Deny the Holocaust- crime or no crime

[welsh]

Nazis, Klansmen and other forms of anti-semites need not apply here.
(Hey the name of the board is No Mutants Allowed)

Ok, while we are all thinking the Muslims are a bunch of fucking wackos for going nuts over a couple of cartoons... what about the right of people to deny the Holocaust.

If we are to protect one form of free speech, should we not allow for the protection of another?

Free speech

Denying the holocaust

Feb 23rd 2006
From The Economist print edition

It is loathsome, but should not be a crime

FABRICATING history is an act of intellectual vandalism that poisons modern understanding of past misdeeds and heroism alike. But should it be a crime? In civilised countries, the truth is best policed by scholars, not criminal prosecutors. Historians who distort, inflate and invent find their credibility shredded by their peers, not the police. But David Irving, an author of books about the second world war, is now starting a three-year prison sentence in Austria (see article) for remarks he made in 1989 doubting the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz. That has won him praise in Iran, where the president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, recently described the holocaust as a “myth”.

ANd that's the question- It is a crime to say something that was recorded in history did not happen? Is this best policed by intellectuals or prosecutors?

Holocaust denial is ridiculous, but it is too common, and too damaging, to be a joke. It commonly makes four claims: that the numbers of Jews killed were wildly inflated; that any persecution was matched or exceeded by allied war crimes against Germans; that Hitler was ignorant of, or even opposed to, the killing of Jews; and that accounts of systematic extermination were invented to benefit Israel.

After all, aren't the Nazis and the Klan their own worst enemies just by speaking their ideas?
For example-
Nazi- "The Holocaust didn't happen"
The rest of the world- "And you're an idiot."

And let's consider these four claims-
Is there no political motive to use the Holocaust to justify the existence of Israel?
How much do we know about allied war crimes against Germany?
How accurate are the numbers of people lost in the Holocaust?

Don't get me wrong. I think this holocaust denial is just stupid. But I recall the Holocaust museum in Washington DC where there was a statement justifying the state of Israel based on the Holocaust.
I am also concerned that there is little known about allied war crimes- after all justice should be blind, not colored by a victor's flag.
And how many people were killed? Do even the Russians know for sure given how terrible the war was on the Eastern Front? Without numbers how can there be accountability?

Holocaust deniers such as Mr Irving are expert at taking anomalies and contradictions in the historical record and erecting such pyramids of loathsome nonsense upon them. From the gaps (all explicable) in the surviving evidence about Auschwitz-Birkenau they infer that the gas chambers there were a propaganda invention. And not only that: other details of the Holocaust are invented too. In fact it didn't really happen: Hitler liked Jews. Or (as the Palestinian movement Hamas argues) Jews caused the war. Holocaust denial (or “revisionism” as its pseudo-scholarly advocates term it) uses quibbles, semantics and phoney logic to befuddle the gullible about the mass murder of millions of innocents.

Ok, so these guys are assholes.
But should be the impeachment of history be a crime?

Let me illustrate. I am currently doing a bit of research on the numbers of blacks killed by whites in the South during the Reconstruction up into World War 2. The period after that is pretty well known. But a lot of folks cringe when they think of the word terrorism as being applied to practices of whites to terrorize blacks out of the enfranchisement of rights.

But what if it was a crime to do such an investigation? Crime is defined by law, and law is written to serve social interests- to define what is moral and immoral and to adjudicate the disposition of power within a society. If there law that makes some speech legal and other illegal, than who is this law servicing?

To the fair-minded, such claims are preposterous. But among the prejudiced, silly and ignorant they flourish, especially on the internet. They gain a touch of intellectual legitimacy from a handful of cranky academics—though of these only Mr Irving has any claim to be a historian. His early works, particularly on military matters, were acclaimed. Nobody doubts his knowledge of German archives, or his skill in deciphering the crabbed handwriting of senior Nazis.

But if this guy is to be impeached, should not be done by other scholars who look at what he says and says, "hey you're out of fucking mind?"

But I am not sure. For instance a lot of the gun nuts point to Lott's work on defensive use of handguns to justify looser hand gun restrictions. Never mind that this methods are fucked up, that he's supported by the gunlobby and other forms impeachment of Lott's crediability. In the end a lot of NRA fanatics (and not all NRA members are fanatical) are going to point to Lott and say- "This guys proves it!"

If you get the right number of people with an agenda elected into office, than that agenda could become the official status quo. Make contrary statements to that status quo a crime, and you've got a problem.

