Mfw my WW2 history professor SPECIFICALLY CITES Veeky Forums as one of the biggest dens of Holocaust denial among young...

To be fair, we have a fair amount of holocaust denial here from /pol/ leakage. Probably a few other forums that /pol/tards patronize too, but I don't spend much time on places like /r9k/

>he doesn't understand the concept of samefagging

...

...

He said Veeky Forums, not pol.

To be fair to him, /pol/ is probably the most vocal board, and definitely the one that gets the most media attention.

>Why is him being laughed out of the room an unacceptable consequence? Sure, there's one thing about using state power coercively against individuals for speaking, but it's a completely different one to claim that all speech should be exempt from social consequence. What exactly goes against free speech principles for private individuals ridiculing poorly researched and poorly thought out notions?

both are forms of shutting down free speech via some consequence. Now I do see your point but this sort of idea of your can be manipulated and weaponized. It'd done by the left constantly. Yeah, we can't throw you in jail. Just make everyone hate you and you jobless for the rest of your life. The state and its law isn't god and shouldn't be used in an argument as such. Other forms of power and control are just as bad. Just because someone told you that one was bad and the other is not doesn't change anything on the intellectual level.

Now there is a very grey area when it comes to this. Someone spewing non sense should be ignored. But who is to say what is nonsense and whats not? Why should we not laugh at some guying talking about flat earth theory shit. There is a large grey area but when one sides method to shut down debate becomes about laughing the other side off and ostracizing him, it is not longer an argument and anti intellectual.

>free speech is a good thing

*tips*

>Anonymous 03/09/17(Thu)20:30:00
>20:30:00
witnessed

>both are forms of shutting down free speech via some consequence.

If you count that as a form of shutting down free speech via some consequence, than pretty much any damn thing can involve shutting down free speech, and the term becomes so vague its meaningless. When I don't tell my wife how my wargame is going because I know she's not interested in the vissictisudes of a hex and chit thing, is she stifling my free speech, or is that just a normal interaction of two people who don't share all interests and focuses at all times?

>Yeah, we can't throw you in jail. Just make everyone hate you and you jobless for the rest of your life. The state and its law isn't god and shouldn't be used in an argument as such.

Anything can be weaponized, and yes, that includes speech, and the consequences thereof. If you want to stop any person or group of private peoples from infringing on something as nebulous as the social status of another, you'd need to bubble-wrap all social interaction to the point of insanity. Today I tried out a new deli. I wasn't crazy about my sandwich. Theoretically, I can run around to everyone I know and tell them about how that deli is shit and how you shouldn't go there and get shitty sandwiches. Should that be impermissible, even though it's a form of power I exercise? What exactly is bad about that? Maybe I just want to save my friends some dosh or the unpleasant eating experience?

And let's not forget that at least in the current case, where Holocaust denial is involved, you have an enormous body of people who are not in fact disinterested scholars trying to freely investigate and discuss a taboo subject, but an actual political movement trying to push an agenda, and often with members who are perfectly ready to distort the historical record when not outright lying to further it; for the most part, it was never an intellectual argument, it's propaganda and people trying to shut it down.

>If you count that as a form of shutting down free speech via some consequence, than pretty much any damn thing can involve shutting down free speech, and the term becomes so vague its meaningless.

I'm talking about a specific context, not you and your wife having awkward social interactions. Context being if someone were to publish or seriously challenge the notion of 6 million jews getting killed. There would be no argument, just telling the other guy he is crazy. Now evidence clearly leans to one side. What if he were to challenge the number of people killed. Would he be meet with debate or being called an anti semite and having his reputation slandered on the news for years to never recover. Just like capital punishment, its' making an incentive to the opposing side to not participate.

>Anything can be weaponized, and yes, that includes speech, and the consequences thereof. If you want to stop any person or group of private peoples from infringing on something as nebulous as the social status of another, you'd need to bubble-wrap all social interaction to the point of insanity.

you're missing the point. I'm not saying we do should do this. I'm saying this exists and is a form of soft power and many people do it to "win" arguments or debates and should be recognized as anti intellectual. An intelligent person in the context of a debate won't shun the other away from providing an argument and to say otherwise is ridiculous.

