Is there any legitimate case for Holocaust denialism...

For example the claim that the death estimates are inconsistent with the president and post population estimates. Or that there was no evidence of poison gas being pushed into the showers. Or that records of the more brutal camps are applied to other, less brutal camps to come up with an estimate much higher than likely.

Once again, stuff I've heard, not stuff I believe. I never sourced the claims.

I don't really know much about his claims, but I'd reckon that David Irving's objections to what he calls the "Holocaust Legend" would be the most credible source for denial about certain claims about the Holocaust. Broadly speaking he claims that not as many died in the Holocaust as is often said. And that, logistically speaking, it is unlikely that the Nazis were able to kill so many. He's been to prison for his criticism for the currently accepted account of the Holocaust.

I don't really know how much of what he says is true. He's obviously a gifted historian. And I do respect his zeal.

>t really know much about his claims, but I'd reckon that David Irving's objections to what he calls the "Holocaust Legend" would be the most credible source for denial about certain claims about the Holocaust.

If it weren't for the fact that when he was called out on his stuff, he sued another historian for libel in the UK, and lost. And the UK's libel laws are ridiculously stringent compared to pretty much anywhere else in the world.

>And that, logistically speaking, it is unlikely that the Nazis were able to kill so many.

Done mostly by ignoring all competing documentation, like the June 1943 Bauleitung (sp?) analysis of the cremation capacity at Auschwitz.

>He's obviously a gifted historian.

He's really not. Go look up The Destruction of Dresden, the book that put him on the map as a historian. It's pure, unadulterated bullshit. The city's own government put the causalties at around 25,000, but Irving claims, on the basis of a man who held a position he just made up, that they were at least 10 times that. Nowhere does he explain how Dresden would have had a causalty rate roughly 4 times that of Hamburg's, despite Hamburg being a larger, denser city, bombed with greater tonnage of bombs, for longer, and in better weather, which logically should lead it to the conclusion that it would have a higher death toll.

The man is a decent researcher, but he's a terrible historian.

Si tu parle en Francais, oui...sinon mange un char de marde..

youtu.be/ogn88Zbbdxc

It depends on what you mean by "denialism"; completely denying that anything happened is demonstratably false but on the other hand there are a number of points to be made for the case that the mortality figures have been dramatically inflated and a number of atrocities overblown if not outright fabricated.

IMO the whole thing is probably overblown by an order of magnitude if you're not including typhus and starvation victims (you know, like most of the rest of German civilian casualties) and any sympathy I might have had towards the Jewish people because of their suffering is long gone because of how they use the holocaust as a get-out-of-jail card and keep milking it even seventy fucking years later while marginalizing other genocides.

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/Leisung_der_Krematorien_in_24_Stunden_lt._Zenrralbauleitung_der_Waffen-SS.jpg/440px-Leisung_der_Krematorien_in_24_Stunden_lt._Zenrralbauleitung_der_Waffen-SS.jpg

And why exactly did they need crematoria capable of handling 4,756 people A DAY well before the starvation set in, and after the typhus vaccinations began? In fact, what possible reason could you possibly need to have enough cremation capacity to incinerate a camp's then-population in a week if you aren't planning mass murder?

>

Based correction, user. Hopefully the constant spinning of Aurelius in his grave has slowed down at least a tiny bit.

Because if the bodies start piling up due to a fever that nobody's treating, they want to be able to clean things up quickly.

Outside of charts composed of misinformation and made on Microsoft paint? No.

Its down right stupid to claim it didn't happen at all, as it is to believe every 'evidence' of it presented is genuine. For example, Auschwitz is pure bizzare historical show for the masses made by morbid zionists, they probably didn't even use the gas chambers in that particular camp. Not saying mass slaughters and genocide didn't happen, but there is pure post-war agenda and propaganda at play, also Stalin killed many more Jews that fled in USSR than its known.

The fact that the only death camp claims come from bolshevik, who also blamed nazis for war crimes they committed at numberg, and the introduction of cremation to hand wave the lack of mass graves. Concretion camps were as bad as gulags and sometimes even worse, but its dishonest to turn slave labor camps aimed at political dissents into global genocide conspiracies

Bolsheviks even ethnically cleansed the crimeran peninsula, this holocaust emphasis is just to hide other people's war crimes when every one in ww2 was a bad guy

Is there any proof that the claims originate from USSR?

No one disputes the actual death camps were only in poland, and allied forces were never allowed access to USSR or puppet states territory. I suppose there isn't any proof they tortured nazi officials into admitting war crimes at nuremberg

quora.com/Did-the-Allied-forces-inspect-the-Nazi-death-camps-located-in-the-Soviet-zone-of-control-such-as-Auschwitz-Treblinka-Belzec-etc-in-1945-and-if-so-where-are-the-detailed-inspection-reports?share=1

What about testimonies by Nazi officials during the post-war trials?