But there are plenty of doubts about his integrity. At a libel action in London in 2000, in which he had every chance to make his best case, the judge concluded that he was “anti-Semitic and racist”, saying he had “persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence” and “portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light.”

Ok, so maybe he is a lier and a cocksucker. But should the judge be the one to say it.

It is hard to see what the Austrian court's sentence can add to that. Keeping Mr Irving in jail at most may stop him going to a conference that Mr Ahmadinejad is convening to “rewrite and revise” the history of the holocaust. But against that small plus are two big minuses. One is that the sentence makes Mr Irving look a martyr. The other is that it makes the West look hypocritical: all too willing to bruise Muslim feelings, while protecting Jewish ones by law.

Yes, I have a few muslim friends who have been saying this. How can the Europeans protect the Danish cartoons, yet prosecute the anti-semites. Isn't speech supposedly free?

Laws against holocaust denial (which 14 countries have) were never a good idea. The best defence against neo-Nazis is reason and ridicule, not the criminal law. But at a time when the western world is battling to defend free speech against religious zealotry, they look particularly indefensible. It is punishment enough for Mr Irving that he has lost his professional credibility. He should not lose his liberty too.

Ok so what are your thoughts-

 

[Lukus]

I agree that denying the holocaust is stupid, but making 'being stupid' a crime is even more so preposterous. (Do you have any idea how many society would have to lock up for being unintelligent assholes?)

I do think however, that teaching children that the holocaust didn't happen in nazi schools should be forbidden - much like I believe that teaching children that ID theory owns evolution in confessional schools should be outlawed. Adults should be allowed to have and express their views, but not indoctrinate the young. Which, of course, is quite problematic since there is no present parent that doesn't influence the child, but there should be limits - IMO, hitler jugend and confessional schools are beyond the limit of what should be allowed. The government should be responsible for giving the young an as objective as humanly possible account of reality in school, and then let them join the LSD church or the nazi party when they are of age. This I believe since I think the childrens right to freedom of (and from) opinion and religion is more important than the right of parents to do what they please with their offspring, but I guess that's another topic.

Bottom line in the topic at hand is that it would be terribly inconsequent to protect freedom of expression in humor, but not serious matters, considering the muhammad cartoons. Lack of taste, or intelligence, shouldn't be a crime in itself.

 

[Slaughter]

Making the "denial of holocaust" a crime is hypocrisy.

 

[Roshambo]

Denying the Holocaust IS a crime.

Slander and/or libel that abets murder, the charge depending upon how it is delivered and to what degree, is still a crime.

 

[Lazarus Plus]

Denying the Holocaust IS a crime.

Slander and/or libel that abets murder, the charge depending upon how it is delivered and to what degree, is still a crime.

There's no statute of limitations on murder, but this is not murder. How long can we punish someone for disagreeing, either maliciously or through ignorance?

 

[keyser Soeze]

I wounder how many major happenings in history that have been rewritten or not written at all.

"History Is Written By The Winners".

And in this case the evidence that the holocaust was is so over whelming that denying it doesn't really make mutch of an impact.

What if someone should deny that the US used an atomicbomb during WW2, should that be a crime also?

I agree with Luke in that indoctrination is something that you have to think about in a matter like this.

 

[Lord 342]

Ah, this is just like how an abusive father raises an abusive kid. "Poisonous Pedagogy" is the 64-US$ word. I laugh. No crime to think or express your thoughts unless in doing so you somehow create the potential for immediate, serious harm (Yelling "Fire" in a crowded theatre, etc), which this does not.

 

[SuAside]

the thing is, most negationists promote hatred and/or violence at the same time as spreading their idea about the truth. their goal isn't to challenge & investigate history and to find the 'real' truth, they just use it as propaganda and to shock their enemies.

we have such a law in belgium & i never thought it was unfair. upon thinking about it further it seems to be a simple tool to keep extremists in check, preventing them to spread certain types of propaganda. granted, the way in which this is done might be a bit misguided.

the means itself might not be entirely beyond reproach, but the end is certainly valid in my eyes.

 

[alec]

No.
Negationism should not be considered a crime.
That said: I don't even think the Holocaust should be considered a crime. It was an act of war and all should be fair in (love and) war.

 

[SuAside]

surely, there is a difference between war & genocide...

 

[Montez]

That said: I don't even think the Holocaust should be considered a crime. It was an act of war and all should be fair in (love and) war.

