The Holocaust Thread - The Great Debate Between Affirmers, Revisionists and Deniers

[Stan]

Holocaust research only involves collating publicly available documentation. Why would that need to be peer reviewed? Who would peer review it? It's literally illegal in the primary countries it takes place in, yet this isn't seen as a barrier.

You are fucking idiot at best. "Guys this guy attacking an establishment that receives billions of dollars won't acknowledge his arguments that poke holes in their theory, so therefor it must not be valid, infact he must be a fraud!"

Your ignorance of historiography and the process of historical research is shocking. Refusing to engage in peer review is basically refusing to let anyone else in your field check your work.

Look, “publicly available information” is stuff that has already been found. But to find more, one would need to search: for example, in public records or vital statistics offices, or by conducting an archaeological dig. When you publish in journals that aren’t pro-Nazi shams meant to look respectable, the editors will want to check your work before publication by looking at all the data you collected and assess it for themselves as fellow academics. Refusing to do that basically means your favorite proNazi author refuses to engage in real academic work.

Also, Mattogno (or whatever his name is) publishes to pro-Nazi journals with names that are supposed to look respectable, like “the historical review”, but that journal only publishes unverified crap written by Holocaust deniers. So I resent Matognome’s efforts to fool readers into thinking he’s a published academic when he isn’t.

 

[Bonesjones]

I am just curious. Why do you accept these figures without "physical evidence" showing cadavers and "mass graves" of all or most of these victims. Where are the cadavers?

You are legitimately and honestly stupid (that is a plain statement of fact, no internet bants), so I will spell this out for you - I am not denying soviet atrocities, but making fun of your emotionally motivated double standard in glibly accepting first-page google result estimates of Soviet victims while demanding individual autopsies for each Nazi victim.

At no point has anyone denied that millions of people were killed and displaced during the war. We've never debated this.

We've never debated over thousands of people dying in concentration camps due to disease and malnutrition.

Neither of these have anything to do with the holocaust.

You can name call me all you want and say I'm stupid and whatever, it has no effect on me because you've repeatedly proven how actually dumb you are in this very thread.

You have to prove they killed people intentionally. You have to do this. It is your central argument. All you do is claim they gassed and cremated millions, then when you can't prove it, move on to "the nazis were bad and did bad things" that's a dodge.

Wikipedia admits it was a transit camp that they claim is a death camp because a lot of people died there, including camp guards from typhus. This isn't even an argument for the Holocaust, its actually an argument against it. Since if you are transporting giant masses of people, the ones left would most likely be the ones too sick to travel further. Again your own arguments for the narrative of the Holocaust are disproven by your own assertions.

 

[mrolonzo]

No it does not you LARPing ignoramus.

Poland is probably the most "based" country in Europe and thoroughly anti-Nazi. The Mike Enoch claim that everything hinges on Holocaust denial is false.

Yes actually. It shows what happens when people are fooled into believing things. People fooled into believing atrocities can thereby commit atrocity. Hitler had been used in multiple examples of war boosting.

Yes, this. I linked it to you once before and you ignored it.

Dude. There's a extensive study done on this very pamphlet and all the stuff in it.

 

[Stan]

Yes actually. It shows what happens when people are fooled into believing things. People fooled into believing atrocities can thereby commit atrocity. Hitler had been used in multiple examples of war boosting.



Dude. There's a extensively study done on this very pamphlet and all the stuff in it.

Well, Hitler is certainly involved in a deception that led to atrocities, but they’re the very same atrocities you want to pretend never happened and you read fanfic by fake academics to confirm what you wish to be true. Illogical

 

[Stan]

“Mattogno’s exegeses of wartime reports from the death camps all share in common a number of bogus assumptions. One such a priori assumption is even clearly spelled out in the titles of several of his books: that the reports can be dismissed as “propaganda”.24 Yet nowhere in his oeuvre does Mattogno explain what is meant by this term or justify why calling something ‘propaganda’ necessarily implies its falsity. That Mattogno doesn’t understand the meaning of the terms he is using is proven by his frequent invocation of something he calls “black propaganda”, apparently an especially nasty type of propaganda, if one follows the usage of the slogan through his oeuvre.25 But in actual fact the term ‘black propaganda’ has a very precise meaning, which Mattogno himself inadvertently quotes when citing Walter Laqueur speaking of how Polish underground courier Jan Karski “engaged in ‘black propaganda’ among German soldiers, printing and distributing leaflets in German”.26 This is a correct use of the term. Black propaganda is propaganda purporting to come from the enemy side. Mattogno’s “black propaganda” is nothing of the sort. Instead, it is just a hysterical repetition of a phrase he liked when he first read and commented on Laqueur’s book back in 1991, and which is not being correctly used.27”