Denialism? No. Revisionism? Absolutely. We know for a fact that an untold number of documents and other pieces of evidence were fabricated by the Allies thanks to the fall of the Soviet Union. We also know that getting the opportunity for private research is both difficult and potentially dangerous to one's own well-being if your research does not reach the official answer (or at least somewhere close). The official historiography is extremely likely to be inaccurate. Denialism is even more inaccurate. If, and this is even more unlikely, a day comes when the existence of a certain nation-state is not predicated on the official historiography and private research can be done without fear of reprimand then we might gain the history as it essentially happened.

There were later testimonies, some by very high officials at the death camps in question, admitting to gassing prisoners and such. Testimonies are the main source of things like the final solution, I was just always skeptical from the lack of government papers and mass graves, and later use in propaganda

so there's actually a crucial difference here where he says that if there are no gods there's basically no reason to live?

I think what leads people to deny the holocaust is the taboo nature of denying the holocaust. Everyone knows that history is written by the victors and that tragedies have consistently been exaggerated throughout history for thousands of years but If you suggest that the Holocaust didn't happen exactly how the official record said It's happened you get hounded. The taboo nature of that questioning just leads people to question it more.

What would the incentive for such a coordinated lie be for the Nazis? They didn't get anything out of it.

>for such a coordinated lie be for the Nazis?
Not him, but it wasn't really coordinated. Much of the testimonies don't link up at all except in non-specifics. Infamously, neither do camp survivor testimonies. The rather hilarious claim of a camp bear at Buchenwald being fed Jews whose carrion would then be fed to eagles comes to mind.

>They didn't get anything out of it
Lesser sentences, spared lives, end of torture, etc. There's always benefit to fessing up to crimes you may or may not have committed.

Veeky Forums History and Humanities
"There aren't even any dates"

>What would the incentive for such a coordinated lie be for the Nazis? They didn't get anything out of it.

Seriously m8?
>Hey Hans, we need a moral justification for abetting Bolshevism and sending off hundreds of thousands of young men to die in a foreign war; you can either agree to memorize this script about how you and your buddies used to play football with the heads of Jewish children and we'll set you up with an apartment in Buenos Aires after putting you in jail for a while or we can torture you until you agree and then get sent to the gallows

>06/01/16(Wed)
>not a date

O's razor says you're using any excuse you can, imaginary in this case, to preserve your point

>evidence shows that much less Jews died in camps and nazi hands than is claimed

thats what he asked for m8. Post it or leave.

>an entire ethnic group faked their own genocide
You better gave some damn good evidence

The only reason to outright deny the holocaust would be that if it didn't happen, it would be impossible to justify the nation of Israel's existence. Therefore, anti-semitic politicians deny it to decrease Israel's legitimacy

Israel has no justification even with the holocaust.

However, the holocaust is used to vilify any and all nationalists through comparison to nazis.

I don't get how anyone could deny the Holocaust outright, when Nazi officials acknowledged it themselves.

You can of course split hairs on the fine details, but usually the only reason someone denies the Holocaust is because they have some kind of irrational grudge against Jews.

>UN partition of land the British gave them
>Peace treaties in 1948 and 1967
>Israel has no justification

Get out of ahmed, defensive conquest is a thing that exists.

Israel has way more claim to that land than anyone else

Nope. If you're going to deny the Holocaust, you might as well deny the whole war, while you're at it.

>people think the holocaust happened only in camps
>neglecting that when the camps went into use the germans had killed almost every jew east of Berlin

Holocaust denial very rarely refers to people denying the existence of the holocaust, It has to do with the numbers of deaths, causes of deaths and purposes of the camps

Sure. Likewise, I don't deny the war happened, I just doubt the numbers of death, causes of death, and purposes of armed forces.

>Neglecting Hitler had jews in his inner circle

>neglecting the fact that german jews were hard as fuck to get rid of
>I just said east of Berlin
By which I mean the jews in Poland, Belorussia, Ukraine, the baltic states and Russia

>Hitler had two Jewish friends, guize
>all that 'fug da juice :DDDDDDDDD' stuff was just banter, m8

youtube.com/watch?v=7dxsVSzL4HE

I'll just leave this here. Inb4 you fags dismiss it as stormfag ravings before even watching it or TL;DW.
youtube.com/watch?v=7dxsVSzL4HE

It's a very dry and clinical treating of the topic that is completely based off of books written by historians and copies of primary sources from university libraries. It's very long, but doesn't feel that way when watching it. It treats each part of a very large topic in detail, using diagrams, photographs, movie clips, highlights of primary source texts, etc. It doesn't even treat the whole Holocaust; just the subject of a few of the largest camps. No illuminati kikespiracies, no melodrama. No soundtrack, even. Just a critique of the mainstream narrative using academic sources. It's well worth your time.