How could it be considered an act of war, except in the broadest modern interpretation of the word? It was a completely one-sided aggression against a group of people who shared the same nationality as the aggressors.

 

[Megalomaniac]

What proof do we have that the holocaust did take place? Do we have any proof that 6 million Jews were gassed? A few hundred thousand could have died from disease and infections (such as typhoid). It is only logical that dead people were cremated to avoid epidemics. If the holocaust did take place, then why is Israel not located in Germany? Most of the Jewish families living in Israel only immigrated there, and therefore, how can they have the right someone else's country? Israelis and Palestines lived in peace before 1948. Israel claim that they have the right to Palestine by God's will. According to the Torah, the "Promised Land" for Jews extend from the Nile to the Euphrates.

Where do Iran come in? USA and Israel fear Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Israel already have nuclear weapons! India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, too. Iran and Venezuela are being supported by Russia. Hundreds of Russian engineers are located in Teheran, perfecting Iran's weapons systems. Hundreds of billions DEM (Deutsche Mark) have been paid out to Israel by Germany. There is a Holocaust industry, earning billions of dollars. The Simon Wiesenthal Center is a very well known Jewish organization, and also one of the most corrupt. Simon Wiesenthal claimed to bring war criminals to justice, but what about all the Jewish war criminals he supported?

Palestines and true Israelis are the ones who have the right to live in Israel. Jews are paid by various Jewish foundations to move to Israel, which explains why there are so many conflicts with settlers. Historical revisionism is very dangerous. But what about 50 years from now, will the history books tell us that palestines used to live in Israel? Perhaps a slightly exaggerated comparison. but then again, how far from the truth is it? No Israelis will be left alive to tell us about life in Jerusalem before 1948.

If denying the holocaust should be a crime? Let me put it this way, should free speech be a crime? But then again, I suppose free speech only applies to some things. I'm sure everything Joseph Goebbels said was believed to be true at the time in Germany. The power is held by those who own and control the media.

 

[Sander]

What proof do we have that the holocaust did take place? Do we have any proof that 6 million Jews were gassed? A few hundred thousand could have died from disease and infections (such as typhoid). It is only logical that dead people were cremated to avoid epidemics.

Nazi reports, accounts from survivors of the camps (including non-Jews), accounts from nazi-officials, the existance of such death camps and statistics.
Really, denying the holocaust is, quite simply, idiotic.

If the holocaust did take place, then why is Israel not located in Germany?

Eh? What? This really doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Most of the Jewish families living in Israel only immigrated there, and therefore, how can they have the right someone else's country? Israelis and Palestines lived in peace before 1948. Israel claim that they have the right to Palestine by God's will. According to the Torah, the "Promised Land" for Jews extend from the Nile to the Euphrates.

Where do Iran come in? USA and Israel fear Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Israel already have nuclear weapons! India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, too. Iran and Venezuela are being supported by Russia. Hundreds of Russian engineers are located in Teheran, perfecting Iran's weapons systems. Hundreds of billions DEM (Deutsche Mark) have been paid out to Israel by Germany. There is a Holocaust industry, earning billions of dollars. The Simon Wiesenthal Center is a very well known Jewish organization, and also one of the most corrupt. Simon Wiesenthal claimed to bring war criminals to justice, but what about all the Jewish war criminals he supported?

Palestines and true Israelis are the ones who have the right to live in Israel. Jews are paid by various Jewish foundations to move to Israel, which explains why there are so many conflicts with settlers. Historical revisionism is very dangerous. But what about 50 years from now, will the history books tell us that palestines used to live in Israel? Perhaps a slightly exaggerated comparison. but then again, how far from the truth is it? No Israelis will be left alive to tell us about life in Jerusalem before 1948.

...
What does this have to do with the subject at hand? 'Israel is teh evil!' isn't relevant at all.

 

[Montez]

Nazi reports, accounts from survivors of the camps (including non-Jews), accounts from nazi-officials, the existance of such death camps and statistics.

As well as video footage and accounts from allied soldiers. Really, there's absolutely no doubt that it happened, so if denying it is going to be a crime then I think that people who commit that crime shouldn't be sent to jail, they should be forced to wear a giant sandwich-board sign which reads "I am an utter idiot who can not understand concepts like "evidence" and "witnesses" and I completely lack the ability to comprehend the world around me", or something to that effect, for the duration of the sentence. It would probably be much more effective than having them in a prison where they can continue to spread their ideas an stew in ignorance.

 

[Wooz]

What proof do we have that the holocaust did take place?

