People who have a contrary opinion on the holocaust often find themselves the victim of violence. For simply expressing a non violent, peaceful opinion regarding revisionism or calling for an open debate can lead to assault, arson, loss of employment and even death. And this all happens in democratic countries - www.ihr.org/books/ztn.html
For simply expressing a non violent, peaceful opinion regarding revisionism
Deniers' euphemisms are so hilarious!
What he really means by this is "just claiming that the worst Jewish tragedy of the last five hundred years is really only just a Jewish con, because you know the Jews are so fundamentally and satanically dishonest they're willing to fake the deaths of one third of their own people just to defraud the gentile through their iron Jew grip on academia, the media, and international banking."
reply share
What Zort cannot grasp is that it isn't the whole of those who deny the Holocaust aren't trying to suggest that the whole of the Jewish nation are evil and dishonest. It's those individuals that are lying about their girlfriend throwing them apples over the barb wire fence being in their imagination was real to them. That's not the whole Jewish nation, nor is it the whole of the deniers, just a few that are living off of the dishonesty of a handful of con men.
I for one was devastated when learning about the Holocaust. Then in my early 20s it really sent me off into a depression that people could used gas chambers to kill so many people, and torture and destroy families because of small differences. Then I saw Adolf Hitler: the Greatest Story NEVER Told, and then David Cole's Behind the Gates of Auschwitz that I started to see that there's no proof of extermination, just testimonies that seemed illogical once I got off my high horse of I-100%-Believe-in-the-Holocaust. I saw the distortions and realized that some people are irrational enough to not at least look at what's been found instead of believing in the emotional bias of testimonies that ring untrue.
You'll only believe what you want. And there is no battling that.
Denying an historical event doesn't mean approving it even if it indeed happened...
"offered by Jewish scholar and psychologist Kevin B MacDonald"
Well, other than the fact that he's not Jewish, not a psychologist, and utterly discredited as a scholar, you've described him perfectly.
Yes, this is the same Kevin B MacDonald who was a featured speaker at the now infamous neo-Nazi gathering in Washington DC after the election where they shouted "Heil Trump" and did Hitler salutes. Your kind of guy, apparently.
Ah, hello Jewish person! You guys get the skinny on the big mean people who have opposing interests. All the Jews know KMac. Let me see... name one single thing he has ever said that is inaccurate. One.
Ah, hello Jewish person! You guys get the skinny on the big mean people who have opposing interests. All the Jews know KMac.
I knew about Kevin MacDonald because had the uniquely ugly distinction of being the only person to voluntarily testify on David Irving's behalf in this trial. He'd planned to be in the witness box for days of cross-examination, but he so thoroughly destroyed himself in his initial presentation that Rampton said he had no questions for the guy. Here's Lipstadt, from her book on the trial:
Irving had told him to expect to be on the stand for a few days. In less than thirty minutes it was over. Looking like a boxer who entered the ring for a much-hyped fight only to be knocked out in the first seconds of the first round, the professor rose, descended from the witness box, and, still shaking his head in surprise, took a seat near Irving.
As far as naming one single thing he's been inaccurate on, try his main thesis -- that evolutionary psychology supports his anti-Semitic stereotypes. The entire field has disowned him. That he's now publicly thrown in his lot with white-power types surprises no one.
But Holocaust denial is by definition such a brain-bereft enterprise that even one racist, crap scholar like MacDonald is a prize for you guys, isn't it.
reply share
Something tells me you couldn't be persuaded no matter the evidence. I don't know who you are or what your background is, but I've been in this movement for a few years and if there is one thing I've noticed more than anything, its that humans are not primarily rational; they rationalize (different concept) something based on the value of a belief it has to them unconsciously, so they will defend something to the death no matter what. In the Alt-Right we talk about virtue signalling, so the effect here is that saying something that keeps the struts in place in a social order because it does things like give someone identity, access to friends, access to resources, etc. A dominant psychological force is also cognitive dissonance (which is connected to feelings of anxiety). We aren't immune to it, but I'd bet we are more open to certain truths.
I was one of the biggest supporters of Jews studying history a few years ago. I read these books like Gita Sereny's Into that Darkness, and I too once fought "Nazis" online. But at some point, something changed and I looked into the alternative literature and then with the moral courage it takes to look at things, realized we've been lied to. Its absolutely the story of the century. This Jewish author might agree, read the title ->
See? If Slezkine blurts it out, maybe we're on to something. This is not about "hating" Jews. Sure, there is tons of anger out there about all of this, but I can speak for myself and say that I don't walk around "hating" people. No, some of us can assess these things rationally. *beep* man, I can say things would probably be better if people could get along, but what the hell am I supposed to do with all of evidence I've found? Act like a herd animal and ignore it, going back to living in the Matrix, a world of nightclubs (I'm too old for that anyway), football games, and consumerism? Nah, if my civilization is at stake, I'd rather fight to preserve it.
Something tells me you couldn't be persuaded no matter the evidence.
Funny indeed coming from someone defending Holocaust denial.
The good news is that outside the meeting of the hundred or so alt-Right losers, morons, wibblers, and patheticos at the Reagan building that day were hundreds and hundreds of true Americans protesting and making it clear that we as a nation recognize that neo-Nazis and tighty-whities like you are still pukes even when they put on ties and couch their racism behind foil-festooned pseudoscience and euphemisms like "alt-Right."
Skimmed the rest; just the usual moronic boilerplate. Waiting for your next set of alt-Right cue cards, I'm guessing, so you just reused the usual ones.
Nah, if my civilization is at stake, I'd rather fight to preserve it.
Civilization has way more to lose from neo-Fascists like you than from Thuh Joooos. Now shuffle back to your Klan meetings.
reply share
You're obviously Jewish. You don't even act like a human being, your mind is a storm of hatred stemming from ethnocentrism. You literally cannot have dialogue without anger and probably visions of violence against gentiles. There is no point in having a further discussion.
You're obviously Jewish. You don't even act like a human being, your mind is a storm of hatred stemming from ethnocentrism.
Hilarious.
It's not that you're a gentile that makes you a moron promoting neo-Nazi propaganda. It's that you're a moron promoting neo-Nazi propaganda. You many not even know it.
reply share
Are you honestly delusional enough to believe that these discussions make you look good?
I'm imaging you as one of those fat ugly black women dressed in skin-tight clothing, strutting around insisting that they're God's gift to man. There's really no significant difference between their behavior and yours.