What is it that deniers deny?

Discussions
User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Fri Jul 31, 2015 5:14 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:. . . The KL's did not have a very high survival rate at all btw. . . .

There's really a lot loaded up here. The situation in the 1930s, when prisoners tended to be released and the KL population dwindled to several 1000s by 1935, were quite different to the late 1930s - when new camps (especially those supplying Speer's building program) were built and "populated" - and when in 1938 around 20,000 Jews were seized during Kristallnacht and held in the camps in an effort to force them to leave Germany. And the situation in the late 1930s was not like that during the early war. 1942, as exploitation of slave labor grew apace, was a horrific year for inmate mortality. Here are some data:

Mauthausen, one of the deadliest of the KLs - generally saw annual mortality rate for industrial workers 5%, for construction/quarry workers 30% (the pattern was mostly true across the KLs, with construction work being the most destructive to inmates). But the list below shows what happened in 1942 and late 1944-1945. In 1943 and early 1944 efforts to keep inmates alive for labor apparently had some effect.

1941 - 34%
1942 - 50%
1943 - 25%
1944 - 17%
1945 - 44% in 3 months

Buchenwald, as one would expect, had lower annual mortality than did Mauthausen - but still appallingly high, even in the "reform" years:

1941 - 20%
1942 - 33%
1943 - 17%
1944 - 15%
1945 - 16% in 3 months

Pohl reported that for July - November 1942 there were 75,545 prisoners deaths with over 9,000 executions. Again, 1942 stands out for its level of brutality as the KLs transitioned to armaments suppliers and construction brigades. Himmler was to make a business of renting out pliant, cheap labor to business, especially war-related industries. The experience of 1942 seems to have caused the SS to prioritize labor exploitation a bit over sheer punishment and draconian, violent discipline.

Generally, women fared better than men, and Jews and Roma fared worst of all. Poles were brutally used, like the so-called "rabbits" who were subjects for medical experiments at Ravensbrück.

The data also show that the closing phases of the war led to terrible conditions in the camps, and renewed very high mortality. This was a heavy construction period (Dora-Mittelbau and the other "underground" projects), and during the latter part of 1944 and into 1945, chaos overtook the system. In an effort to boost the KLs' role as slave labor provider, the SS took in more and more prisoners - there were 110,000 IIRC in late 1942 and close to 800,000 by 1944-1945: overcrowding, lack of food and hygiene, dangerous and destructive work, long hours, severe discipline and strict punishment all took their tool and raised mortality again to alarming highs.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Jeff_36 » Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:24 pm

Thanks
The consensus seems to be that mauthausen gusen was the most brutal of the kl camps in terms of punishment and labour deaths. The brutality of the quarry was legendary

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 02, 2015 6:59 pm

Again, thanks to Xcalibur, I've read one of David's recent posts in this thread. In that post, David quoted this sentence from Evans’s review: “Nikolaus Wachsmann feels that that Jews made up no more than 10 percent of the inmate population.” As we shall see, only by taking this data point out of context are we left with the idea of nothing more than minor impact of the KLs on the Jews.

To create a false impression, David chopped up this snippet and others from Evans’s review, without indicating where he’s omitted text. Given this dishonesty, let’s look first at what Evans actually wrote, which did not explore conditions for Jews in the KLs at the height of the war period. As we will see, David tried to edit around the re-entry of Jews into the camps especially during 1944-1945. Here is what Evans wrote:
How many of the prisoners were actually Jewish? For most of the period of the camps’ existence, up to the final phase of the war, Wachsmann reckons that Jews made up no more than 10 percent of the inmate population. Kim Wünschmann, in her excellent monograph on the subject, completed as part of a large-scale research project under Wachsmann’s overall direction, reckons that of the 150,000 to 200,000 Germans incarcerated in the camps in 1933, during the Nazi seizure of power, around 5,000 to 10,000 were Jewish, or 5 percent of the camp population up to the middle of 1938. These low figures should not surprise us. Jews, as defined by their religion, made up less than one percent of the German population as a whole in 1933. Despite the small numbers, on the other hand, Jews were clearly overrepresented in the camps from the very beginning.

Most of the Jews imprisoned in the camps, as Wünschmann shows, were middle-aged businessmen and professionals. They were there for a wide variety of reasons. Initially, in 1933–1934, most of them were left-wing activists, politicians and political journalists, or businessmen denounced by rivals and competitors for supposedly corrupt or criminal practices. Later on, after the Nuremberg Race Laws were passed in 1935, they were joined by men arrested for consorting with non-Jewish women. Some Jews had been imprisoned for homosexuality and taken to the camps on release from prison. Then, as the camps’ function changed in the mid-1930s to house the “asocial,” the regime’s relentless assault on the Jews’ economic position and its continued drive to force Jews out of business and professional life brought a growing number of them into the camps for being “work-shy” or engaging in desperate acts of petty crime in order to stay alive.

Following the Nazi Anschluss of Austria in March 1938, there were mass arrests of Jews, above all in Vienna, along with known opponents of the Nazis and supporters of Austrian independence. Most of these people were sent to Dachau, where 2,000 of the 3,500 Austrians who arrived in the camp were classified as Jewish. Shortly afterward, in June 1938, a special “Reich Work-Shy Action,” in which vagrants, deviants, and petty criminals were rounded up on Himmler’s orders across the newly enlarged German Reich and sent to the camps, brought thousands more Jews into the camps. Thirteen percent of the 6,224 men taken to Sachsenhausen in the course of this action, 19 percent of those taken to Dachau, and no fewer than 53 percent of those put in Buchenwald were Jews: altogether 2,259 Jews were added to the overall camp population in June 1938. . . .

