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

[Steely Dan]

I think I gotta agree with Norm Macdonald on this one...there's no way the smokestacks at Auschwitz and Birkenau could cast those kinds of shadows...and wooden doors? C'mon...

In all seriousness I think debating whether or not the holocaust happened is silly simply because of how well documented it is. What interests me more is its legacy and how it's been used politically as a scapegoat for not only Israel's (illegal) creation as a state, but also as a way to perpetrate Israel's war crimes against countries like Lebanon and Palestine.

There's a documentary called Defamation by an Israeli filmmaker where they take Israeli kids to Poland to show them the death camps, and essentially they try to brainwash them into believing that the holocaust, and people's supposed hatred of Jews today is why they have to fight to defend the holy land. It's very fascinating to me to see the reverberations of events in history and they affect policy and politics today.

Also check out Norman Finkelstein's book The Holocaust Industry for more about that if it also interests you.

 

[mr.moon1488]

Are you high or just plain stupid?

Vladimir Putin's a Russian nationalist first and foremost.

Even if he's ethnically Hebrew (which there's no evidence to suggest he is) he's very much a Slavic Russian culturally.

At this point, I can't tell if this is trolling or just /pol/

Lol His mother, Maria Ivanovna Shelomova is an ethnic Jew, and I didn't even comment on his politics, I was just stating a matter of fact. Aside from this, at least when I stopped going on /pol/, 90% of the posters there acted like he was some kind of messiah, so I don't know where you're deriving /pol/ content from me saying something that would be considered negative about him by most of /pol/.

 

[Papa Adolfo's Take'n'Bake]

One attempt at recreating the Great British Bake Off and they never let you hear the end of it, smh.

 

[Unyielding Stupidity]

I'd argue the Holocaust 100% happened, but the issue is the fact that we focus way too much on the concentration camps when assessing it from a modern perspective, which gives those that attempt to deny it ammunition. A couple camps killing and processing millions of people with 1940's tech in a couple years is functionally impossible, BUT a large amount of the deaths considered to be part of the Holocaust were people that were just murdered unceremoniously and dumped in unmarked mass-graves throughout occupied Europe. We have more than enough documentation of these events to prove that the Holocaust happened, but the documentation is naturally biased towards the camps, as there wouldn't be much documentation for some people that were shot by the SS in some village in the middle of nowhere.

 

[Imperial Citizen]

I'd argue the Holocaust 100% happened, but the issue is the fact that we focus way too much on the concentration camps when assessing it from a modern perspective, which gives those that attempt to deny it ammunition. A couple camps killing and processing millions of people with 1940's tech in a couple years is functionally impossible, BUT a large amount of the deaths considered to be part of the Holocaust were people that were just murdered unceremoniously and dumped in unmarked mass-graves throughout occupied Europe. We have more than enough documentation of these events to prove that the Holocaust happened, but the documentation is naturally biased towards the camps, as there wouldn't be much documentation for some people that were shot by the SS in some village in the middle of nowhere.

I don't think there have been that many genocides that had camps specifically designed to just exterminate people, at least before the Holocaust. Take the Armenian genocide or the Trail of Tears; they were being moved from one location to another and the atrocities happened along the way.

If the Nazis just had the Einsatzgruppen murder their way through Eastern Europe, it would have been seen as a dark atrocity of the war. The fact that the Nazis designed camps with the sole purpose of killing people is unnerving. Putting a bullet in every untermensch was too costly. Instead the Nazis decided to gas half of them and keep the rest of them as starving slaves. There is something wrong with the concept of industrialized murder which makes everyone focus on that.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

There are couple of reasons why the Holocaust gets such a weight compared to other genocides:
* The targets - Besides some Jews capitalizing as hell on the event, the targets weren't some backwards group in the middle of nowhere, but a population that existed with other countries for centuries and started assimilating in a lot of fields.
* The perpetrators - We tend to think of western people as enlightened and beyond savagery, especially Germany back then (not that the western countries aren't responsible for some genocides, but like the previous point those cases were on far away places).
* The pointlessness - Besides confiscating Jewish belongings which added some war funds the whole process was pointless and wasted a lot of manpower for what amounts to sheer spite, but it continued regardless.
* The industrial manner of the deaths - Proabably the strongest reason for the visceral reaction. The holocaust was the nightmarish conclusion of industrialization. Taking a group of humans and sequentially rendering them down in the most efficient way possible. Yeah a group of Africans with machetes can get a higher body count but those deaths at least tend to be brutally fast rather than a slow process of losing everything until you're either shot, poisoned or starve to death.