>hitler wanted all jews dead, no comprises, refused to even deport them or use them as slave labor over total genocide
>Had more jewish friends than you

>the only good jew is a good jew
Paraphrased but from table conversations with Hitler.

>Hitler kills approximately 5.5 million jews
>b-but he had jewish friends
Is that supposed to redeem him?

so he was a hypocrite. and?

I think invading all of Europe as part of a massive bitch fit because France and Britain wouldn't let you have Poland is a good enough justification for fighting the Nazis.

God wouldn't let such a thing happen, thus it couldn't have happened.

He let the Jews languish in Egyptian slavery for several centuries.

No, he didn't. This old book is false, only whats written after Jesus is true.

Jews are annoying cunts

Therefore, they didn't get genocided unless such a point where it becomes beneficial for me to say so

>the foundation of this house doesn't exist but the house still stands perfectly fine

Actual quote:

>Since it is possible that thou mayest depart from life this very moment, regulate every act and thought accordingly.
>But to go away from among men, if there are gods, is not a thing to be afraid of, for the gods will not involve thee in evil; but if indeed they do not exist, or if they have no concern about human affairs, what is it to me to live in a universe devoid of gods or devoid of Providence?
>But Gods there are, undoubtedly, and they regard human affairs; and have put it wholly in our power, that we should not fall into what is truly evil.

>the holocaust was faked to justify war against the nazis
>the fact that they invaded Russia, killed hundreds of thousands of POWs and caused millions of civilians to starve wasn't a good enough excuse
>never mind that most of the evidence for the holocaust was published after the war
>implying that Stalin needed realistic excuses to invade a country. where is the massive international conspiracy to justify the invasion of Poland and Finland?
>implying pretty much all Western historians are fooled by Soviet propaganda, but some random guys making youtube videos get it

stormfags are this retarded.

>the holocaust was faked to justify war against the nazis
The Holocaust was discovered AFTER the wars have started, and after Germany lost them, and after they started trying to surrender.

The germans used slave labor, and tried to remove the evidence by killing it off so they can make reasonable treaties, and it backfired even worse.

You really expected something to come out of it. They are just horrible people that try to erase terrible thing that happened in the past. Fuck them and their "jews are horrible /control the world shit.

See

Wow, looking at this thread, there are some awful people on this board. Sounds as though they genuinely believe it didn't happen. Worst is that fake politeness and understanding.
Good dammit.

Here's an actual thread

archive.is/TZ1Sz

Probably just /pol/ user shitting up the debate and resorting to ad hominems as usual.

>>UN partition of land the British gave them
A partition that Israel constantly ignores? You can't cite a UN ruling as the basis for your countries legitimacy and then turn around and ignore it when you're taking over your neighbours land. How in the hell do Israel have a right to build settlements in the west bank? They didn't get that in the partition plan.

Most importantly, it doesn't matter if DA HOLOCAUST happened or not.

Proven facts:
>Property of homosexuals, cripples, Jews, retards was seized and they were taken to camps.
>Prisoners of war also went to such camps as the war went on.
>When the war went to shit and the economy struggled, the people in camps were used for slave labor.
>As resources were tight, and these people were undesirable anyways, the conditions became worse and people started dying often in these camps.
>As the war was lost, the German command wanted to erase evidence that slave labor was used, to save face and be more presentable on the negotiation table.
>One solution applied was to kill all the undesirables that remained alive.

It doesn't matter of 60 thousand or 60 million people died.
Slave labor, and execution, based on sexuality, ethnicity, mental illness, was performed.
This is enough to justify the trials and the current German culture of apologizing for everything.
The numbers are probably exaggerated, and probably nobody was making lamps out of human skin, but this isn't relevant. Weather it was inhuman monstrosity, or German practicality and pragmatism taken to its extreme edge, shit went down, and they were punished for it.

The truth always matters, user.

You do agree, don't you? This is a history board, right?

The truth matters for its own sake.
This truth won't change all the things /pol/ regulars would want changed, such as allowing nazi parties, studying Hitler in school and having monuments to him, removing the negative connotations from the WWII german regime, etc.

If we make nazi Germany only 500% evil, instead of 600% evil, I don't think this will alter our reality much.

This much is true, as regards the fate of Germany after WWII and the reputation of National Socialism.

It would certainly affect the reputation of the Allies and International Jewry if they were found to be big fat liars, though. Curious, how questioning the mainstream narrative results in jail time or social suicide.

>Boo-Hoo-Hoo /pol/ is invading us
>muh serious intellectual debate free of icky stuff

How about getting your head out of your ass? I you disagree with fact or statement how presenting your case and maybe you might actually make a difference or even someone? Otherwise, get lost.