 

[Bonesjones]

Your ignorance of historiography and the process of historical research is shocking. Refusing to engage in peer review is basically refusing to let anyone else in your field check your work.

Look, “publicly available information” is stuff that has already been found. But to find more, one would need to search: for example, in public records or vital statistics offices, or by conducting an archaeological dig. When you publish in journals that aren’t pro-Nazi shams meant to look respectable, the editors will want to check your work before publication by looking at all the data you collected and assess it for themselves as fellow academics. Refusing to do that basically means your favorite proNazi author refuses to engage in real academic work.

Lmao you don't even know how academics work. When you research something using publicly available texts, anyone can check your sources. That's how it works. The problem is no one can, it's that no one wants to. You are trying to conflate the two because you can't admit that.

If only we could do archeological digs, but wait doing so for the purposes of holocaust denial is illegal and or would be immediately rejected by governing bodies Even if you could use deception to do it successfully, your work would be immediately rejected based on your deception.

You act like we don't have a reproduction crisis in all of academia. Even in hard science people are unable to reproduce other people's results. This is solely due to cultural and financial factors.

So how is someone doing what amounts to research into something as unacceptable as holocaust denial supposed to function within that system?

 

[Aves]

Dude. Why tell us this?

Do you think if a Nazi like knew the purpose of the holocaust education it would help everyone see how not a hoax it is?

Is this an implicit admission that it's a hoax?

What? No, I said it because this is what I think about the holocaust. To me, it’s less about “6 million” and more about the intentional murder of millions. Like, Bonesjones keeps calling me a Nazi for saying it could be 5 million.

 

[m1ddl3m4rch]

Poland is probably the most "based" country in Europe and thoroughly anti-Nazi.

Here you are willing to rate the basedness and anti-Naziness of the Polish, a white European people, and by saying "most" you must have data for the rest of European countries and the white peoples that live in them. Please share with us these ratings, along with the ratings you surely have for the diverse Muslim populations in Europe and around the world. But you only seem willing to discuss white people. I mean I get it, it's easier to find a job hating white people.

 

[Stan]

What? No, I said it because this is what I think about the holocaust. To me, it’s less about “6 million” and more about the intentional murder of millions. Like, Bonesjones keeps calling me a Nazi for saying it could be 5 million.

The number can be higher than 6 million depending on what you want to include. Starvation deaths and disease deaths in the ghettos were by design: Nazis closed the ghetto and gouged the Judenraten for bulk food shipments. The obvious purpose of doing that is to encourage the ghettos to starve; which is an inhuman thing to do to anybody. I didn’t include that as part of the “Holocaust” but one could. You might think Kristallnacht was part of the Holocaust, or that indirect Jewish casualties count if they died from Nazi negligence.

 

[Bonesjones]

Well, Hitler is certainly involved in a deception that led to atrocities, but they’re the very same atrocities you want to pretend never happened and you read fanfic by fake academics to confirm what you wish to be true. Illogical

Hitler came to power in counter to the rise of Communism. We can see which one has worked out worse for humanity.