A man who denies that the holocaust happened is called a holocaust denier. That's pretty self explanatory, I don't see why it's bad

How expensive was zyklon-b during ww2?

>Context being if someone were to publish or seriously challenge the notion of 6 million jews getting killed. There would be no argument, just telling the other guy he is crazy.

But that is quite simply wrong. You have enormous amounts of scholarly discourse refuting Holocaust denial, and not simply dismissing the deniers as crazy.

For instance, here's this. ia600802.us.archive.org/33/items/BelzecSobiborTreblinka.HolocaustDenialAndOperationReinhard.ACritique/BelzecSobiborTreblinkaHolocaustControversies.pdf

>What if he were to challenge the number of people killed. Would he be meet with debate or being called an anti semite and having his reputation slandered on the news for years to never recover.

Ever hear of a guy named Chris Browning? He challenged some very sacred cows of the Holocaust of his day, not the numbers, but of Hitler's role in how the Final Solution came about, and while he was called an anti-semite in some circles, he also kept his academic reputation intact, in large part because his stuff was well researched and well argued.

> I'm saying this exists and is a form of soft power and many people do it to "win" arguments or debates and should be recognized as anti intellectual.

And I'm saying that the mere ridiculing of an idea is not equal to it being ridiculed as a means of sidestepping debating it. And in the case of something like holocaust denial, most definitely so. It's ridiculed BECAUSE it's impossible to defend on an intellectual basis, not to avoid the necessity.

>An intelligent person in the context of a debate

And how often do holocaust denial canards come up in the context of a formal debate? Especially on Veeky Forums?

This all seems like someone taking pictures out of context, and there's no sources. Kinda suspect if you ask me

Someone needs to tell the media/normies what /pol/ and what Veeky Forums actually are and put the distinction to them too. /pol/ a containment board. It exists to preserve the balance and keep the other innocent boards free of hateful bs. It's not representative of what Veeky Forums is at all - a fucking anime image sharing board in case we all forgot.

This. By coming here, we are all de facto weebs

>/pol/
>Containing anything.

Ishiggity niggity bix nood.

first of all I'm not denying the Holocaust. Its just the example in which I see this type of shunning tactic used a lot. I understand why people do this but most people haven't looked into both sides of the argument and don't deserve to use this tactic.

I can see why someone who has refuted claims his whole life getting fed up with some 4 chan tier claims and just saying stfu. But most of the time its just throwing around the anti-semite card because he somewhat resembled the attitude of being anti semitic. I've seen countless articles and met people who see Trump as anti semitic. He may be some things but this is taking it too far.

I'm probably getting my point across poorly because i'm drunk but I just think people should be careful of this soft power that's used to control ideas and other people.

>Why is him being laughed out of the room an unacceptable consequence? Sure, there's one thing about using state power coercively against individuals for speaking, but it's a completely different one to claim that all speech should be exempt from social consequence.

Iike I said originally there is going to be a grey area depending on what the topic and how detailed it is. Some guy on 4-chan calling everyone a goyim is different than having a debate whether or not the number may be high even if just by a little bit. Blanketing everyone who questions something because some idiots are poisoning the well isn't intellectual and is dangerous. MSM and any propaganda outlet whether it be left or right can use this phenomenon to control and manipulate people. I'm scared of the fact that if an idea is widely accepted, that trying to debate it can land you ostracized as a form of punishment. One could argue and say that if the opponent has clear and cut facts, then he will obviously win, but the real world never is so pretty and clean like that.

>It's not representative of what Veeky Forums is at all - a fucking anime image sharing board in case we all forgot.
Blah blah blah, why the fuck are you talking about what represents Veeky Forums. Fucking Christ, it's an anonymous image board, there is no fucking representation, you don't have to say a bunch of PR bullshit. Plus /pol/ is THE largest board on Veeky Forums, that's not what I would call a containment board, unless everyone who wants to discuss politics is bad to you? A true containment board is /mlp/ because NO ONE wants to see ponyshit on their board.
To summarize, go back to Plebbit

pretty sure all the hitler worship and holocaust denial here is ironic

or at least was at first

but you know what they say

community full of people pretending to be idiots yade yade yada the community attracts real idiots

ironic phase was probably years ago now

I wish the Holicaust had happened.