 

[soy_king]

Holocaust happened.

Also the state of Israel was created as a direct result.

Who the fuck gets a free country after getting genocided?

Something doesn't add up.

Just asking questions, man.

Uhhhh.... the Tutsis, Bengalis, Timorese, and Bulgarians got "free countries" after being genocided, and Armenians got one too for a short while. Your point is exceptional.

 

[Lemmingwise]

The industrial manner of the deaths - Proabably the strongest reason for the visceral reaction. The holocaust was the nightmarish conclusion of industrialization. Taking a group of humans and sequentially rendering them down in the most efficient way possible. Yeah a group of Africans with machetes can get a higher body count but those deaths at least tend to be brutally fast

I agree with most of your post, but this part doesn't really make sense. How is the industrial way more efficient if it is far slower and with lower body count?

You know, on second rereading, I agree with about half your post

V Jews had been there for centuries
X jews were assimilated
If they had been assimilated, the difference wouldn't have been noticable. They would intermarry unrestrainedly and after 2-4 generations there's be no jews left, only people with jewish ancestry.

X we think of the west as enlightened and beyond savagery
X we think of germany back then as beyond savagery
It's debatable, but I never stop hearing how savage western colonial powers were. I don't think the west is especially enlightened or savage, personally.

V Pointlessness
V sheer spite
Mostly agree, but there was some mutual spite going on. I went digging in old newspaper articles once out of curiosity. You come across articles of jews calling on other jews to stop serving Germans in restaurants in the UK, things like that. That was prior to kristallnacht or nazi german policies targetting jews (though of course the election may have helped set the stage).

You also come across articles of capitalist jews saying that they are not on board with the general jewish boycott of germany, which shows that there was one.

Then of course I also came across articles explaining what marriages would be allowed in Italy going forward to prevent intermarriage of italians and jews and you just sit there awestruck at a time where you read something like that in the news.

 

[Antipathy]

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

I agree with most of your post, but this part doesn't really make sense. How is the industrial way more efficient if it is far slower and with lower body count?

I meant efficency has having very little go to waste (think of a modern butchery where every part of the cow is being utilized for minimal waste). The body count can be seen as high considering the whole affair was relatively well hidden and done in the middle of a massive war with a completely different group.

You know, on second rereading, I agree with about half your post

V Trump's Chosen People had been there for centuries
X Trump's Chosen People were assimilated
If they had been assimilated, the difference wouldn't have been noticable. They would intermarry unrestrainedly and after 2-4 generations there's be no Trump's Chosen People left, only people with Trump's Chosen ancestry.

Assimilation doesn't mean that a group loses their entire identity and gets absorbed into a big melting pot (something that doesn't happen with any group, religeous or not). But rather that they are relatively spread around the populace without a whole lot of friction.

X we think of the west as enlightened and beyond savagery
X we think of germany back then as beyond savagery
It's debatable, but I never stop hearing how savage western colonial powers were. I don't think the west is especially enlightened or savage, personally.

It's more of something I learned and is pretty dependent on the person. Though I do think it's something that people will think as inconceivable by most western countries, definitely at those times.

V Pointlessness
V sheer spite
Mostly agree, but there was some mutual spite going on. I went digging in old newspaper articles once out of curiosity. You come across articles of Trump's Chosen People calling on other Trump's Chosen People to stop serving Germans in restaurants in the UK, things like that. That was prior to kristallnacht or nazi german policies targetting Trump's Chosen People (though of course the election may have helped set the stage).

You also come across articles of capitalist Trump's Chosen People saying that they are not on board with the general Trump's Chosen boycott of germany, which shows that there was one.

Then of course I also came across articles explaining what marriages would be allowed in Italy going forward to prevent intermarriage of italians and Trump's Chosen People and you just sit there awestruck at a time where you read something like that in the news.