Most of the Jews arrested in 1938 were released before the war, a good number after bribing the camp authorities or selling their properties and businesses to local authorities at knock-down prices. Those arrested in November were the first to be set free, but their heads were shaved immediately before their release so that they would be stigmatized in public as former inmates. The intention of the regime was that they should emigrate, and many had to sign official exit documents to do so before gaining their freedom. By the outbreak of World War II in September 1939, half the Jewish population of Germany had gone, leaving mostly the elderly behind. The Jewish population of the camps subsided once again to not much more than its pre-1938 level. On the eve of the war the total number of Jews in the SS concentration camps amounted to about 1,500 out of 21,400.

So, what about the height of the war - were Jews a significant presence in the camp? David tries obscuring facts with some general piffle about conditions deteriorating during the war and then statements about "German Jews" in the camps.

Well, had David read Wachsmann’s book, he would have been able to report that during this period - 1943-1944 - after driving the last large groups of Jews from Germany in early 1943 and shoving Polish and other eastern Jews into eastern slave-labor camps that year (until these Jews too were to “disappear some day in accordance with the Führer’s wish," as Himmler put it), as the war turned worse and worse for the Germans, Himmler reversed course and, to squeeze the last drop of labor capability from his inmates for the war effort, brought Jews back into camps within the Reich, including to build and help staff vast underground weapons plants during 1944:
there was one prisoner group that grew faster than any other - Jews. In the course of 1944, the German authorities forced more Jewish men, women, and children to the KL than ever before. According to one estimate, almost two-thirds of all new arrivals between spring and autumn 1944 had to wear the yellow star. By the end of the year, more than two hundred thousand were registered as KL inmates [out of approximately 700,000 inmates]; any Jews in German-controlled territory were now most likely held inside concentration camps.

(Wachsmann, p 456) Wachsmann notes that Polish (e.g., Lodz) and of course Hungarian Jews made up a large proportion of these Jews entering the KLs at this time.

What about these Jews and their conditions in relation to the general KL inmate population? Across the board, Jews were worked the hardest, fed the worst, most poorly clothed and housed, and most violently dealt with among the prisoners; this treatment resulted in horrendous mortality rates. When some “fit” Jews were temporarily pulled out of the killing process and assigned for slave labor, they were still dealt with as Jews, subject to harsh treatment by camp guard contingents or usually German Kapos acting on behalf of the camp SS. They were not killed at once, as were they compatriots, brothers, sisters, and parents, in the death camps; but their prospects for surviving the slave-labor regime were meager.

For example, a contingent of 1,000 Polish Jews arrived, via Auschwitz, from Lodz to the Hanover-Stöcken “Continental” slave labor camp in September 1944, as part of the liquidation of Lodz ghetto. From the “Continental” camp, this group was then taken to Hanover-Ahlem camp in November to convert an asphalt mine into an underground factory. Conditions were deplorable. According to Marc Buggeln, by spring 1945 45% of the Lodz Jews had died, most of them in the Hanover-Ahlem camp after 13% of them had perished in just weeks in the “Continental” work-camp. During January 1945, 250-350 sick Jewish prisoners had been removed from the asphalt works to Neuengamme main camp and left to die there in a so-called dying zone.

The death rate was 3-6 times higher in the slave-labor camps for Jewish men than the death rate for non-Jewish men placed in similar slave-labor camps. (Buggeln, Slave Labor in Nazi Concentration Camps, pp 86-87) Had the war lasted another year, 100% of the Jews on this Lodz transport would have perished (in 14 or so months - as opposed to dying immediately had they been retained in the death process).

In general, taking the example of the Neuengamme subcamps (42 in number) Jews in the men’s camps perished, according to Buggeln, at far higher rates during 1945-1945 than non-Jews:
the mortality rates in subcamps with male Jewish prisoners were at least twice as high as in subcamps with non-Jewish detainees who were performing the same type of labor.

(Buggeln, p 91)

Buggeln found that Neuengamme was less lethal for construction work than Mauthausen and other camps: “the underground construction subcamps [on the Neueungamme system] had the lowest mortality rates of all examined types of labor [in the system], with the exception of the subcamp with Jewish prisoners.” (p 104) In other words, even in safer work within Neuengamme, Jews fared adversely.

The aforementioned “Continental” camp, on the other hand, was the most deadly in the system. Yet even there one can see what happened to Jews vs other prisoners. When in January 1945, the 250-350 sick Jews were removed to a dying zone, the Jewish slave workers were replaced by Danish, Polish, Russian and French slave laborers: “This resulted in a considerable drop in the camp mortality rate.” (Buggeln, p 110) In December 1944-January 1945, when Jews staffed the camp, the mortality rate had been 14.% and 11.8% respectively - in other words, in less than a year, at such rates, all those working the camp would have died. In February, after the Jewish workers had been replaced with non-Jews, the death rate fell to 3.3%, still extremely high but about a quarter as high as the Jewish mortality rate. The reverse occurred at Bremen-Schützenhof in late 1944: Jews were brought to the slave labor camp there and its mortality rate skyrocketed to highest in all the Neuengamme shipbuilding camps. Second highest? At Hamburg-Stülckenwerft, a subcamp staffed by Hungarian Jews. (Buggeln, p 120)

I won’t give more examples. There are various possible explanations for these high mortality rates among Jews within the Neuengamme system - an extermination policy, "destruction (or extermination) through labor," anti-Semitism and targeted cruelty, physical deterioration of eastern Jews arriving in German KLs after years in ghettos or other camps, excesses on the part of commanders or guards or Kapos, and so on. There are many other data points and comparisons we could examine. But, with David's dishonesty, one can't even begin a useful discussion about what was going on in the KLs.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Aug 03, 2015 6:22 pm

So David wrote, as quoted by Xcalibur,
Kim Wünschmann, reckons that of the 150,000 to 200,000 Germans incarcerated in the camps in 1933, during the Nazi seizure of power, around 5,000 to 10,000 were Jewish, or 5 percent of the camp population up to the middle of 1938.

and Most of the Jews arrested in 1938 were released before the war . . .

