|
|
Post by cato on May 3, 2021 15:36:09 GMT
Over on the Irish Catholic forum Maolsheachlann posed the above question recently. Why is it a topic we cannot query?
I agree with ostacising holocaust denial and I will try to explain why.To begin holocaust denial is not the same as critical historical study of the attempted butchery of European Jews and other "undesirables" in the Nazi era. Kevin Myers was falsely branded a holocaust denier for stating the figure of six million murdered Jews may not be accurate. I think he came up with some figures roughly a few hundred thousand less. This doesn't take away from the fact of a deliberate planned genocide carried out by one of the most educated sophisticated and socially advanced nations on earth. Myers revising down of the figures of Irish war dead 1914-18 is generally accepted as the most reliable figures currently. This is a genuine academic endeavour and is how we advance knowledge and understanding.
Holocaust deniers expend a lot of energy and ingenuity in creating doubts about the historical narrative but what they do is not genuine historical research or a search for truth. Fundamentally they are malicious extremists motivated by anti Jewish prejudice.They deny one of the worst atrocities in 20th century history in order to absolve the wicked of horrendous crimes and savagery. That attempt to muddy the waters or pretend the holocaust never occurred is part of a an agenda to rehabilitate monsters and their legacy. I have never come across a holocaust denier who is not an anti Semite. There is a bigger more sinister agenda at play .
There is also Turkish holocaust denial ; state sponsored laws there make it a crime to call the slaughter of Armenian Christians a genocide. Indeed there is also widespread popular ignorance among the western young of Marxist genocides and mass slaughter especially in Russia , China , Cambodia and a score of other unfortunate places. Few seek to deny these explicitly but most of our popular focus is on the Jewish extermination to the exclusion of other genocides which is unfortunate and wrong.
Morally the Jewish holocaust is up there with a possible trio of events in the 20th century that severely scarred our western culture and led to a huge crisis in our thought and civilisation. I am thinking of the mass slaughter in World War one especially and mass bombing of civilians culminating in the atomic bombings in 1945. Denying the holocaust is minimising or pretending one of those horrific events didn't happen. It's an incredibly wicked view to hold. I am not aware of any other "school" of history that denies an historical event.
The broad left generally minimise their ideologies links to bloody genocides and have succeeded in making Nazism a right wing phenomena ignoring its explicit paganism, socialist, eugenicist and modernist technological focus which are a large part of its makeup along with racism , imperialism and military aggression. It is important that those on the right resist this smearing of all on the right with the sins of Nazism.
Many of the opponents of this evil ideology were conservatives and devout Christians. They were the true civilised defenders of humanity and Christian Civilisation. We on the right today need to be very careful about the modern ideological disciples of the hard right as well as the intersectional race /gender obsessed crowd who dominate the public square.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on May 3, 2021 20:49:56 GMT
Over on the Irish Catholic forum Maolsheachlann posed the above question recently. Why is it a topic we cannot query? I agree with ostacising holocaust denial and I will try to explain why.To begin holocaust denial is not the same as critical historical study of the attempted butchery of European Jews and other "undesirables" in the Nazi era. Kevin Myers was falsely branded a holocaust denier for stating the figure of six million murdered Jews may not be accurate. I think he came up with some figures roughly a few hundred thousand less. This doesn't take away from the fact of a deliberate planned genocide carried out by one of the most educated sophisticated and socially advanced nations on earth. Myers revising down of the figures of Irish war dead 1914-18 is generally accepted as the most reliable figures currently. This is a genuine academic endeavour and is how we advance knowledge and understanding. Holocaust deniers expend a lot of energy and ingenuity in creating doubts about the historical narrative but what they do is not genuine historical research or a search for truth. Fundamentally they are malicious extremists motivated by anti Jewish prejudice.They deny one of the worst atrocities in 20th century history in order to absolve the wicked of horrendous crimes and savagery. That attempt to muddy the waters or pretend the holocaust never occurred is part of a an agenda to rehabilitate monsters and their legacy. I have never come across a holocaust denier who is not an anti Semite. There is a bigger more sinister agenda at play . There is also Turkish holocaust denial ; state sponsored laws there make it a crime to call the slaughter of Armenian Christians a genocide. Indeed there is also widespread popular ignorance among the western young of Marxist genocides and mass slaughter especially in Russia , China , Cambodia and a score of other unfortunate places. Few seek to deny these explicitly but most of our popular focus is on the Jewish extermination to the exclusion of other genocides which is unfortunate and wrong. Morally the Jewish holocaust is up there with a possible trio of events in the 20th century that severely scarred our western culture and led to a huge crisis in our thought and civilisation. I am thinking of the mass slaughter in World War one especially and mass bombing of civilians culminating in the atomic bombings in 1945. Denying the holocaust is minimising or pretending one of those horrific events didn't happen. It's an incredibly wicked view to hold. I am not aware of any other "school" of history that denies an historical event. The broad left generally minimise their ideologies links to bloody genocides and have succeeded in making Nazism a right wing phenomena ignoring its explicit paganism, socialist, eugenicist and modernist technological focus which are a large part of its makeup along with racism , imperialism and military aggression. It is important that those on the right resist this smearing of all on the right with the sins of Nazism. Many of the opponents of this evil ideology were conservatives and devout Christians. They were the true civilised defenders of humanity and Christian Civilisation. We on the right today need to be very careful about the modern ideological disciples of the hard right as well as the intersectional race /gender obsessed crowd who dominate the public square. I do agree that Holocaust denial is generally, even always, motivated by anti-semitism. However, I think it's important to protect open and free debate of all kinds. As I said on the other forum, I can't think of any way to justify the suppression of this opinion that couldn't just as well apply to a great number of others. It's a good point that it's hard to think of a school of thought that denies an historical event. I suppose denial of the moon landings is one example. I agree that antisemitism is a blight on conservatism, and I have an intense dislike of it myself, but I don't think I would necessarily ostracize a Holocaust denier. I think someone can have one abhorrent opinion and still be a good and sincere person. For instance, most people I know are pro-abortion. Also, I think laws against Holocaust denial-- or even pushing it beyond the pale-- only fuels anti-semitism by apparently privileging Jewish interests and sensitivities. It makes it easier for anti-semitism to argue there is a powerful Jewish cabal running our societies. |