Take a little trip and visit our beautiful country.

I had a neighbour that was imprisoned in Auschwitz for a year. He didn't get exterminated right away, because he was a doctor, and the nazis were in need of trained personnel amongst prisoners. He regularly woke up screaming in the middle of the night, at the memory of what he saw at that time.

Also. Whereas I agree that some Jewish organizations have abused the holocaust's name to justify questionable actions solely by its existance, it's moronic to dismiss the fact that it took place. It's all easy to babble about shit you don't have a clue about when you live thousands of kilometers away from where it happened.

Following the same "logic", I could deny the Tutsi genocide saying human aid organizations in Africa are corrupt "and that they all probably died from malaria or something and, uuh the media, yeah, were paid and stuff".

Imbecile. Get a clue or put a plug on your mental diahrrea orifice

I don't even think the Holocaust should be considered a crime. It was an act of war and all should be fair in (love and) war.

War is one thing, the constant, systematic extermination of undesired individuals by the millions is another thing.

 

[alec]

surely, there is a difference between war & genocide...

Duh: they're two different words.

No, seriously: I've always seen the Holocaust as an act of war, as a part of a bigger strategy, as a tactical manoeuvre, whatever.

I know I'm probably wrong about this, because my knowledge of history sucks, but didn't the Nazis kinda sorta want to cleanse the human race? And didn't they think that the Aryan race was like the summum, that they were descendants of the gods? I'm sure I've read that shit somewhere, maybe it was in Hitler's Mein Kampf. And they wanted more space, so they could breed more Aryans so that one day the whole world would be inhabited and covered by Aryans, which are the best race, no doubt about that, and in Hitler's perfect world there wouldn't be anymore niggers and jews and muslims and shit. Which is a swell idea if you think about it.
Anyway: I've always interpreted that as Hitler's main goal and thus, the second world war was nothing less than a thorough means to achieve that goal: he wanted a pure human race, so he killed anyone who wasn't pure, like jews and gypsies and faggots and stuff, and he needed more space, so he conquered some countries.
Big deal.

WWII according to alec
Goal: go Aryan on everyone's arse.
Means: war, motherfucker!
Tactics: Blitzkrieg in your face, Holocaust in your nuts and so on.

So where's the crime? The man had big friggin' ideals and he wanted to achieve something, which is to his credit, goddamnit, he did more in his short, stressful life than any of you will ever achieve, the man wrote history, and not just footnotes, mind you, but complete libraries. When everyone will have forgotten whom George W. Bush or Clinton or Poetin is, everyone will still now whom Hitler was. Hitler is bigger than history. Hitler is bigger than God.
Which immediately shows us the real reason why everyone is always complaining about the guy: Holocaust this, Holocaust that, jews here, jews there, pffft... I'll tell you what's bothering so many people: they are jealous of the man. That's right. They are jealous of Hitler, because although he is dead, he is still more alive than they are. And they know that they can live like Jesus and do good to everyone and everything, when they die, they'll be forgotten, but no one will have forgotten Hitler.

<rant>



I'm really an okay guy, you know. I don't even care for Nazis and Hitler and shit. Although I do have to admit that their uniforms were the most stylish uniforms any army has ever had ever. Those duders had style, man. They had taste. They had mojo. It's a shame those yanks interfered with their plans, or else we would already be living on the moon and shit. Them Nazis were so friggin' smart and stuff, you know. And German women are hot sluts too, man, no kidding. I once had sex with a German girl whilst on holiday in Berlin and that bitch showed me all the corners of her student flat, trust me. And there were more than four corners, oh yes.



Ah well...

 

[Jebus]

No, seriously: I've always seen the Holocaust as an act of war, as a part of a bigger strategy, as a tactical manoeuvre, whatever.

I know I'm probably wrong about this, because my knowledge of history sucks, but didn't the Nazis kinda sorta want to cleanse the human race? And didn't they think that the Aryan race was like the summum, that they were descendants of the gods? I'm sure I've read that shit somewhere, maybe it was in Hitler's Mein Kampf. And they wanted more space, so they could breed more Aryans so that one day the whole world would be inhabited and covered by Aryans, which are the best race, no doubt about that, and in Hitler's perfect world there wouldn't be anymore niggers and jews and muslims and shit. Which is a swell idea if you think about it.
Anyway: I've always interpreted that as Hitler's main goal and thus, the second world war was nothing less than a thorough means to achieve that goal: he wanted a pure human race, so he killed anyone who wasn't pure, like jews and gypsies and faggots and stuff, and he needed more space, so he conquered some countries.
Big deal.