>Curious, how questioning the mainstream narrative results in jail time or social suicide.
Same as having consensual sex with a 15 year old girl, even if she has the body of a fertility goddess at that age.
Or abortion, or homosexuality in certain countries. Worshiping the wrong god in almost all.
If you want to go on a moral crusade, there are better causes available. Ones where you will be defending "the good guys", in addition to fighting the hypocrites and liars.

>Curious, how questioning the mainstream narrative results in jail time or social suicide.
Does it? The last seventy years have been full of loads of historians questioning the narrative. None of them were jailed or ostracized. In fact, the intention-structure debate of the Holocaust has been one of the most revised parts of historical research in the last half a century. I think you are being slightly disingenuous.

>the current German culture of apologizing for everything.
I was actually with you until this point.

This is the same fallacy as original sin, you absolutely do not inherit sin from your ancestors, even if you believe in some sort of partial reincarnation everything is forgiven after death.

No, the Germans should not apologise. They should not be made to feel bad. Actions should not be taken to perform even vaguely similar or any acts of any perceived relevance again them, two wrongs don't make a right.

You're a sick person for even posting that as a side note.

You mustn't forget the sins of your father, Fritz. Least we see you repeating them.

Can't blame us too, seeing how one generation did repeat the sins of the next, and we had two back to back total wars in Europe, practically taking away world leadership from the powers in the region.

>If you want to go on a moral crusade, there are better causes available

Perhaps. But consider that maybe a real moral crusader pursues the truth even if it happens to make evil men look slightly less evil than previously supposed.

>None of them were jailed or ostracized
>None
>I'm the one being slightly disingenuous

You are correct that many historians have questioned the narrative, but it's always within a certain Overton window. I know I probably sound like Chomsky here, but it's true.

His dresden claims are particularly ludicrous when you consider the fact that Tokyo was more or less totally flattened and that still only produced 100000 victims

I'm actually Australian and my last German ancestor left Germany in some time around the early 1800s.

Are you actually that ignorant on the causes of WW2? Veeky Forums is less historically informed than /pol/ of this I'm sure.

>the current German culture of apologizing for everything.

Had me until here. No one should apologize for something committed by other people.

>Veeky Forums is less historically informed than /pol/ of this I'm sure

Sensible chuckle.

Except for the Dachau chamber existing as well, just as gassing trucks inside of Germany, and a certain shooting range dressed up as a measuring unit for executing unsuspecting prisoners in Buchenwald.

Yeah, it was never finished, but implies that the other chambers were true

>do untold damage
>destroy cultures
>destroy cities
>push back europe for decades
lmao let's just forgive them after 10 years

Absolute denialism? No.

Argument for inflated numbers? Yes.

No one is seriously saying that anyone was gassed at Dachau anymore. They built "gas chambers" after the war for exhibiton purposes and they admit it.

T. been to Dachau

>As the war was lost, the German command wanted to erase evidence that slave labor was used, to save face and be more presentable on the negotiation table.

How exactly is having to deal with millions of bodies an efficient way of covering things up?

>the amount of stupid in this thread

More efficient than having to deal with millions (number I never mentioned by the way) alive people who will talk and be witnesses in court.

Yeah and who the fuck are you gonna blame today? The handful of people who were voting age adults when Hitler got into power?

Let it go. Hardly anyone alive today is responsible and even if they are, they're senile by now.

OK, then why weren't they all killed? There is plenty of documented evidence of people being rounded up and shot by the Germans. Why not just shoot them all? Why gas chambers?

>OK, then why weren't they all killed?

Like you said, its not an easy job. Huge project, coming at a time of collapse, and a time when people were rethinking their loyalty.
Incompetence, disobedience, chaos of war, so on.

>OK, then why weren't they all killed?
Why are there still Tutsis?
Why are there still Armenians?

lack of education or trying to dramatize it even further

in a way holocaust makes sense
a very gruesome sense, it was organized robbery and murder hiding behind some pseudo science

i wish this book was translated so it would be accesible easily for ppl to see

>They built "gas chambers" after the war for exhibiton purposes and they admit it.

No. They finished an already begun gas chamber for exhibition purposes.

Which means it was already bedgan to be build under the nazis, you dumbfuck. They just didn't manage to finish the construction process in time.

Why start to build something you do not plan to use?

>Is there any legitimate case for Holocaust denialism?

No, not really. The denialists like to sound impassive about the numbers from one side of their mouth, but out of the other side it's always, "JOOOOOS"

Is there any legitimate case for not denialing holocaust?

It's become /leftypol/.

>people who call my bullshit out are lefties!

Education. Looks like you need some, Mr. Denialing.

>The American public
>Giving a shit about any of that

Pick one, and only one.