David told us, dismissively, that what's is at stake here is a numbers game, that it was not til the war that conditions deteriorated in the camps, and that before the war the number and % of Jews was low . . .

But here is what Wünschmann's basic argument really is (Before Auschwitz, pp 6-8):
A practice of pronounced anti-Jewish violence . . . is reflected in the camp regulations issued by Dachau's commander Theodor Eicke in 1933. Inmates were grouped into three ranks, with "Jews and other persons who have become known as elements harmful to the people's community or as vicious agitators" assigned to the lowest rank and hence subjected to the harshest conditions. . . .

In contrast to the dimensions of the wartime camps [as I've posted above btw], the number pf the Jewish prisoners in the prewar concentration camps appears to have been relatively low. . . . In the analysis of prisoner numbers, two important observations can be made. First, Jewish inmates in time camps were at all times conspicuously overrepresented in relation to their share of the population as whole (which was 0.77 percent and 2.8 percent in Germany and Austria respectively). Second, although before 1938 their absolute numbers were low in comparison both with other groups of prisoners and with the wartime figures, their significance was high. . . . [T]he camps influenced the lives of Jews in Nazi Germany as objects of fear beyond the narrow circle of those who experienced them from the inside. . . .[T]he peril deadly peril that radiated from the prewar camps felt real. The symbolic power of the concentration camp in threatening Jews thus cannot be underestimated. . . . Under scrutiny here is the process of exclusion of Jews from German state and society during the years 1933 and 1939, and in this process . . . the camps did play an important part. . . . [M]y main aim is to investigate the role of the concentration camps in the process of marking, isolating, and terrorizing Jews as the prime enemies pf German society in the Nazi era. Nowhere was their exclusion as a discriminated minority, their degradation from "German citizens of Jewish faith" to outlawed "Jews in Germany," enacted more radically and brutally than in the concentration camps. . . . Thus concentration camps, as newly created sites of terror that forcefully sorted "community aliens" from valuable "Germans," contributed to the process of creating a "racially pure" Nazi state.

David, in addition to dishonestly glossing Wünschmann's meaning and distorting her conclusions, also overlooked her contention that of the more than 1.2 million European Jews who died in KLs, most were killed in Birkenau and Majdanek and in gas chambers. But, according to Wünschmann, the KLs as a whole are objects of study in their own right and not only as precursors or part of the Holocaust; her intent is to examine the role of the KLs in prewar German society and politics, as quoted above. Her conclusion, which David failed miserably to convey, is that the KLs were central to the process of excluding, marginalizing, and brutalizing German Jews.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Guess Hoess didn't get the Memo?

Post by David » Mon Aug 03, 2015 6:32 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:"(David still silent about what I asked him about his "wrongway gas chambers" claim it seems),


Groan- SM, Go watch Eric Hunt's Majdanek video again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDsJtB2F9i8

Of course you are dodging the fact the 5 "gas chambers" have already been "forgotten" by Believers.
Amazing how you Believers sweep inconvenient "evidence" into the Memory Hole
The "Last Gas Chamber at Majdanek" was a building right at the main entrance to the camp




Statistical Mechanic wrote:Helm, writing about Ravensbrück, discusses, as Evans says, the use of gas chambers at the camp, the gas chambers established by a team, including Höss, who'd fled Auschwitz.


This is pretty funny...don't you Believers claim that Himmler issued another one of those Top Secret disappearing orders
halting the "gassing of Jews?"

Now you have a "team" establishing gas chambers.
So which one is it, SM...Secret Himmler Order or the Hoess Gas Chamber Team?




Did "AktionKommando Hoess" have instructions on how to build those amazing outdoor cremation pyres that could
depose of 2,000 bodies in a day?

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

a place where Jews were taken to be gassed

Post by David » Mon Aug 03, 2015 6:42 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote: He answers a question concerning 15 books - which he clearly hasn't read - about how "Revisionists" are supposed to "agree with the revisions" in the books - by cherrypicking from a book review, which he doesn't understand, that discusses 2 of the books!


Hello SM- And speaking of "which he doesn't understand;" It would be most helpful if you read what I wrote-

Here is the start of my comments

Take the opening-
In the popular imagination, the Nazi concentration camp now features mainly as a place where Jews were taken to be gassed. In a recent German opinion poll, most respondents associated the camps with the persecution and murder of Jews; under 10 percent mentioned other categories of camp prisoners, such as Communists, criminals, or homosexuals. The power of the “Holocaust” as a concept has all but obliterated other aspects of the crimes of the Nazis and the sufferings of their victims and driven the history of the camps from cultural memory.

Revisionists agree with that statement on popular history- end

You might have even noticed that I emphasized the discussion with a change of thread title?

Now you are spinning off with Tales of secret teams of SS fleeing Auschwitz to build other gas chambers :roll: :roll:

Do you want to try to stay on topic?
Do you AGREE with Evans comment?
Last edited by David on Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

5 percent of the camp population!!!

Post by David » Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:21 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:To create a false impression, David chopped up this snippet and others from Evans’s review, without indicating where he’s omitted text.


Correctly citing the percentage of Jewish Germans temporarily detained by the government does not "create a false impression," SM.
It is looking at the actual figures.

You seem to have trouble reading what I wrote but maybe you can do better at simple math.
Taking "Kim Wünschmann, in her excellent monograph on the subject," and using her figures
what is the lowest possible percentage figure for Jewish Germans incarcerated in the camps in 1933 based on the figures she gives?

To help start you out
200,000 Germans incarcerated
"around" 5,000 were Jewish-

[ ] 2.5%
[ ] 5%
[ ] 10%
[ ] 25%
[ ] 250%


[/quote]

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Concentration camps in Popular Imagination

Post by David » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:27 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:David told us, dismissively, that what's is at stake here is a numbers game, that it was not til the war that conditions deteriorated in the camps, and that before the war the number and % of Jews was low . . .

and
also overlooked her contention that of the more than 1.2 million European Jews who died in KLs, most were killed in Birkenau and Majdanek and in gas chambers.


