One proof... just one proof
One proof... just one proof
You often hear "revisionists" demand to deliver "just one proof" for the factuality of the Shoah. But after decades of research done by historians, several court trials and numerous heavily referenced books written on this topic the situation is actually this:
"Revisionists" often claim, correctly, that the burden of proof is on historians. The proof, of course, has been a matter of public record since late 1945, and is available in libraries around the world. The burden has been met, many, many times over.
What proof exists that the Nazis practiced genocide or deliberately killed six million Jews?
http://www.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar01.html
Meaning: the ball is in the court of those deniers who claim that it is all a "hoax". It's up to them to deliver all the documentary evidence in support of their implicitly claimed conspiracy of (Jewish) forgers, instructors and torturers (see here: http://www.phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/~jamie/the-hoax.shtml). It's up to them to deliver correspondence, memos and reports with a stronger probative force, directly converging on the conclusion that such a conspiracy really exists. Just pointing to perceived "inconsistencies" regarding the Shoah or to a perceived "pattern" regarding the use of the number 6 million or to the existence of hate speech laws is not sufficient as proof and cannot be considered hard evidence at all.
In this manner they often demand to deliver THE one single proof for the factuality of the Shoah. But the situation is actually like this:
In a similar way, there is an assumption by deniers that if they can just find one tiny crack in the Holocaust structure, the entire edifice will come tumbling down. This is a fundamental flaw in their reasoning. The Holocaust is not a single event that a single fact can prove or disprove. The Holocaust was a myriad of events in a myriad of places and relies on myriad pieces of data that converge on one conclusion. Minor errors or inconsistencies here or there cannot disprove the Holocaust, for the simple reason that these lone bits of data never proved it in the first place.
Michael Shermer & Alex Grobman: Denying History – Who says the Holocaust never happened and why do they say it? (p. 33)
This kind of thinking is a fallacy, and probably in not few cases it's a trap deliberately set up. "Revisionists" want you reduce the complexity of the existing evidence to just one single instance, which they then in turn can dismiss as "unreliable", "faked" or simply "unconvincing".
Below are some links pointing to lists of evidence in support of the factuality of the Shoah. The two articles on the blog http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com managed to compile a huge list with a special focus on homicidal gassing with many references to online facsimiles, but even this cannot be seen as a complete list of all evidence, it's in no way comprehensive. It should be clear that not all original German documents can be found online in form of facsimiles, but nevertheless there is quite a lot that actually can be found in this way.
If "revisionists" think this was all faked etc. it would be up to them to deliver the evidence for this claimed conspiracy of forgers, instructors and torturers. People who want to convince scholars and the world in general, people who want to establish an "alternative version" of history need to substantiate their assertions with hard evidence.
"Revisionists" like to tell us that ALL eyewitness testimonies are unreliable, that they are hearsay, even if there are hundreds who confirm each other in their basic message, and even if the perpetrators themselves confirmed this message. They demand hard evidence in the form of documentary proof, physical evidence, forensic investigations etc. When it comes to their own claims, which more or less openly imply a massive conspiracy, they are suddenly willing to accept anything, no matter how weak the probative force may be. They should apply the same "critical skepticism" and "high standards" to their own proof that they demand when it comes to evidence in support of the factuality of the Shoah. Otherwise they would reveal themselves just to be hypocrites who are selectively cherry-picking what suits their belief system, and who outright dismiss any evidence that does not fit in. And that would ultimately show that the driving force behind their actions is not the honest search for the truth as they claim, but simply certain ideologies.
Evidence for the Holocaust (short overview)
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial#Evidence_for_the_Holocaust
Index of published evidence on mass extermination in Auschwitz and Auschwitz-Birkenau
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2012/10/index-of-published-evidence-on.html
Testimonies of prisoners (hearsay) on mass extermination in Auschwitz
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2012/10/testimonies-of-prisoners-hearsay-on_7.html
Testimonials and admissions of Nazis about the plan to exterminate the Jews
http://shamash.org/holocaust/denial/nazi_doc.txt
The Einsatzgruppen reports (Ereignismeldungen / OSR's)
http://www.phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/intro-einsatz/einsatzgruppen-reports.shtml
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/sitreptoc.html
Only SOME of the evidence that I found among the most impressive:
Jean-Claude Pressac: Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers
(includes facsimiles of original German documents)
http://www.phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/pressac/technique-and-operation/
Ibid., chapter: "One proof... one single proof": thirty-nine criminal traces
http://www.phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/pressac/technique-and-operation/pressac0429.shtml
Original audio recording of Himmler's Posen speech, admitting plan to exterminate the Jews
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2a_cmbi3iIg
The Jaeger Report – Recording Mass Murder
http://alley-cat.info/the-jaeger-report-recording-mass-murder/ share