Holocaust Revisionsists?

komodosp

What exactly is the position of holocaust revisionists? They seem to be anti-semite anyway, so do they think that the holocaust never happened but it should have?

They mustn't like Hitler either!

6th

Moved from Conspiracy Theories.

OhNoYouDidn't

komodosp wrote: »

What exactly is the position of holocaust revisionists? They seem to be anti-semite anyway, so do they think that the holocaust never happened but it should have?

They mustn't like Hitler either!

They tend to 'talk down' the scale of the holocaust with a view to making the third reich seem less barbaric, often hoping for a fourth. There were less deaths than commonly accepted, people died naturally, not in gas chambers etc.

Another trick is to make an equivlalence between Alled atrocities such as Dresden or Hiroshima and the final solution.

miec

I beleive it is to justify their position as a historian, by revising history they ensure they continue to write and be known. I think there are some topics that cannot be revised, this being one of them, but alas, academics love nothing better than to come up with theories that move further and further away from what actually happened or from any common reality / realised experience.

Rev Hellfire

miec wrote: »

I think there are some topics that cannot be revised, this being one of them

What an odd thing to say. Clearly anything is open to revision/reinterpretation once new evidence which can be collaborated is available.

paulaa

imo there are revisionists on both sides of the Holocaust debate.
On one side you have the likes of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who says the Holocaust never happened or was exaggerated. On the other side you have some Zionists who say over 6 million Poles, gypsies, and the other groups who were targeted was only about 1 million.

Rondolfus

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

What an odd thing to say. Clearly anything is open to revision/reinterpretation once new evidence which can be collaborated is available.

Exactly. We don't have to agree with everything revisonists say. We can argue back with our own evidence. Denying someone a voice only succeeds in undermining the truth as we see it.

The jailing of David Irving did more for raising awareness of his theories than a hundred of his books could.

Zombrex

komodosp wrote: »

What exactly is the position of holocaust revisionists? They seem to be anti-semite anyway, so do they think that the holocaust never happened but it should have?

They mustn't like Hitler either!

It is basically trying to paint the Nazi party in a better light by playing on the idea that Jews are all evil liars, who would happily lie about how bad the Nazi's were. But not such evil liars that the Nazi's would want to kill them all

Joey the lips

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial

Those who deny the holocaust..... It describes them perfectly really.

Dades

Holocaust Deniers v Holocaust Revisionists

sounds like

Creationism v Intelligent Design

New terminology designed to distract from the bull****.

miec

What an odd thing to say. Clearly anything is open to revision/reinterpretation once new evidence which can be collaborated is available.

I cannot see how the experience of the holocast can be revised. I do not believe that revisionism can be applied in relation to the holocaust. According to the dictionary, revisionism means "the revision of an accepted, usually long-standing view, theory, or doctrine, especially a revision of historical events and movements".

In the case of Irish history certain aspects can be revised and added to, but there is clear evidence from the Second World War that there was written and well documented policy of exterminating jews, there are records (by the Germans) of the number of people destroyed and interned in the concentration camps, there is personal testimonies from Jewish people, I could go on and on. Now additional material can be added to this which extends our understanding of events, but the overwhelming evidence that the holocaust occurred cannot be revised or overturned. It simply is there, and that is why this particular topic cannot be revised in my opinion.

JohnK

But what if it was discovered that many of those records were fake? Or falsified? Or people lied? Sure its highly unlikely that such would happen but its not entirely beyond the realms of possibility. Anything is open to revision if new information or facts support it.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Dades wrote: »

Holocaust Deniers v Holocaust Revisionists

sounds like

Creationism v Intelligent Design

New terminology designed to distract from the bull****.

I wouldn't fully agree. A lot of people believe the figure for nazis murdering jews was a lot less than 6 million but still think the nazis were vile and that Jews obviously suffered horrifically in Europe.

They would be Holocause revisionists but I wouldn't put them in the same bracket as holocaust deniers.

Whereas Intelligent Design literally is creationism

Me, I simply don't know enough about history to decide if I believe the common accepted belief

NickNolte

60% - 75% of Jews living in Europe were murdered during the Holocaust. This is an absolute fact so I don't think there's any need for revision to be perfectly honest. About time we let these poor people rest in peace and make sure nothing like this ever happens again.

brianthebard

Jesus people, there's a massive ****ing difference between revisionism and negationism, and hardly anyone on this thread seems to realise that. Dades your comparision is incorrect. Revisionism is a legitimate school of thought in the field of history, negationism is specifically designed to deny or massively play down the truth for personal/political reasons. Can't believe people let the OP off without question, revisionists (even those who deal with the holocaust) are not anti-semites!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.