I am not sure what you mean by a "numbers game." The statistics are clear and they destroy the Image that exists in "the popular imagination, the Nazi concentration camp now features mainly as a place where Jews were taken to be gassed.
They also create problems for Believer propagandists like Evans.

I am citing the conclusions in the review of books you snarkily demanded I talk about.
What I ignored is the all the tap-dancing about "Why we should not be surprised" at the amazing actual figures.
To repeat-
So what are the lessons learn from the latest Believer revisionism?
1. The number of Jewish German inmates was low
2. The percentage of Jewish German inmates was low
3. There were often "other causes" for the detention of the Jewish inmates such as political activity against the
German government, homosexuality and being "work-shy."
4. Survival rate was high
5. Release rates were high prior to the War.
6. These statistics were matched with Austrian-Jewish detainees and in other camps were records are preserved.
7. Conditions in the Camps deteriorated during the War.

You have not commented on the original statement of the "commonly accepted history of German concentration camps" as huge gas chambers.
Nor have you challenged any of the statistics given in the latest books.
In fact, you banged your head on the key fact,
her contention that of the more than 1.2 million European Jews who died in KLs, most were killed in Birkenau and Majdanek and in gas chambers.

Since you have trouble reading, That entirely supports my comment was that there was a quantum difference between the death rate of Jewish inmates in camps where there are still records and the Tales of millions of deaths at Birkenau and Majdanek

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Guess Hoess didn't get the Memo?

Post by Jeff_36 » Mon Aug 03, 2015 11:30 pm

Now you have a "team" establishing gas chambers.
So which one is it, SM...Secret Himmler Order or the Hoess Gas Chamber Team?




Did "AktionKommando Hoess" have instructions on how to build those amazing outdoor cremation pyres that could
depose of 2,000 bodies in a day?


This was a general action against prisoners at this particular KL, to clear the population. It was a local action specific to Ravensbruck.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Aug 04, 2015 12:28 am

Was David's post supposed to be an argument of some sort? Or he is just under the impression that he's being clever? Anyway, I don't think he is aware of the numbers involved at Ravensbrück in 1945 or the state of the Final Solution at that point.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

The state of the Final Solution at that point

Post by David » Tue Aug 04, 2015 12:42 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Was David's post supposed to be an argument of some sort? Or he is just under the impression that he's being clever? Anyway, I don't think he is aware of the numbers involved at Ravensbrück in 1945 or the state of the Final Solution at that point.


I was asking you a question as to "the state of the Final Solution at that point."

So, do you believe in the "Himmler Order" stopping the Final Solution?
Or some revision of the story?
The Story, for those who might not be aware of the Tale is based upon a written statement made by SS-Standartenführer Kurt Becher before the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal:

"Between the middle of September and October 1944 I caused the Reichsführer SS Himmler to issue the following order, which I received in two originals, one each for SS Generals Kaltenbrunner and Pohl, and a carbon copy for myself: 'Effective immediately I forbid any liquidation of Jews and order that, on the contrary, hospital care should be given to weak and sick persons. I hold you (and here Kaltenbrunner and Pohl were meant) personally responsible even if this order should not be strictly adhered to by lower echelons.' I personally took Pohl's copy to him at his office in Berlin and left the copy for Kaltenbrunner at his office in Berlin

Raul Hilberg wrote:

"In November 1944, Himmler decided that for practical purposes the Jewish question had been solved. On the twenty-fifth of that month he ordered the dismantling of the killing installations."
The Destruction of the European Jews, Quadrangle Books, Chicago 1961, p. 631.

for a more complete discussion of the matter see
http://codoh.com/library/document/958/#_edn2

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23900
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by scrmbldggs » Tue Aug 04, 2015 1:11 am

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:To create a false impression, David chopped up this snippet and others from Evans’s review, without indicating where he’s omitted text.


Correctly citing the percentage of Jewish Germans temporarily detained by the government does not "create a false impression," SM.
It is looking at the actual figures.

You seem to have trouble reading what I wrote but maybe you can do better at simple math.
Taking "Kim Wünschmann, in her excellent monograph on the subject," and using her figures
what is the lowest possible percentage figure for Jewish Germans incarcerated in the camps in 1933 based on the figures she gives?

To help start you out
200,000 Germans incarcerated
"around" 5,000 were Jewish-

[ ] 2.5%
[ ] 5%
[ ] 10%
[ ] 25%
[ ] 250%







David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:David told us, dismissively, that what's is at stake here is a numbers game, that it was not til the war that conditions deteriorated in the camps, and that before the war the number and % of Jews was low . . .

and
also overlooked her contention that of the more than 1.2 million European Jews who died in KLs, most were killed in Birkenau and Majdanek and in gas chambers.


I am not sure what you mean by a "numbers game." The statistics are clear and they destroy the Image that exists in "the popular imagination, the Nazi concentration camp now features mainly as a place where Jews were taken to be gassed.
They also create problems for Believer propagandists like Evans.

I am citing the conclusions in the review of books you snarkily demanded I talk about.
What I ignored is the all the tap-dancing about "Why we should not be surprised" at the amazing actual figures.
To repeat-
So what are the lessons learn from the latest Believer revisionism?
1. The number of Jewish German inmates was low
2. The percentage of Jewish German inmates was low
3. There were often "other causes" for the detention of the Jewish inmates such as political activity against the
German government, homosexuality and being "work-shy."
4. Survival rate was high
5. Release rates were high prior to the War.
6. These statistics were matched with Austrian-Jewish detainees and in other camps were records are preserved.
7. Conditions in the Camps deteriorated during the War.

You have not commented on the original statement of the "commonly accepted history of German concentration camps" as huge gas chambers.
Nor have you challenged any of the statistics given in the latest books.
In fact, you banged your head on the key fact,
her contention that of the more than 1.2 million European Jews who died in KLs, most were killed in Birkenau and Majdanek and in gas chambers.