I thought about it when I've posted and came to the conclusion that satisfying some urge of revenge for a minority of people has absolutely no practical reason, defintely not in a war where you risk antagonizing your population. It's not even smart as some scapegoat because killing the scapegoat necessatates creating a new one. And a good chunk of jewish deaths where dirt poor farmers and traders rather than an actual risky group that can threaten your population.

 

[Lemmingwise]

I thought about it when I've posted and came to the conclusion that satisfying some urge of revenge for a minority of people has absolutely no practical reason, defintely not in a war where you risk antagonizing your population. It's not even smart as some scapegoat because killing the scapegoat necessatates creating a new one. And a good chunk of Trump's Chosen deaths where dirt poor farmers and traders rather than an actual risky group that can threaten your population.

I just never bought the reason of them simply being a scapegoat and nothing more. I've read it being described that way on maybe 20 different jewish sites, but I just don't find it very convincing that the ultimate reason was the scapegoating.

Jews were involved with a complete revolution and purge of Russian leadership. They tried the same in Germany and after almost a year long civil war they failed. Now, one might say that it's wrong to hold all jews accountable, and I agree with that, but what it isn't is just finding a scapegoat.

Interpeople conflict (jews vs germans) wasn't a game just played by the germans and the same goes for most of the conflicts between jews and various european peoples. That's why I gave the boycott example, although things like the morgenthau plan are probably better examples.

The reason the scapegoat meme is proliferated is because if you leave out the various bad things that jews have done, and you keep in the various bad things that various european groups have done, you're left asking the question: Why did they do this? It's very demanding and necessary question. Why was one side so bad when the other side was so benign? And since it demands an answer, the "scapegoat" reason is supplied. It's just not a very credible reason. The more sensible conclusion is that they weren't just scapegoats each time when different countries and different cultures expelled them, but that it happened as a response to conflict between the two groups.

I mean this kind of thing happened so frequently in history. Should I believe that somehow these mayans were also looking for a scapegoat?

Assimilation doesn't mean that a group loses their entire identity and gets absorbed into a big melting pot (something that doesn't happen with any group, religeous or not). But rather that they are relatively spread around the populace without a whole lot of friction.

It depends on how you're defining assimilation. You're arguing for the salad bowl rather than the melting pot. I think this is more of semantic discussion, or perhaps what paradigms we use to view identities in society. And yes, there are more than a few examples of melting pots. For example, huegenots that fled from france to the netherlands, or germans and italians in the US (by losing much of their former identity). A people either keeps its identity, or they melt it into another. I don't pass moral judgements on it. For centuries, they kept their identity. Good for them.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

I just never bought the reason of them simply being a scapegoat and nothing more. I've read it being described that way on maybe 20 different Trump's Chosen sites, but I just don't find it very convincing that the ultimate reason was the scapegoating.

Trump's Chosen People were involved with a complete revolution and purge of Russian leadership. They tried the same in Germany and after almost a year long civil war they failed. Now, one might say that it's wrong to hold all Trump's Chosen People accountable, and I agree with that, but what it isn't is just finding a scapegoat.

Interpeople conflict (Trump's Chosen People vs germans) wasn't a game just played by the germans and the same goes for most of the conflicts between Trump's Chosen People and various european peoples. That's why I gave the boycott example, although things like the morgenthau plan are probably better examples.

The reason the scapegoat meme is proliferated is because if you leave out the various bad things that Trump's Chosen People have done, and you keep in the various bad things that various european groups have done, you're left asking the question: Why did they do this? It's very demanding and necessary question. Why was one side so bad when the other side was so benign? And since it demands an answer, the "scapegoat" reason is supplied. It's just not a very credible reason. The more sensible conclusion is that they weren't just scapegoats each time when different countries and different cultures expelled them, but that it happened as a response to conflict between the two groups.

View attachment 1241407
View attachment 1241409

I mean this kind of thing happened so frequently in history. Should I believe that somehow these mayans were also looking for a scapegoat?