I think the point user was trying to make is that most 'denialists' are actually revisionists who don't dispute that systematic killings took place, only that certain details of these killings are mistaken or inaccurate. David Irving and David Cole both acknowledge that the Nazis deliberately killed large numbers of Jews and other minorities, they just question the validity of the official Auschwitz narrative. And for this Cole had to fake his death to get anywhere in the world and Irving was imprisoned.

I think that Cole put it pretty well. The holocaust undeniably happened, but Auschwitz was decided on afterwards as THE holocaust happening. It's the one they published all the pictures of and made all of the movies about. They pushed it to the point where for many people Auschwitz IS the holocaust. So a historian challenging the Auschwitz narrative is seen as an attacker of the holocaust as a whole. He believes that these relatively small individual elements which are based on unstable foundations and are not allowed to be investigated are what keeps holocaust denial alive in the 21st century and that if a couple of minor misconceptions were allowed to be cleared up and Irving and Cole were destigmatized that'd be the end of it for good.

But they don't want it to end. Because the only ones who really even care about the holocaust anymore are hardcore anti-Semites and even harder core Semites.

I can only speak for myself but I ironically practice anti-semitism on the internet.

>I think the point user was trying to make is that most 'denialists' are actually revisionists who don't dispute that systematic killings took place, only that certain details of these killings are mistaken or inaccurate

Is that really true? By far the most prolific 'denialist' by volume of writing is Carlo Mattogno, and he spends most of his time

A) Denying anything ever happened and that there was any sort of systematic killing
B) Focusing, for the most part, on the Aktion Reinhardt camps.

> So a historian challenging the Auschwitz narrative is seen as an attacker of the holocaust as a whole.

Like Browning!

>He believes that these relatively small individual elements which are based on unstable foundations and are not allowed to be investigated are what keeps holocaust denial alive in the 21st century and that if a couple of minor misconceptions were allowed to be cleared up and Irving and Cole were destigmatized that'd be the end of it for good.

Except that a lot of stuff is allowed to be investigated. Archival access is in fact open if you go through the proper channels. That hasn't stopped anything.

Yeah, im only ironically anti-semitic.
Just like how I would only ironically exterminate the jewish race if given the chance

No wonder subhuman Americuck have shit education

Maybe /pol/ but that's a stretch since most of it is just jokes and irony taken way too far
The rest of the boards are way more normie

MUH FIRST AMENDMENT

MURICA FUCK YEAH

>Someone needs to tell the media/normies what /pol/ and what Veeky Forums actually are and put the distinction to them too. /pol/ a containment board. It exists to preserve the balance and keep the other innocent boards free of hateful bs. It's not representative of what Veeky Forums is at all - a fucking anime image sharing board in case we all forgot.
t. leftypol shill calling for an SJW safespace through a thin veil of "muh anime"

I think you missed the board

I'm surprised he's citing Veeky Forums and not stormfront.

>I think you missed the board
>t. leftypol

>keep the other innocent boards free of hateful bs.
newfags like you who get offended because someone says the word nigger is why this website has gone to shit

Probably because Veeky Forums gets enormously more traffic than Stormfront.

Jesus Christ, grow the fuck up already.

nigger

Proof that most "historians" shouldn't be taken seriously

We need to deal with this. Most of us are from Veeky Forums, we stand for humanism and for Foucault and we stand against Nazi pigs. We are RATIONAL, like Neil Degrasse Tyson. Not fucking FASCISTS!

Am I right bros?

>Veeky Forums
>Niel Tyson

Most of what you said is true though. I'm from Veeky Forums and a huge Foucault, Marx, Nietzsche fanbouy

>admitting you go to Veeky Forums in public

lmao

>Marx
>Foucault
>And Nietzsche

This is what half a century of leftist (((scholarship))) degrading a man like Nietzsche who described equality as a "vile poison" has done to him. Put him in the same adolescent rebellion category as a scatological French faggot with AIDS who got fucked at bathhouses and a deadbeat Jewish dad.

>It'd done by the left constantly.

It's done by literally everybody constantly. Today it's holocaust denial, yesterday it was being a communist, tomorrow it'll be something else.

American hours are specifically about Catholicism, Hans.