Since you have trouble reading, That entirely supports my comment was that there was a quantum difference between the death rate of Jewish inmates in camps where there are still records and the Tales of millions of deaths at Birkenau and Majdanek



So you're saying there were hardly any German Jews in German concentration camps, or in any concentration camps? And not many of them died?

And I could be wrong, but I see quite a difference in balance between "150,000 to 200,000 Germans incarcerated in the camps in 1933" out of millions, and included in those numbers are 5,000 to 10,000 Jews out of about 500,000 (June 1933 census)?
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Jeff_36 » Tue Aug 04, 2015 1:27 am

I have put him on ignore once again

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28730
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Matthew Ellard » Tue Aug 04, 2015 1:58 am

Jeff_36 wrote:I have put him on ignore once again
David does seem to be rambling on, more then usual. I think Monstorous has inspired him to play "I forgot all the evidence again", reboot game. He's probably trying to impress Monstorous rather then us.

I think its the "battle of percentages", that although most holocaust deniers have accepted that most of conventional history is true, there will always be a couple who won't budge an inch. These people's posts should be put in cult museums as "curiosities" before they die out fully.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:31 am

Jeff_36 wrote:I have put him on ignore once again

I have him on ignore until he provides an answer for for what I asked him concerning his Majdanek claims.

you guys keep quoting his gibberish which more or less defeats the purpose however grrrrr except I've stopped reading that too as it is very old and very pathetic
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Tue Aug 04, 2015 5:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23900
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by scrmbldggs » Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:36 am

Aww, we ♥ you too. :-P
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Jeff_36 » Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:42 am

like a broken record. If he starts talking about gravel again I will smash my head through a brick wall.

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Re: Concentration camps in Popular Imagination

Post by David » Tue Aug 04, 2015 5:38 am

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:David told us, dismissively, that what's is at stake here is a numbers game, that it was not til the war that conditions deteriorated in the camps, and that before the war the number and % of Jews was low . . .

and
also overlooked her contention that of the more than 1.2 million European Jews who died in KLs, most were killed in Birkenau and Majdanek and in gas chambers.


I am not sure what you mean by a "numbers game." The statistics are clear and they destroy the Image that exists in "the popular imagination, the Nazi concentration camp now features mainly as a place where Jews were taken to be gassed."

They also create problems for Believer propagandists like Evans.

I am citing the conclusions in the review of books you snarkily demanded I talk about.
What I ignored is the all the tap-dancing about "Why we should not be surprised" at the amazing actual figures.
To repeat-
So what are the lessons learn from the latest Believer revisionism?
1. The number of Jewish German inmates was low
2. The percentage of Jewish German inmates was low
3. There were often "other causes" for the detention of the Jewish inmates such as political activity against the
German government, homosexuality and being "work-shy."
4. Survival rate was high
5. Release rates were high prior to the War.
6. These statistics were matched with Austrian-Jewish detainees and in other camps were records are preserved.
7. Conditions in the Camps deteriorated during the War.

You have not commented on the original statement of the "commonly accepted history of German concentration camps" as huge gas chambers.
Nor have you challenged any of the statistics given in the latest books.
In fact, you banged your head on the key fact,
her contention that of the more than 1.2 million European Jews who died in KLs, most were killed in Birkenau and Majdanek and in gas chambers.

Since you have trouble reading, That entirely supports my comment was that there was a quantum difference between the death rate of Jewish inmates in camps where there are still records and the Tales of millions of deaths at Birkenau and Majdanek

David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

Research on pre-War camps

Post by David » Tue Aug 04, 2015 5:54 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
So you're saying there were hardly any German Jews in German concentration camps, or in any concentration camps? And not many of them died?

And I could be wrong, but I see quite a difference in balance between "150,000 to 200,000 Germans incarcerated in the camps in 1933" out of millions, and included in those numbers are 5,000 to 10,000 Jews out of about 500,000 (June 1933 census)?


Hello scrm- I am not saying anything but repeating the figures given in the Evans' article, mainly discussing pre-War conditions.

Evans sort of fudges the percentage figures but they could range from a low of 2.5% of the detainees being Jewish
up to 10%. Almost all detainees were released.

As to the importance of the variations in rates, some large part of that seems to be based on the large role Jewish Germans had
in left-wing politics and, later, for "work-shy" status. Those important figures are "left-out."

Evans' review starts out with the comment about Concentration camps in Popular Imagination. He cites these
figures to disprove the "popular image."

Again, Revisionism is very much in accord with these new "discoveries."

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Aug 04, 2015 10:49 pm

This is kind of an interesting one. David wrote, in an effort to dismiss the anti-Semitic motivations of early incarcerations of Jews in the KLs,
There were often "other causes" for the detention of the Jewish inmates such as political activity against the
German government

and he presented this conclusion as a "revision" to the understandings of the camps:
These new "discoveries" have been pointed out by Revisionists for years. We agree with them.

“Other causes” gets sneer-quote treatment for some reason or another . . .

One of the historians whom David quotes on this is Kim Wünschmann. Well, sadly for David, Wünschmann takes precisely the opposite tack David claims she takes. One thrust of Wünschmann's argument is in fact directed against the conventional wisdom that political activity was a dominant factor, standing alone, in the early arrests and protective custody detentions of Jews. On p 21 of her new book, she states this so clearly that even David will understand her point:
Most historians of the early concentration camps ascribe the reasons for the imprisonment of Jews either to their Communist or left-leaning political activities, or to a vague set of 'racial reasons' that are regarded as self-explanatory and generally not analyzed.

