Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Discussions
User avatar
Balsamo
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2079
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Balsamo » Mon Nov 13, 2017 1:30 am

Sergey_Romanov wrote:I'd say yes.
"Good", detail-oriented research into Auschwitz began with Pressac, a former denier. So here we have a denier trying to debunk Auschwitz, getting converted and influencing accepted history (e.g. his Krema conversion thesis).

I would also give partial credit to Cole, Mattogno and Graf for certain Majdanek revisions. The death toll revision from 235k to 78k is to Kranz's credit, and if I'm not mistaken the abandoning of some GCs too; but a) Kranz has read M&G's book and actually has it in several footnotes. Pretty sure he was influenced by it. b) Cole relays his talks with Kranz about those gas chambers later finally abandoned.

Credit goes to Kranz for being open-minded, and these revisions were a long time coming, but yeah, I think the prodding was from the denier side.

Otherwise? By poking holes at the edges of history deniers sometimes find true mistakes, in answering them we correct the mistakes and revise history (cf. http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... useum.html )

LOL,
It seems we are saying the same thing, but our basic answer to the OP question still differs.
I said "of course, not", but...
You said "I'd say yes", because.

Don't you think that things would have been revised, with or without denial, in due time just by the evolution of academic historical research? New generations, more detached from the subject (historical events), always kind of correct the former ones who were to close to it. While new techniques and perspectives are added to the method.
I saw it regarding the French Revolution (through the historiography of let's say the XIX century and the XXth..)

Actually, one of the reason i prefer the "No, but" instead of the "yes, because", is that denial can also have a reverse effect. That is by trying to fight it instead of making the research evolves, some might be tempted to go back to more ideological stance, with the side-effect of rejecting new perspectives only because of the threats those perspectives might represent in the context of fighting denial. This new tendency of trying to broaden the guilt - which feels like a reverse to some form intentionalism - can be seen in some of the recent works, for example, or the unease to define the Holocaust in a proper time frame, etc.

What do you think?

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 602
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:31 pm

> Don't you think that things would have been revised, with or without denial, in due time just by the evolution of academic historical research

Yes, but the question of credit is the question of sufficiency, not necessity. As an illustration, the theory of relativity would have undoubtedly appeared without Einstein, pretty soon at that. Einstein wasn't necessary for it. He still gets the credit.
Last edited by Sergey_Romanov on Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 602
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:44 pm

I can take credit for the HDOT change - it happened after my emails.

Some otherwise capable scholars - like Berger - still cling to some diesels tho, so the switch is not complete.

Basically we at HC made a quasiscientific prediction: that all motor testimonies from the persons-in-the-know would say gasoline. Back then we didn't have any Treblinka gasoline testimonies and only a mix for the gas vans.

The Shalayev statement put a big fat cross on the Treblinka diesel, and so did Hans' gas vans research, especially Pradl's testimony.

Quite a successful prediction.

User avatar
Balsamo
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2079
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Balsamo » Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:01 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:I can take credit for the HDOT change - it happened after my emails.

Some otherwise capable scholars - like Berger - still cling to some diesels tho, so the switch is not complete.

Basically we at HC made a quasiscientific prediction: that all motor testimonies from the persons-in-the-know would say gasoline. Back then we didn't have any Treblinka gasoline testimonies and only a mix for the gas vans.

The Shalayev statement put a big fat cross on the Treblinka diesel, and so did Hans' gas vans research, especially Pradl's testimony.

Quite a successful prediction.
Yes but then...you are not known for being a Denier... :lol:

But understood. ;) ;)

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 602
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:11 am

Yeah, but it was asked about in one of the posts.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Jan 28, 2018 12:46 pm

not exactly an answer to the question in the OP but related: Saul Friedlander's introduction to Gerald Fleming's book, Hitler and the Holocaust, makes the assumption that Fleming wrote his book in response to Irving's Hitler's War
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jan 30, 2018 5:03 pm

a side note on diesel - which raises the question whether we could lure Fritz with TV to sit for some experiments with diesel, CO, and Zyklon B:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/worl ... nkeys.html
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... -emissions
https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/5449000 ... -chambers/
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42858668
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Goody67 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 8:25 pm