If we speak about the Commies then there was a vast amount of regular Christians in any communist group, it wasn't something that can be contributed solely to Jews. Even the argument about the leadership being mostly jewish doesn't hold water considering it was because that population had the most to gain from the utopic lie they were sold. In the end jews were primarily useful idiots in regards to communism who quickly went the way of the useful idiot once the dust settled.

As for history of Jews being evicted or having problems with the local populace: So? Human history is rife with us fucking each other over minute shit, take any group (especially one that is spread out rather than controlling a single location) and you can have a timeline of agressions from both sides. With a list of infamous people who are infamous for doing the same underhanded shit as others but not being in the same group.

It depends on how you're defining assimilation. You're arguing for the salad bowl rather than the melting pot. I think this is more of semantic discussion, or perhaps what paradigms we use to view identities in society. And yes, there are more than a few examples of melting pots. For example, huegenots that fled from france to the netherlands, or germans and italians in the US (by losing much of their former identity). A people either keeps its identity, or they melt it into another. I don't pass moral judgements on it. For centuries, they kept their identity. Good for them.

If anything the idea of melting pot today is pretty hated for removing a lot of cultural heritage of whites in the USA for some generic consumerist garbage.

 

[Rice Is Ready]

The Holocaust was kino but I always preferred the sequel and felt it was underrated.

 

[Lemmingwise]

As for history of Trump's Chosen People being evicted or having problems with the local populace: So? Human history is rife with us fucking each other over minute shit, take any group (especially one that is spread out rather than controlling a single location) and you can have a timeline of agressions from both sides. With a list of infamous people who are infamous for doing the same underhanded shit as others but not being in the same group.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

we speak about the Commies then there was a vast amount of regular Christians in any communist group, it wasn't something that can be contributed solely to Trump's Chosen People. Even the argument about the leadership being mostly Trump's Chosen doesn't hold water considering it was because that population had the most to gain from the utopic lie they were sold. In the end Trump's Chosen People were primarily useful idiots in regards to communism who quickly went the way of the useful idiot once the dust settled

Even if they had the most to gain, the leadership of the november revolution was jewish. Whether they had good motive or not is inconsequential to that fact.
And whether they got pushed or chopped aside doesn't matter either. Kinda like every leader involved in the french revolution. And that was a revolution that didn't even fail. Whether they had good results or not is irrelevant to seeing who were the ringleaders.

 

[RichardMongler]

 

[Vecr]

View attachment 1246637

Math checks out, anyone have any comments?

 

[Claude Speed]

It happened. But people make a great deal out of it. The death of your loved one is a pain for any family, it doesn't depend on how it was done if the person that mattered the most for you is dead. After Holocaust and NAZIS, there were the Communists which ALSO killed Jews and many other. I just love how Politicians today pretend that one of those did not exist and get everyone to the extremes. Situations like these should not be used as a political tactic. They are tragic, not needed events that happened over 75 years ago. We should learn from them,not repeat in a way or another.

 

[Flynt's Missing Pecker]

So when the British cracked the enigma machine, they were able to intercept the daily reports given by the camps. Total number in the camp, people in, people out, number of deaths and cause of death were reported. By far the biggest cause of death Reported was disease but they also mentioned shootings and executions. You know what was never mentioned - gassing.

Seems very strange that you would report total deaths and even executions so meticulously but somehow fail to mention an apparent non-stop conveyor belt of people being fed into gas chambers.

 

[Lemmingwise]

View attachment 1246637

I don't know about the full post of this, but up to and including the einsatzgruppen it is identical to David Irving's Account, supposedly the most pronazi british historian.

Then comes the gasvans as a new invention, except gas vans were invented for the soviets by a russian jew by the name of Isay Berg in 1936 and thus prior to the 2nd world war.

 

[Flynt's Missing Pecker]

Then comes the gasvans as a new invention, except gas vans were invented for the soviets by a russian one of Trump's Chosen People by the name of Isay Berg in 1936 and thus prior to the 2nd world war.

There were 3 concurrent stories the Chosen were running with during WW2. Gas chambers, giant fire pits or electrocution chambers.

The one that stuck was the gas chambers. Unfortunately for people like Elie Wiesel he bet on the pits of fire story. So we have his account of being at Auschwitz and Buchenwald without a mention of gas chambers. Not even one!