“Mattogno’s exegeses of wartime reports from the death camps all share in common a number of bogus assumptions. One such a priori assumption is even clearly spelled out in the titles of several of his books: that the reports can be dismissed as “propaganda”.24 Yet nowhere in his oeuvre does Mattogno explain what is meant by this term or justify why calling something ‘propaganda’ necessarily implies its falsity. That Mattogno doesn’t understand the meaning of the terms he is using is proven by his frequent invocation of something he calls “black propaganda”, apparently an especially nasty type of propaganda, if one follows the usage of the slogan through his oeuvre.25 But in actual fact the term ‘black propaganda’ has a very precise meaning, which Mattogno himself inadvertently quotes when citing Walter Laqueur speaking of how Polish underground courier Jan Karski “engaged in ‘black propaganda’ among German soldiers, printing and distributing leaflets in German”.26 This is a correct use of the term. Black propaganda is propaganda purporting to come from the enemy side. Mattogno’s “black propaganda” is nothing of the sort. Instead, it is just a hysterical repetition of a phrase he liked when he first read and commented on Laqueur’s book back in 1991, and which is not being correctly used.27”

I dont think someone complaining about the language someone uses is valid to anything.

What? No, I said it because this is what I think about the holocaust. To me, it’s less about “6 million” and more about the intentional murder of millions. Like, Bonesjones keeps calling me a Nazi for saying it could be 5 million.

The common narrative of the Holocaust is that the Nazis killed intentionally millions of people which is estimated to be 6 million people. To deny or change that number, literally makes you a holocaust denier. No matter how accurate you are. I'm not entirely serious about the label, but I am serious about pointing out how stupid the narrative is and how easy it is to accidently revise.

 

[mgc]

The number can be higher than 6 million depending on what you want to include. Starvation deaths and disease deaths in the ghettos were by design: Nazis closed the ghetto and gouged the Judenraten for bulk food shipments. The obvious purpose of doing that is to encourage the ghettos to starve; which is an inhuman thing to do to anybody. I didn’t include that as part of the “Holocaust” but one could. You might think Kristallnacht was part of the Holocaust, or that indirect Jewish casualties count if they died from Nazi negligence.

Hans Frank, the head of the General Government, explicitly said he was condemning 1.2 million Jews to death by starvation (many of the ghettoized Jews to whom you refer), and that if they did not starve, he hoped the anti-Jewish measures (the deportations) would speed up.

 

[Stan]

Lmao you don't even know how academics work. When you research something using publicly available texts, anyone can check your sources. That's how it works. The problem is no one can, it's that no one wants to. You are trying to conflate the two because you can't admit that.

If only we could do archeological digs, but wait doing so for the purposes of holocaust denial is illegal and or would be immediately rejected by governing bodies Even if you could use deception to do it successfully, your work would be immediately rejected based on your deception.

You act like we don't have a reproduction crisis in all of academia. Even in hard science people are unable to reproduce other people's results. This is solely due to cultural and financial factors.

So how is someone doing what amounts to research into something as unacceptable as holocaust denial supposed to function within that system?

I have a Masters degree. So I do know a little bit about defending a thesis. It’s upsetting when the pro-Nazi ‘historians’ set up a little boy’s club to make each other’s ‘research’ look respectable at a glance. It’s a little bit scammy to pretend you’re a learned academic when you’re just a fanfic writer.

Archeological digs are ongoing at the camp sites. They don’t open the mass graves anymore but anything else is fair game.

How can you be so wrong so often?

 

[mgc]

One other point Neo-nazis do not realize is that tons of mass graves have been found and continue to be found.

I just posted a link today regarding 8,000 Polish victims of Nazi barbarism (mass graves of them were found this week). https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62161018

In response I got emotionally driven copes about how the Soviets must have killed them, even though this happened in 1939 in land the Nazis had annexed as part of East Prussia, not the Soviet zone.

The "pro-European" Nazis teamed up with Stalin to turn Eastern Europe into a massive graveyard.

 

[Bonesjones]

I have a Masters degree. So I do know a little bit about defending a thesis.

Archeological digs are ongoing at the camp sites. They don’t open the mass graves anymore but anything else is fair game.

How can you be so wrong so often?

So you aren't mistaken, just a bold liar. Glad you admit ignorance to common knowledge so you can manipulate your argument. How very Holocaust historian of you.

So they refuse to look at where they know the dead bodies are but can look anywhere else? How fucking stupid are you to find that acceptable in any way?

Jesus you are sub history speaks tier.

 

[Bonesjones]

One other point Neo-nazis do not realize is that tons of mass graves have been found and continue to be found. I just posted a link today regarding 8,000 Polish victims of Nazi barbarism (mass graves of them were found this week). https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62161018 Got emotionally driven copes about how the Soviets killed them, even though this happened in land the Nazis had annexed as part of East Prussia, not the Soviet zone.

