27. Somewhat interesting question, "denier" vs "revisionist"

Clearly someone like David Irving is a denier, there are others but he is among the best examples to put forth a great deal of energy towards whitewashing the generally accepted record. The motivation here is fairly obvious. To feel better about their great admiration of the Nazi regime (some aspect, or the entire package), the less palatable aspects of that period (the whole messy business about "rounding up practically any group they didn't like that they could find and murdered them in a manner that was surprisingly more efficient than their seemingly more important military campaigns") must be either explained away, or dismissed. While generally idiotic, that at least has a logic pattern that could be picked up on with enough goosestepping (which allegedly loosens the brain up for greater acceptance of erstwhile-crazy ideas).

That aside, I don't understand the revisionist aspect. I have read their stuff and have talked about it with those types, but I'm still puzzled as to motivation. They seem to be as well. I tend to look at the "whys" more than "whats"; with that in mind, the line of "sure a bunch were killed, but it wasn't that bad really"...serves what end, exactly? I understand that adding in Roma, Poles, Communists, etc.. is perhaps to deflate the attempts by some to monopolize the insane campaigns for their modern propaganda purposes (those who choose to find an anti-semite hiding behind the mask of any critic), but there are better arguments for that even. Do you have any thoughts to clarify this aspect?

The whole business, either way (and 'business' was carefully chosen, since many of these types have a career in this garbage, which actually may explain the motivation issue your humble narrator has a problem comprehending above) seems to me an exercise in terribly misdirected energy, even if one not care for Jews or the modern Israeli entity; for this, current events are more interesting and would furnish a more relevant argument. :shrug:

[Hippo_Tron]

28. The holocaust is arguably the best documented event in human history

We know that the Nazis had an official policy of exterminating the Jews because they kept transcripts of meetings where they discussed it. Whether or not their was an actual "exterminate the Jews" order from the Fuhrer or whether or not he left that to underlings is actually debated. But nonetheless it was official Nazi policy.

[readmoreoften]

32. Hell, we have the IBM cards that sorted people by reason for extermination.

[dcindian]

33. For a people who believe in some sky daddy ...

And then point fingers at a Holocaust denier as delusional is kinda well hypocritical.

[Behind the Aegis]

35. I would say that is twisted logic, except, it isn't even "logic."

Perhaps you have no problem with Holocaust denial?

[Warren DeMontague]

38. I don't believe in a "sky daddy", and I had relatives who died in the camps.

In short, um, your point- if I can call it that- is fucking idiotic.

[dustbunnie]

44. People were killed based on genetic material, not their beliefs necessarily.

Many German Jews were as secular minded as you can get. If you an eighth Jewish you had a better chance of escaping than if you were half or "full-blooded."

[LanternWaste]

48. You can of course expound a bit for us, yes?

You can of course expound a bit for us, yes? Precisely why does a) accusations towards a Holocaust denier coupled with b) faith in God result in c) hypocrisy?

[cemaphonic]

34. No, it's a pretty common tactic of them, to drop the number by an order of magnitude or so

as if a half-million wasn't bad enough.

[AlCzervik]

39. Willful ignorance.

[supernova]

40. Oh, so I think less people were killed so that makes it less horrifying?

That still doesn't make any sense.

Even if 300K only were killed, that's still bad for very bad, evil even, reasons.

Even if 30K or 3 people were killed, it's still the same level of evil in my mind, because you are still exterminating people based on nothing but their geneology.

Williamson is kook, no question. And I'm deeply sorry for my Catholic friends, that he has been reinstated, and ugh... given a promotion, it seems.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

41. The middle paragraph of this is very wrong indeed.

Trying to draw equivalence between drawing attention to the murder of millions of gypsies, homosexuals etc in the holocaust and holocaust denial is mad.

The figures this article quotes are all for death toll among Jews, but it presents them as "death toll for the holocaust" unless you read carefully. Actually, nearer 10-12 million people died in the holocaust, of whom somewhat over half were Jewish, and 40ish% were gentiles of one stripe of another.

If anything, it's trying to suppress that fact that's denial, not pointing it out.

[Behind the Aegis]

43. Not wrong, just poorly worded.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

42. The middle paragraph of this is very wrong indeed.

Trying to draw equivalence between drawing attention to the murder of millions of gypsies, homosexuals etc in the holocaust and holocaust denial is mad.

The figures this article quotes are all for death toll among Jews, but it presents them as "death toll for the holocaust" unless you read carefully. Actually, nearer 10-12 million people died in the holocaust, of whom somewhat over half were Jewish, and 40ish% were gentiles of one stripe of another.

If anything, it's trying to suppress that fact that's denial, not pointing it out.

[dustbunnie]

45. Holocaust denial is one thing.

It comes in varying degrees as the author muses, and it's relegated to odd pockets of people, certainly not the majority. The numbers are still being contested, and to some extend that's fine, in the interest of history and accuracy.

What is so incredible, and frightening is this new rabid acceptance of the holocaust as "a good thing." The recent spate of Israeli protests brought people out of the woodwork in countries all over the world with slogans like "back to the ovens with you" or "the ovens were too good for you." Nobody really protested or found it revolting. It's truly unbelievable and makes one wonder if people will ever be civilized.

[liberalhistorian]

46. Someone who is so blinded by hatred

of Jews that they cannot see or hear anything else, that they are able to overlook the voluminous documentation the Nazis themselves provided the world and claim, with a straight face, that Jews are responsible for fabricating all such documents.

As for this idiot "bishop", he's both anti-semitic and anxious to downplay the Church's indifference and inaction in the face of KNOWING what was going on during WWII and, indeed, its complicity and approval in some areas of the Church.