How could the holocaust possibly be an act of war?

war
1. A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties.
2. The period of such conflict.
3. The techniques and procedures of war; military science.

The Jews in Germany and all the occupied countries were no nations, states or organised parties. They were private citizens, and mostly played absolutely no part in the war effort. Therefore, the holocaust (or any other wartime genocide) is NOT an act of war, yet a crime committed with the means of the warmachine. A WARCRIME.

So where's the crime? The man had big friggin' ideals and he wanted to achieve something, which is to his credit, goddamnit, he did more in his short, stressful life than any of you will ever achieve, the man wrote history, and not just footnotes, mind you, but complete libraries. When everyone will have forgotten whom George W. Bush or Clinton or Poetin is, everyone will still now whom Hitler was. Hitler is bigger than history. Hitler is bigger than God.

Which immediately shows us the real reason why everyone is always complaining about the guy: Holocaust this, Holocaust that, jews here, jews there, pffft... I'll tell you what's bothering so many people: they are jealous of the man. That's right. They are jealous of Hitler, because although he is dead, he is still more alive than they are. And they know that they can live like Jesus and do good to everyone and everything, when they die, they'll be forgotten, but no one will have forgotten Hitler.

<rant>

Historical legacy comes in many forms, and I don't think anybody would ever want to be remembered the way Hitler is.

It's a shame those yanks interfered with their plans, or else we would already be living on the moon and shit. Them Nazis were so friggin' smart and stuff, you know. And German women are hot sluts too, man, no kidding. I once had sex with a German girl whilst on holiday in Berlin and that bitch showed me all the corners of her student flat, trust me. And there were more than four corners, oh yes.



Ah well...

You overestimate the Nazi's. There was a brilliant generation of German scientists in the interbellum, yes, but that is hardly thanks to Nazi ideology. Nazis themselves were, obviously, usually of a lesser intellectual level. The whole lebensraum thing is a pretty obvious notion of that: the belief that any state will be more powerful when it has more agrarian land was already pretty dated by the time Hitler penned it down.

Secondly, the Nazi system was hardly tolerant of creativity or originality. A nazi europe would've gone the same way as the Soviet Union: once the initial generation dies out, an indoctrinational and traditionalist educational system would've delivered far lesser minds than the previous generation.

Thirdly, most of the brilliant minds of WWII were not, or hardly, nazis. Just think of all the great scientist that fled Germany, or military leaders like von Manstein or Guderian, that were disposed of by Hitler because they didn't follow his ideology.

Learn to keep things apart.

 

[alec]

Learn to keep things apart.

Oh yeah? Well, you're gay!

 

[welsh]

Megalomaniac- I knew that this would draw dumbasses but I didn't think it would do so as quickly as it did. Go away.

Alec- sometimes your efforts at humor are lost to others.

Genocide and Act of war-
Well Genocide is an international crime.
At the end of World War 2 there were three crimes of international law that were used against the Nazis-
(1) crimes against peace- or thou shalt not start war.
(2) War crimes- or when thou has war, thou shalt play nicely
(3) crimes against humanity- if thou ist a sick motherfucker to human beings, thou shall certainly hang before roasting in the pits of hell.

I think this is was a wise move in splitting up types of crimes.
Piracy- for example, is neither a crime against peace nor a war crime- as pirates (much like terrorists) are neither states nor state representatives in uniform. But it is a crime against humanity because you are not supposed to put a crew to the sword as you rob the vessel of its treasure.

As for whether "saying the holocaust didn't happen" should be a crime or not-
I have been doing a bit of reading on the violence against blacks by whites after the Civil War. A lot of this was perpetuated by myths of blacks as sexual predators, rapists, etc. But the lynching of blacks was often almost a surreal ceremony in which the black person was sacrificed to sustain the social status quo. Often these murders were perpetuated or justified on mythos of black sexual predation or white supremacy.

But those are just ideas, right? Thing is that if you spread a lie around enough, and if no one retorts and says "that's bullshit" than the lie becomes truth.

That's true today as back then. You see this in politics all the time.

Ideas, themselves, have power and are subject to abuse. Small groups with vile ideas can convince a lot of folks simply because there are not enough people to respond.

 

[Jebus]

Oh yeah? Well, you're gay!

No, I'm not.

Once again: learn to keep things apart. The reason I turned down your mother was because she's fat and ugly, not because I'm gay.