|
|
|
Post by Seán Ó Murchú on May 4, 2021 9:46:08 GMT
Over on the Irish Catholic forum Maolsheachlann posed the above question recently. Why is it a topic we cannot query? I agree with ostacising holocaust denial and I will try to explain why.To begin holocaust denial is not the same as critical historical study of the attempted butchery of European Jews and other "undesirables" in the Nazi era. Kevin Myers was falsely branded a holocaust denier for stating the figure of six million murdered Jews may not be accurate. I think he came up with some figures roughly a few hundred thousand less. This doesn't take away from the fact of a deliberate planned genocide carried out by one of the most educated sophisticated and socially advanced nations on earth. Myers revising down of the figures of Irish war dead 1914-18 is generally accepted as the most reliable figures currently. This is a genuine academic endeavour and is how we advance knowledge and understanding. Holocaust deniers expend a lot of energy and ingenuity in creating doubts about the historical narrative but what they do is not genuine historical research or a search for truth. Fundamentally they are malicious extremists motivated by anti Jewish prejudice.They deny one of the worst atrocities in 20th century history in order to absolve the wicked of horrendous crimes and savagery. That attempt to muddy the waters or pretend the holocaust never occurred is part of a an agenda to rehabilitate monsters and their legacy. I have never come across a holocaust denier who is not an anti Semite. There is a bigger more sinister agenda at play . There is also Turkish holocaust denial ; state sponsored laws there make it a crime to call the slaughter of Armenian Christians a genocide. Indeed there is also widespread popular ignorance among the western young of Marxist genocides and mass slaughter especially in Russia , China , Cambodia and a score of other unfortunate places. Few seek to deny these explicitly but most of our popular focus is on the Jewish extermination to the exclusion of other genocides which is unfortunate and wrong. Morally the Jewish holocaust is up there with a possible trio of events in the 20th century that severely scarred our western culture and led to a huge crisis in our thought and civilisation. I am thinking of the mass slaughter in World War one especially and mass bombing of civilians culminating in the atomic bombings in 1945. Denying the holocaust is minimising or pretending one of those horrific events didn't happen. It's an incredibly wicked view to hold. I am not aware of any other "school" of history that denies an historical event. The broad left generally minimise their ideologies links to bloody genocides and have succeeded in making Nazism a right wing phenomena ignoring its explicit paganism, socialist, eugenicist and modernist technological focus which are a large part of its makeup along with racism , imperialism and military aggression. It is important that those on the right resist this smearing of all on the right with the sins of Nazism. Many of the opponents of this evil ideology were conservatives and devout Christians. They were the true civilised defenders of humanity and Christian Civilisation. We on the right today need to be very careful about the modern ideological disciples of the hard right as well as the intersectional race /gender obsessed crowd who dominate the public square. I do agree that Holocaust denial is generally, even always, motivated by anti-semitism. However, I think it's important to protect open and free debate of all kinds. As I said on the other forum, I can't think of any way to justify the suppression of this opinion that couldn't just as well apply to a great number of others. It's a good point that it's hard to think of a school of thought that denies an historical event. I suppose denial of the moon landings is one example. I agree that antisemitism is a blight on conservatism, and I have an intense dislike of it myself, but I don't think I would necessarily ostracize a Holocaust denier. I think someone can have one abhorrent opinion and still be a good and sincere person. For instance, most people I know are pro-abortion. Also, I think laws against Holocaust denial-- or even pushing it beyond the pale-- only fuels anti-semitism by apparently privileging Jewish interests and sensitivities. It makes it easier for anti-semitism to argue there is a powerful Jewish cabal running our societies. Multiple mass genocide's happen in the twenty century and one happened to large amount of Jewish people. Which is a subject that should be allowed to be discussed as I think we agree. What I disagree with is the term anti-semitism which has been redefined multiple times. Here are a few examples from /www.gov.uk/government/speeches/a-definition-of-antisemitism and my understanding is the definition had redefined again(UK Labor Party): -Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions. -Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust). -Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust. -Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the State of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:-Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour. -Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism to characterize Israel or Israelis. -Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. I would also disagree with you on "conservatives" being so-called anti-Semitic. Look at the Conservative party in the UK and Republican's in the USA. All pro-Isreal libtards. |
|
|
|
Post by cato on May 4, 2021 15:42:30 GMT
Sean I didn't refer to conservatives being anti-Semitic. The term is often falsely used to tar conservatives though by opponents.In fact the mainstream right in the Anglosphere is broadly philo-Semitic and pro Zionist.
