- Joined
- Jul 23, 2019
It means you appear to think that Jews, among other ethnic groups, weren't targeted for democide by the National Socialists.
The Holocaust Thread - The Great Debate Between Affirmers, Revisionists and Deniers
- Thread starter RichardMongler
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2019
You see only what you want to see.
You think bringing up the roma is some kind of gotcha, when that double standard is something I've been talking about and you end up supporting what I've been saying.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 7, 2019
Okay, look, no matter where you fall on the Holocaust spectrum:
There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting hard evidence for something. There's absolutely nothing wrong with having questions to facts as presented which lack hard evidence. Likewise, stop throwing out inconvenient pieces of evidence that don't fit your narrative unless you can disprove them somehow. So many otherwise thoughtful or critically-minded people do anything but when this topic comes up.
It is possible to have a world where the a mass death event did take place in some fashion and have the facts about it distorted to the point of lunacy for a seemingly never-ending money/power grab. It's still possible to have a lot of dead prison camp inmates and not have gone out of your way to actively kill them off en masse. It's still possible to have committed acts of atrocity during wartime without having the express intent of flippin' genocide.
Thinking you can shut someone up by accusing them of "just asking questions" is a fake and gay way to shut a conversation down right up there with "whataboutism." They're just bullshit false fallacies designed to make sure you don't have to hurt your pretty little head having to think about something from someone else's perspective or just ignore their (terribly inconvenient to your argument, usually) point entirely. You wanna play the game, but you wanna play it by your own rules. Knock that shit off.
I swear to Christ, it's the same shit no matter how many times I see this topic play out.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting hard evidence for something. There's absolutely nothing wrong with having questions to facts as presented which lack hard evidence. Likewise, stop throwing out inconvenient pieces of evidence that don't fit your narrative unless you can disprove them somehow. So many otherwise thoughtful or critically-minded people do anything but when this topic comes up.
It is possible to have a world where the a mass death event did take place in some fashion and have the facts about it distorted to the point of lunacy for a seemingly never-ending money/power grab. It's still possible to have a lot of dead prison camp inmates and not have gone out of your way to actively kill them off en masse. It's still possible to have committed acts of atrocity during wartime without having the express intent of flippin' genocide.
Thinking you can shut someone up by accusing them of "just asking questions" is a fake and gay way to shut a conversation down right up there with "whataboutism." They're just bullshit false fallacies designed to make sure you don't have to hurt your pretty little head having to think about something from someone else's perspective or just ignore their (terribly inconvenient to your argument, usually) point entirely. You wanna play the game, but you wanna play it by your own rules. Knock that shit off.
I swear to Christ, it's the same shit no matter how many times I see this topic play out.
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2020
What about this video:
I find it again and again when this topic comes up, kiketoob deletes it regularly, but the good people always put up mirrors (I just downloaded it for safekeeping, not sure if it should be on KF servers or not).
Not sure what to make of it, I don't know enough about the topic and I'm not interested that much to dig deeper.
I find it again and again when this topic comes up, kiketoob deletes it regularly, but the good people always put up mirrors (I just downloaded it for safekeeping, not sure if it should be on KF servers or not).
Not sure what to make of it, I don't know enough about the topic and I'm not interested that much to dig deeper.
Kyria the Great
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2017
I will second this to the fullest. I am of the fullest notion once you cross the 100 thousand mark, counting is simply a matter of metrics of how much damage a group did. It really wouldn't matter if only 5 million Jews died in the Holocaust rather than 6 as still 5 million Jews died in the Holocaust. The same goes for Holomodor or Year Zero in my book.
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2017
- Joined
- May 23, 2020
Oh aren't we so generous to rape and pillage people and then rebuild them into de-facto economic vassal states. Especially considering germany was quickly rising to a level of significant competition with the allied nations.
So the atomic bombings are literally as bad as the holocaust because counting bodies is just pedantry?
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2019
I've went into archives in the past and found two copies of such newspapers, so it's likely that the other examples are legit too.