To be sure, some Jews who were arrested and held in KLs were seized due to their political affiliations and activities - and not in all cases, Wünschmann shows, for activities "against the German government," as David seems to think she argues. Some Jews arrested for political reasons were arrested when the newly empowered Nazis decided to settle old scores involving activities years before opposing in a perfectly legal manner . . . the NSDAP - e.g., incarceration of Jewish lawyers who had handled cases charging Nazis with illegal activities and so forth. In other cases, arrested Jews were slandered and charged with earlier activities in which they were not even involved. A number of Jewish labor leaders, whose work involved defending the rights of workers, were seized and put in KLs. Jewish lawyers were targeted - Wünschmann has three core arguments concerning Jewish lawyers: 1) Hitler's and the Nazis' anti-Semitic stereotypes about law and lawyers were strong factors, 2) protective custody was used to drive lawyers from practice when they met exemptions in the new Nazi legislation concerning the legal profession, and 3) the Nazis used the KLs to get back at Jewish lawyers who'd help draft Weimar constitutional documents and who espoused democratic principles. Thus, Wünschmann stresses, there was a strong anti-Semitic component to even these supposedly "political detentions"; this anti-Semitic component went beyond arrest and incarceration and including verbal and physical abuse at the hands of camp guards, specially meted out violence and sustained torture, and murder whilst Jewish arrestees were detained.

But, leaving aside David's misleading gloss on the "new thinking" about these Jewish political figures, let's look at Wünschmann's main argument, which is that
The notion that only Jews with political affiliations were imprisoned in concentration camps of 1933-1934, however, is invalid.

Wünschmann presents, to support her thesis, a number of cases in which Jews were seized and detained in KLs on grounds such as being a "Jewish bloodsucker," being one of a city's "most scheming and cunning businessmen," having "pestered the police, tax authorities, and the prosecution authorities with petitions," belonging to"the race of cheaters and exploiters of the people," pursuing "Aryan" women ("Through his behavior as a Jew toward the female sex, he had outraged the public"), and so on. Another line of attack in the early months of the Third Reich saw SA riots against Jewish immigrants (e.g., brown shirt mob actions in Berlin's Scheunenviertel in spring 1933) which resulted in arrests and confinement of the Jewish victims (Wünschmann presents case studies of two young Jewish men of eastern origins who in other actions were murdered whilst in custody). Wünschmann cites the Saxon Ministry of the Interior noting that too many Jews were being put into KLs simply for being Jews - nevertheless, according to Wünschmann, Josef Bürckel responded to such concerns (April 1933),
In the future Jews can only be released if two petitioners or the physicians who had issued their sickness certificates are willing to replace them and serve their sentence.

Wünschmann observes that
a significant number of Jews were among the arrestees and . . . they were detained not only as political enemies but because of their 'race.' Although high-ranking authorities tried to deny that Jews were arrested for racial reasons - mostly out of concern for the regime's public image - the practice on the ground was different. . . . In the process, an antisemitic line of attack was fixed onto one of the emerging regime's sharpest weapon[s] of terror.

(pp 44-46)

The "revision" which Wünschmann calls for, and supports, is very different to what David tried putting over: Wünschmann believes that historians have failed to appreciate sufficiently the early role of anti-Semitism in the arrests of Jews, have been too comfortable with ascribing early arrests of Jews to general political factors, and thus have downplayed how the KLs were one weapon used by the Nazis early in their rule to drive Jews from the "national community," deprive them of their rights, mark them as outcasts, and isolate them and subject them to violence and loss of life.

My question is, would David have gotten it any better if he'd actually read any of the books he "reported" on?
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Xcalibur
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Xcalibur » Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:34 am

Jeff_36 wrote:like a broken record. If he starts talking about gravel again I will smash my head through a brick wall.


Nein, you grab this piece of {!#%@} by the nose and kick him in the ass.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23900
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: Guess Hoess didn't get the Memo?

Post by scrmbldggs » Wed Aug 05, 2015 3:13 pm

David wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:"(David still silent about what I asked him about his "wrongway gas chambers" claim it seems),


Groan- SM, Go watch Eric Hunt's Majdanek video again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDsJtB2F9i8

Of course you are dodging the fact the 5 "gas chambers" have already been "forgotten" by Believers.
Amazing how you Believers sweep inconvenient "evidence" into the Memory Hole
The "Last Gas Chamber at Majdanek" was a building right at the main entrance to the camp




Statistical Mechanic wrote:Helm, writing about Ravensbrück, discusses, as Evans says, the use of gas chambers at the camp, the gas chambers established by a team, including Höss, who'd fled Auschwitz.


This is pretty funny...don't you Believers claim that Himmler issued another one of those Top Secret disappearing orders
halting the "gassing of Jews?"

Now you have a "team" establishing gas chambers.
So which one is it, SM...Secret Himmler Order or the Hoess Gas Chamber Team?




Did "AktionKommando Hoess" have instructions on how to build those amazing outdoor cremation pyres that could
depose of 2,000 bodies in a day?


That seems a nonsense question. The numbers gassed on site weren't as large as elsewhere and there was a crematorium.

Periodically, the SS authorities subjected prisoners in the camp to "selections" in which the Germans isolated those prisoners considered too weak or injured to work and killed them. At first, "selected" prisoners were shot. Beginning in 1942, in accordance with “Operation 14f 13,” the SS transferred them to the sanitarium at Bernberg, which, equipped with gas chambers, had served as a killing center for people with physical and intellectual disabilities within the framework of the so-called "euthanasia" program of the Nazi regime. The SS sent around 1,600 female prisoners and 300 male prisoners to their deaths at Bernberg in the spring of 1942; around half of these prisoners were Jewish, at least 25 were Sinti and Roma (Gypsies), and at least 13 were Jehovah's Witnesses.