The left seems particularly inclined to sympathise with anti-Semitic or as they might prefer anti Zionist ideas. This was very evident during the Corbyn era. In Ireland of course all our parties bash Israel and remain tight lipped on human rights abuses in Arab and Islamic states. The Soviets of course indulged in low grade (jailing not killing Jews) persecution in the 1950s and 60s too.
|
|
|
|
Post by cato on May 4, 2021 16:14:24 GMT
I do agree that Holocaust denial is generally, even always, motivated by anti-semitism. However, I think it's important to protect open and free debate of all kinds. As I said on the other forum, I can't think of any way to justify the suppression of this opinion that couldn't just as well apply to a great number of others. It's a good point that it's hard to think of a school of thought that denies an historical event. I suppose denial of the moon landings is one example.[br
Cato - The majority of historians and educated people know the moon landing conspiracy is crazy. Nothing is really at stake here other than a dishonest government conspiracy even if it were true.
]
I agree that antisemitism is a blight on conservatism, and I have an intense dislike of it myself, but I don't think I would necessarily ostracize a Holocaust denier.
Cato
I may have used the word "ostracize" inappropriately but I struggle to find another word. Holocaust denial is an extreme form of Trolling and as you know - Never feed a troll !
I think someone can have one abhorrent opinion and still be a good and sincere person. For instance, most people I know are pro-abortion.
Cato.
I think Holocaust denial comes close or is a modern Taboo. In this case a necessary taboo which even our decadent society agrees on. Child abuse is another example. Advocating to undermine these taboos is going beyond what is reasonable or acceptable. I would distinguish between holding and advocating extremist views too. Having pro choice friends is different from befriending an actual abortionist.
br]
Also, I think laws against Holocaust denial-- or even pushing it beyond the pale-- only fuels anti-semitism by apparently privileging Jewish interests and sensitivities. It makes it easier for anti-semitism to argue there is a powerful Jewish cabal running our societies.[/quote]
Cato
I agree with you here Maolsheachlann on criminalizing denialists. It also fosters a forbidden fruit mentality towards the physical trappings and paraphernalia of the third Reich knowing these trigger the left and Jews.
|
|
|
|
Post by hilary on May 5, 2021 18:40:23 GMT
I often wonder, as no doubt many people (with only a limited understanding) do, how it happened. What led up to it and how did the governed people recover from it. I've heard it said recently that most often in the gulag the conversation was about why the captives hadn't spoken out when they had had the chance. Could it happen again? Did those ruled by the Nazis fear that they would be considered crazy if they spoke out, were they afraid or did they condone it or was it a mixture of all three?
|
|
|
|
Post by Séamus on May 10, 2021 11:26:03 GMT
Sean I didn't refer to conservatives being anti-Semitic. The term is often falsely used to tar conservatives though by opponents.In fact the mainstream right in the Anglosphere is broadly philo-Semitic and pro Zionist. The left seems particularly inclined to sympathise with anti-Semitic or as they might prefer anti Zionist ideas. This was very evident during the Corbyn era. In Ireland of course all our parties bash Israel and remain tight lipped on human rights abuses in Arab and Islamic states. The Soviets of course indulged in low grade (jailing not killing Jews) persecution in the 1950s and 60s too. Over the last few months I've been reading from a book of reflections which I bought from some people who are very much completely SSPX supporters. Jaques Benigne Bossuet (1627-1704) was obviously a famous clergyman in his time and was dubbed the Eagle of Meaux. As the title Continuity of Religion implies he touched on Old and New Testament history. And admittedly some remarks make one mildly uncomfortable. But after getting to the post-apostolic destruction of Jerusalem Bishop Bossuet writes a rather beautiful passage about the selection of the Jewish people and how they would still survive through Providence. Of course,for him,this meant eventually accepting Christ before the end of time,but many outside of the Christian mentality would still find this remarkable, written as it was at the height of France's splendor, centuries before a Israeli state was presided over by an Irish president. |
|
|
|
Post by cato on May 10, 2021 13:05:14 GMT
I often wonder, as no doubt many people (with only a limited understanding) do, how it happened. What led up to it and how did the governed people recover from it. I've heard it said recently that most often in the gulag the conversation was about why the captives hadn't spoken out when they had had the chance. Could it happen again? Did those ruled by the Nazis fear that they would be considered crazy if they spoke out, were they afraid or did they condone it or was it a mixture of all three? Hi Hilary and sorry for not replying sooner. I have been thinking about a concise reply to your question and will post in the next few days. |
|