However, I've also come across a number of examples of numbers other than 6 million (7 million, 5 million, 11 million from memory). For me it's more like smoke than actual evidence. It's a sign that something may have been going on there, but not unambiguous evidence.
PS. only watched a minute of the video, can watch the full thing if there's more than just the newspaper titles. Should I?
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2020
Except camp records indicate that inmate deaths apparently declined as Zyklon B became available...
To my knowledge, which is mostly based on works by the polish historian Franciszek Piper (I don't know how well known he is outside Germany/Poland, but he has a pretty good reputation in academia where I live. His estimates are around ~1.1 million total casualties, so much lower than the 4 million number that used to float around way back in the day), arrivals that were immediately executed (unfit for labor fx) were not registered, since the Auschwitz register was only for the ones who were actually "utilized" (not the ones "sorted" on arrival). Instead, the deaths of these "unfit" were recorded and said records sent in regular intervals to (what I'd translate as) the SS bureau for labor and economics and the main security office. A lot of these records (though not all of them, otherwise we couldn't be sure they existed aside from SS testimony, but luckily some remain) were destroyed starting in 1944, but what we do have, is very meticulous train manifests and who was on these trains and where they were headed. And, well, if a person is registered as heading to Auschwitz and then doesn't show up in the labor register and is never heard from again, there's a good chance they didn't "make the cut".
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 23, 2020
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2018
Nazi paramilitary uniforms were great until the trousers. Sam Browne belts and spearpoint shirt collars are sexy, the peaked caps had peak design, and the collar tab rankings were some of the best and simplest rank distinguishers ever conceptualized; but those fucking billow pants - as practical as they were - looked really silly.
Sometimes, I'll see full body footage of Reinhard Heydrich, and those pants will be the one thing that allows me to laugh at what I'll feel should be taken seriously.
Sometimes, I'll see full body footage of Reinhard Heydrich, and those pants will be the one thing that allows me to laugh at what I'll feel should be taken seriously.
Last edited:
Johan Schmidt
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2020
Dresden was fucking hellish. Unironically I hate the 'Bulldog nationalists' in the UK who cheer that shit on; even if I thought we were the good guys in WW2 (Which I don't) I wouldn't be there going 'hahaha yeah, fuck the thousands of women and children we incinerated lol' it'd be like cheering on the soviets campaign of rape against the Germans.
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2016
How can anyone look back on WW2 and think the side with the Soviets and Churchill on it were the ‘good guys’?
Johan Schmidt
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2020
Because most of history being taught seems to be 'Kraut man bad'.
I'm not sure how bad it's gotten now, but during my history GCSE they changed the material around as we were doing it. I couldn't really tell back when I was doing it, but going over some of my notes from then it's pretty fucking grim. In the space of two years the teaching on WW2 and the Nazi's especially went from 'The people were abused by the Nazi's, and most of them didn't think their leader knew what was going on; and thought that he was a good person being taken advantage of by the inner parties anti jewish sentiment.' to 'The German people were complicit in mass murder, and were gagging for war and world domination'.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2017
The goal was good, the conflict itself isn’t.. but then again, there is no thing called ‘a good war’.
- Joined
- May 23, 2020
The defeat of an economic/ideological rival? It could be argued. But the ends most certainly did not justify the means, not one bit. Not even the mountains of fiction spun off before, during, and after our actions can justify Dresden.
Well consider that practically everyone calls them "Nazis", the propaganda term invented by the communists, and not Germans or National Socialists. They've been utterly dehumanized and weaponized.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2017
I mean considering the rivals are totalitarian governments that were bent on getting revenge on everyone for a previously blameless war.. we already appeased them before 1939, they didn’t stop.
- Joined
- May 23, 2020
I genuinely don't know which side you are referring to. The Allied powers that got revenge on Germany for a war they did not start with the treaty of Versailles that resulted in more than 800,000 civilian deaths?
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2015
Blame the French, they're the ones who wanted revenge.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2017
I’m talking about Germany receiving the brunt of punishment after the Great War, which in turn lead to the pent up resentment towards the treaty of Versailles.