Camp authorities initiated a second round of killings at such “euthanasia” killing centers later in 1942, continuing until 1944. During this phase, around sixty transports left Ravensbrück for the “euthanasia” killing center at Hartheim, near Linz, Austria with between 60 and 1,000 prisoners each. The SS staff also murdered prisoners in the camp infirmary by lethal injection or by transferring them to the Auschwitz-Birkenau killing center. In early 1945, the SS constructed a gas chamber in Ravensbrück near the camp crematorium. The Germans gassed between 5,000 and 6,000 prisoners at Ravensbrück before Soviet troops liberated the camp in April 1945.
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php ... d=10005199
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Guess Hoess didn't get the Memo?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Wed Aug 05, 2015 3:39 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:
David wrote:Groan- SM, Go watch Eric Hunt's Majdanek video again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDsJtB2F9i8

Of course you are dodging the fact the 5 "gas chambers" have already been "forgotten" by Believers.
Amazing how you Believers sweep inconvenient "evidence" into the Memory Hole
The "Last Gas Chamber at Majdanek" was a building right at the main entrance to the camp

Oh my, well, of course, I've written in the Majadanek thread at length about the number of gas chambers - and quoted the important testimony of SS orderly Reinartz, given to the NKVD, on the matter. But to get down to business: there is no evidence that I found in Hunt's video for "wrongway gas chambers," nor did Nessie find any way back when. So David needs to stop stalling and dodging and spell out what he's talking about. That means, David needs to give us a summary of the evidence he thinks exists for "wrongway gas chambers" and tell us the exact minutes/seconds mark in the video where the evidence is provided. Btw, Hunt's voiceovers are truly obnoxious - headache inspiring; so, no, I don't want to listen through the whole video yet again . . .

Scrmbldggs is correct about Ravensbrück gassings: about 5,000-6,000 prisoners were gassed at Ravensbrück between late January and April 1945 (a period of about 3 months - 100-200 at a time IIRC, not 1000s a day - the gas chambers along with lethal injections, doses of Luminal, and shootings were how the ill and unfit prisoners were "cleared" from the camp during 1945; there was a crematory in the camp) - our friends from Auschwitz, Johann Schwarzhuber and Otto Moll oversaw the gassings, Moll also carrying out the executions by gunshot. Victims were any women in the camp who were too old, too sick, too debilitated to work - not only Jews. Before wising off, David should do his homework and inform himself on the topic at hand at least minimally.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Wed Sep 23, 2015 10:43 am

The tide is turning.
. . . those who reject climate science say the phrase denier has the pejorative ring of Holocaust denier so The Associated Press prefers climate change doubter or someone who rejects mainstream science.

So repellent is HD, that the nearly as loathsome fringe group of climate change deniers has gotten the AP to make the dubious decision to stop using the term "climate change denier" lest climate change wackadoos be associated with deniers of the Holocaust.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Fri Apr 01, 2016 9:51 am

A quick revival of this thread to add a point on Hilberg's thinking, which underscores how the often-used denier attribution that historians insist on a formula like "master plan + 6 million + gas chambers" is a strawman. This additional point focuses on the "master plan" part of the denier formula. I'm reading a book that quotes Hilberg making a point I hadn't recalled, in his book Victims, Perpetrators, Bystanders (1992), about the improvised character of the extermination of the Jews:
Neither was there a map showing how Europe was supposed to look after the "final victory" nor a master plan for the destruction of the European Jews.

So here a foremost scholar of the extermination of the Jews was explicit that Nazis didn't have or proceed according to "a master plan" - yet deniers time and again insist that "master plan to murder six million Jews by gas" is "the official story."

Hilberg quote translated from German edition, p 22
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol
Contact:

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by nickterry » Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:42 am

Does this mean you've started on Gerlach? Because he quotes this precise point from Hilberg.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Fri Apr 01, 2016 11:24 am

And cites the German edition no less! Indeed ...
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

nickterry
Regular Poster
Posts: 993
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: Bristol
Contact:

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by nickterry » Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:25 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:And cites the German edition no less! Indeed ...


that was the giveaway...

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Dec 25, 2016 1:37 pm

From Goldstein & Goldstein, in their very excellent chapter on Croatian revisionism (focusing on Tudman but bringing in lesser authors I've never heard of), on the techniques revisionists use:
First, the author [in this case Tudman] starts from an advance thesis, which is usually politically inspired, and then looks for and selects arguments to substantiate it. Second, sources and arguments that uphold the advance thesis are not verified but taken as they stand. Third, sources and arguments that refute the advance thesis, even if they are convincing and numerically predominant, are systematically ignored and concealed. and are mentioned only if it is possible to challenge them. Fourth, individual cases and examples are indiscriminately used for arbitrary generalizations about large groups of people, even entire nations. Fifth, revisionist historiographers do not even shrink from falsification.

This description comes after G&G have discussed how Serbian nationalists inflated the death toll at Jasenovac (from 46,000 thought to have died at war's end to 1.1 million). In this effort to maximize Serbian suffering, one Serbian writer even judged Jasenovac 50x larger than Mauthausen. For some reason, among Serbian nationalists the number 700,000 became canonical. G&G, using detailed records show that 59,000 Jasenovac victims' names can be proven - and that the total death toll must have been about 83,000, by far most of those perishing having been Serbs.

G&G then eviscerate Tudman's arguments about Jews in Jasenovac showing that his main argument against the Jews in the camp (Tudman minimizes Jewish death and suffering and casts the Jews as the murderers of the Serbs) relies on three sources. The most important of these sources, a testimony by a released Serbian prisoner, concluded G&G, "is obviously not credible and is at least partly faked" (G&G give 5 arguments demonstrating this point); the second source on which Tudman relied was part of a group of testimonies which Serbian prisoners made under duress ("made upon April 15, 1942, in the Commissariat for Refugees and Displaced persons of Nedić's Serbian government"); and the third source came from an anti-Semitic obsessive whose writings G&G show to be fabulist. For Jasenovac, by contrast, G&G rely on more testimonies and documents than I can quickly tally, rather than cherrypicking as does the revisionist Tudman just three that suit their purposes.