Except you clearly read what I posted about the Soviets doing the exact same thing to Poland as the Nazis did, and they would go on to control all of Poland post WW2. So without proof of who, what, when, the deaths can't be accurately attributed. I don't know if you are playing dumb or not. I know none of you would ever acknowledge that Polish research is going to automatically presume Nazi guilt due to the legality of it unless evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.

 

[mrolonzo]

“Mattogno’s exegeses of wartime reports from the death camps all share in common a number of bogus assumptions. One such a priori assumption is even clearly spelled out in the titles of several of his books: that the reports can be dismissed as “propaganda”.24 Yet nowhere in his oeuvre does Mattogno explain what is meant by this term or justify why calling something ‘propaganda’ necessarily implies its falsity. That Mattogno doesn’t understand the meaning of the terms he is using is proven by his frequent invocation of something he calls “black propaganda”, apparently an especially nasty type of propaganda, if one follows the usage of the slogan through his oeuvre.25 But in actual fact the term ‘black propaganda’ has a very precise meaning, which Mattogno himself inadvertently quotes when citing Walter Laqueur speaking of how Polish underground courier Jan Karski “engaged in ‘black propaganda’ among German soldiers, printing and distributing leaflets in German”.26 This is a correct use of the term. Black propaganda is propaganda purporting to come from the enemy side. Mattogno’s “black propaganda” is nothing of the sort. Instead, it is just a hysterical repetition of a phrase he liked when he first read and commented on Laqueur’s book back in 1991, and which is not being correctly used.27”

Dude what is this? Whining about the use of the term black propaganda?

You have a masters degree ? If you did you'd know the pertinence of source criticism and building an argument. Maybe the masters was in brick laying maybe though so could be wrong there.

Come on, go read the response. Then we can discuss the ins and outs.

What? No, I said it because this is what I think about the holocaust. To me, it’s less about “6 million” and more about the intentional murder of millions. Like, Bonesjones keeps calling me a Nazi for saying it could be 5 million.

Dude. What about the 1 million left over? Don't those people count? You monster!!

 

[mgc]

I know none of you would ever acknowledge that Polish research is going to automatically presume Nazi guilt due to the legality of it

What are you talking about? Poles hate the Soviets and have no problem pinning atrocities on them like Katyn, provided that the Soviets actually did them. They just do not want to whitewash Nazis, the even (far) more prolific murderers of their ancestors. Whitewashing the Nazis is the province of monolingual Burgers in the main.

Monolingual C student burgers know that the Nazis never committed genocide. Because science.

 

[Bonesjones]

What are you talking about? Poles hate the Soviets and have no problem pinning atrocities on them like Katyn, provided that the Soviets actually did them. They just do not want to whitewash Nazis, the even (far) more prolific murderers of their ancestors. Whitewashing the Nazis is the province of monolingual Burgers in the main.

Monolingual C student burgers know that the Nazis never committed genocide. Because science.

The Nazis pinned Katyn on the Soviets you fucking idiot.

edit: Infact the key difference between the holocaust and Katyn is the discovery of the mass grave lead to an international team of red cross researchers to examine it. Why did they never do that for the Holocaust?

Crying that it was used for propaganda purposes is just seething from someone caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

 

[mrolonzo]

What are you talking about? Poles hate the Soviets and have no problem pinning atrocities on them like Katyn, provided that the Soviets actually did them. They just do not want to whitewash Nazis, the even (far) more prolific murderers of their ancestors. Whitewashing the Nazis is the province of monolingual Burgers in the main.

Monolingual C student burgers know that the Nazis never committed genocide. Because science.

Well... you know....science is ok right?

Going out on a limb here....

Well, Hitler is certainly involved in a deception that led to atrocities, but they’re the very same atrocities you want to pretend never happened and you read fanfic by fake academics to confirm what you wish to be true. Illogical

Which misses the entire point of dispute here completely. But then what's illogical about it? Do you see the point being made here?

 

[The Inward]

It actually makes a huge difference. The entire nature of the world hinges on these facts.

It only affects the victim hierarchy lol