The statements you mention (something...) are designed to address the fact that there are two things typically being discussed.
1 - People who hear the term "holocaust denial" tend to think this means people are saying the ENTIRE THING is a hoax
2 - People who actually deny the holocaust typically are saying the camps existed but are denying that there was an organized, industrial massacre of the Jewish people.
So I'm saying that statement 1 is incorrect - something definitely happened. It's important to dispose of that idea because otherwise you're unable to discuss the topic.
I'm not terribly interested in holocaust denial but I've read about it, because I read about everything. What I can say is that your discussion of personal anecdotes, which are not rare, does not actually address (or contradict) any of the key assertions "deniers" make. That also loops back to my earlier statement - these anecdotes are very good proof that a bunch of people were locked up in camps and died and were treated badly. This is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that Jews were systematically targeted, ghettoized, deported, and robbed in Nazi Germany.
What has been disputed is the details of what went on. Basically some deniers say that there was no deliberate, industrialized execution that fits the commonly held belief that Jews were marched into rooms and gassed to death, then burned in fire pits. They then try to prove this other ways, talking about population numbers, etc.
Some of those things are difficult to prove largely because the Germans destroyed as much evidence of possible and appeared to have avoided documenting as much as possible, too. They clearly weren't idiots. This is war, in the 1940's, and the lack of smoking gun proof laying around should not surprise anyone but it does make it harder to prove either way.
The real issue, which I mention in my post, is that there IS a whole ton of bullshit that has been perpetuated about the holocaust. If you want to refute deniers I think you need to address that first. I've rarely seen it done, and when people try, ala Finkelstein, they get shut down. That creates suspicion and fuels the belief in those who really doubt the entire story.
a thousand anecdotes that have been proven false are not proof of anything but a cover-up. Not only that anecdotes are not good proof, EVER. ask a lawyer, you can have a million anecdotes, doesn't mean diddly. So, am I supposed to believe these people? https://voat.co/v/holocaustfacts/comments/177551 please do peruse them before opening your pie hole again.
view the rest of the comments →
Empire_of_the_mind ago
The statements you mention (something...) are designed to address the fact that there are two things typically being discussed.
1 - People who hear the term "holocaust denial" tend to think this means people are saying the ENTIRE THING is a hoax 2 - People who actually deny the holocaust typically are saying the camps existed but are denying that there was an organized, industrial massacre of the Jewish people.
So I'm saying that statement 1 is incorrect - something definitely happened. It's important to dispose of that idea because otherwise you're unable to discuss the topic.
I'm not terribly interested in holocaust denial but I've read about it, because I read about everything. What I can say is that your discussion of personal anecdotes, which are not rare, does not actually address (or contradict) any of the key assertions "deniers" make. That also loops back to my earlier statement - these anecdotes are very good proof that a bunch of people were locked up in camps and died and were treated badly. This is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that Jews were systematically targeted, ghettoized, deported, and robbed in Nazi Germany.
What has been disputed is the details of what went on. Basically some deniers say that there was no deliberate, industrialized execution that fits the commonly held belief that Jews were marched into rooms and gassed to death, then burned in fire pits. They then try to prove this other ways, talking about population numbers, etc.
Some of those things are difficult to prove largely because the Germans destroyed as much evidence of possible and appeared to have avoided documenting as much as possible, too. They clearly weren't idiots. This is war, in the 1940's, and the lack of smoking gun proof laying around should not surprise anyone but it does make it harder to prove either way.
The real issue, which I mention in my post, is that there IS a whole ton of bullshit that has been perpetuated about the holocaust. If you want to refute deniers I think you need to address that first. I've rarely seen it done, and when people try, ala Finkelstein, they get shut down. That creates suspicion and fuels the belief in those who really doubt the entire story.
COUSCOUS ago
actually no. The anecdotes are not good proof.
Empire_of_the_mind ago
a handful are not - thousands are.
COUSCOUS ago
a thousand anecdotes that have been proven false are not proof of anything but a cover-up. Not only that anecdotes are not good proof, EVER. ask a lawyer, you can have a million anecdotes, doesn't mean diddly. So, am I supposed to believe these people? https://voat.co/v/holocaustfacts/comments/177551 please do peruse them before opening your pie hole again.