Notice that G&G don't specifically cite anti-Semitism but allude to this factor driving revisionism in two ways: first, "arbitrary generalizations about large groups of people"; second, the reliance of Tudman on anti-Semitic testimonies (faked) and texts (fabulist).

Obviously, our chimp deniers here use even cruder techniques than those outlined by G&G - but the gurus on whom they rely are well practiced in methods of denial like those described by G&G and of putting across fictitious renditions of history with the aim of promoting an advance thesis (be it exoneration of the Nazis, nostalgia for German power and greatness, an anti-Semitic agenda, or what have you).
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 22658
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: What is it that deniers deny?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jan 07, 2018 12:30 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:Deniers, like Maryzilla, have been known to reduce the Holocaust to six/gas/plan - that is, to define (and deny) the Holocaust by three key elements: 6 million Jewish victims, the use of gas chambers, and a master plan to murder all the European Jews.

To be clear, this is not my definition of the Holocaust. I have a different view of how the extermination of the Jews came about and occurred, in line with what I've tried explaining in this and other threads. In particular, I don't think the Germans had a plan, spelling out at a technical, operational, and detail level how Jews across Europe were to be done away with. Here, however, rather than re-assess the denier proposition in full, and rather than say yet more on how I think the Holocaust took place, I want to drill down on the last element - the existence of a basic or master plan - and a statement that Raul Hilberg made on this issue.

Now, before quoting from Hilberg, one more point: deniers have a corollary to simplistic definitions like six/gas/plan, turning their claim into a strawman. You see, according to deniers "a master plan" is supposedly a core component of an "official" story. And, according to deniers, historians have their knickers in a twist because they are unable to defend "the master plan" plank of Holocaust belief in the face of the revisionist critique.

But it is not just me - and the current generation of historians - who don't conceive the Final Solution, let alone the Holocaust, in terms of the unfolding of a pre-determined German master plan. Here's where Raul Hilberg comes in: "The Germans did not have a basic plan, but their actions fell into a basic pattern."

Hilberg wrote this in . . . 1955. In his doctoral dissertation. He considered the point important enough to have included the statement on the very first page of his dissertation. Deniers are at least 60 years behind events.

As our discussion in this thread continues, I will come back to Hilberg's very important point.

Just this week, over at RODOH, a thread popped up on this topic. In that thread, rollo the ganger AKA Chester from SSF defined revisionism (that is, Holocaust denial) in exactly the same terms discussed above - as the denial of six/gas/plan:
I propose that there are three question which define "Revisionism" or whatever term one wishes to use to define those who may not agree with the current holocaust narrative. These questions have already been asked and I believe any other questions are irrelevant to the discussion. Here are those three questions:

1. Did six million really die?

2. Were there homicidal gas chambers that were actually used to kill hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people?

3. Was there an official program by the "Nazis" to exterminate, i.e. "kill", "murder" the Jews of Europe and if possible, the world?

All the rest is nonsense.

For the record, my understanding is that 1. the death toll of Jews perishing in the Holocaust was in the low 5 millions; 2. gas chaambers were indeed used to kill millions of people, about half the victims in the Holocaust as well as, in related crimes, victims of the T-4 and 14f13 programs and members of other groups (Roma, POWs, etc), and 3. there was no master plan as described above but there was a state policy to exterminate, by different means including murder, starvation, and destruction through labor, European Jews.

The definition of HD used by trollo and Maryzilla (Kollerstrom and associates have recently written in similar terms) interestingly labels a great deal of argumentation from revisionists as "nonsense" and even hateful rhetoric; this narrow way of thinking about denial implies that a great deal of what revs say is simpy irrelevant. Indeed, in the thread at RODOH trollo and FP Berg, who was unable to master the subtleties of logging in and posting here at SSF, at once got into a dispute over whether "Pseudo-Scientific Jew-baiting literature by unqualified Judeo-phobes" were "welcome in this thread." Berg ("The Nazis are the great heroes of modern history who with their extraordinary bravery and military skill saved the world") freaks out because he is an extreme case - been-there, generic, Scott Smith are others - of dwelling on what trollo now considers "nonsense."

What is telling is that in their definitions both Maryzilla and trollo set aside open air shootings and other means of extermination yet both have refused to acknowledge evidence for such. Trollo, e.g., was the creator of the IFWF argument against the Jäger report on the basis of "Zhikharev Cyrillic Bold" font and Maryzilla long inveighed against the evidence in the Jäger report and for the mass murders in Lithuania, describing them as rogue operations not sanctioned by Reich authorities and not aimed at eliminating Jews from the region.

Trollo's more recent definition and his statement that "All the rest is nonsense" would seem to indicate his at least re-thinking such "fine points."

Based on what deniers obsess about - from Weckert's trash on Kristallnacht to been-there's anti-Semitic drivel on international Jewry, from Berg's teenybopper crush on Dolfy to Traynor's dressing up in jack boots, from Graf's 2011 debate with Christian Lindtner on the EGs to Frau Haverbeck's defense of the KLs - trollo is flat-out wrong to try to narrow denial as Maryzilla tried a few years ago. Revisionism is as revisionism does.

Mann, pp 210-211: ”By the end of 1941 Einsatzgruppen [death toll] numbers had increased 11-fold and the killing had escalated way beyond even the wildest of deportations. Yet there still seems to have been no master plan. . . . This was less an orderly series of decisions than a general process of escalation among like-minded elites whose initial plans were frustrated.”

When Rodoh chimps like Trollo or our own ilk like Maryzilla try to make out that "the current holocaust narrative" reduces to gas + master plan + six million, they are playing an adolescent game which, they imagine, can allow them to refute the case for the Holocaust by caricaturing that case.

Mann is another scholar whose work shows that what most deniers claim about Holocaust scholarship says virtually nothing about the case for the Holocaust but a great deal about their own lack of familiarity with what those whom they criticize actually have written.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Post Reply