David Irving helped to discover that the Hitler Diaries were forgeries and also helped with the discovery of the Goebbels Diaries.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:05 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 8:25 pm
David Irving helped to discover that the Hitler Diaries were forgeries and also helped with the discovery of the Goebbels Diaries.
Irving also became convinced that the Hitler Diaries were real.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:00 pm

Someone quiped something to the effect that Irving was the first person to declare them fake and the last to say that they were real.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Goody67 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:13 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:05 pm
Irving also became convinced that the Hitler Diaries were real.
And? The historian Hugh Trevor-Roper declared the diaries to be genuine, although he changed his mind and declared that at a press conference announcing the diaries.

Gerhard Weinberg also initially considered the diaries to be genuine and then changed his mind.

One accepting the diaries were genuine and then changing his or her mind was not exclusive to Irving.

I guess the only peculiar thing which seems to be exclusive to Irving is that he denounced the diaries as fake, changed his mind and considered the diaries as genuine (after he said he was shown other evidence) and then changed his mind again and stated he thought they were fake.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:26 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:13 pm
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:05 pm
Irving also became convinced that the Hitler Diaries were real.
And? The historian Hugh Trevor-Roper declared the diaries to be genuine, although he changed his mind and declared that at a press conference announcing the diaries.

Gerhard Weinberg also initially considered the diaries to be genuine and then changed his mind.

One accepting the diaries were genuine and then changing his or her mind was not exclusive to Irving.

I guess the only peculiar thing which seems to be exclusive to Irving is that he denounced the diaries as fake, changed his mind and considered the diaries as genuine (after he said he was shown other evidence) and then changed his mind again and stated he thought they were fake.
Irving is, to put it mildly, an attention whore. He made a big deal about pronouncing them as fake (good for him) and when it suited him he switched back (bad for him).

I’ve never read anything Irving wrote. He is so tainted by his racism and his flirting with denial I can’t make myself read anything by him.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:36 pm

If you want to read something sad and maddening, read his testimony in the Lipstadt-Irving trial. There needs to be a new word beyond pompous, pretentious, imperious, pontifical, tendentious, and narcissistic. No word I know quite captures his performance.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:53 pm

I read much of it in “Lying About Hitler.” He’s a pathetic dinosaur.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Goody67 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:57 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:26 pm
Irving is, to put it mildly, an attention whore. He made a big deal about pronouncing them as fake (good for him) and when it suited him he switched back (bad for him).

I’ve never read anything Irving wrote. He is so tainted by his racism and his flirting with denial I can’t make myself read anything by him.
:?

How can you have such strong opinions about someone whose works you have not read? I consider it to be quite narrow-minded to dismiss someone because you don’t like what he or she has written or believes. It’s no different to the stupid deniers refusing to read scholarly works because the authors are Jewish or whatever.

A wide variety of opinions and conclusions are good for debates and make discussing a subject interesting. I don’t agree with a lot of things Irving has said and believes, but he is entitled to his opinions. If you look on YouTube you will see that he has changed his opinions and now admits things such as the Nazis did gas the Jews.

His comments about the Hitler Diaries were a few years before he got involved with Holocaust denial. Also, I hope you are aware that most of his books were written before he became involved with the Holocaust denial nonsense.

Before he became involved with Holocaust denier/revisionist BS, although at times controversial, he was respected for his ability to look into the archives and find new material (especially documents) and his knowledge of the Third Reich.

Even Kershaw still cited him in his two-volume biography of Hitler and that was after Irving was widely known to have been involved with Holocaust denial.

Irving’s association with Holocaust denial starting in the late 1980s does not change anything he wrote in books or said years before then. If you were to read his biographies of Rommel and Goebbels, you would not think they had been written by the same man who is now (and rightly so) associated with denying the Holocaust.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:03 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:57 pm
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:26 pm
Irving is, to put it mildly, an attention whore. He made a big deal about pronouncing them as fake (good for him) and when it suited him he switched back (bad for him).

I’ve never read anything Irving wrote. He is so tainted by his racism and his flirting with denial I can’t make myself read anything by him.
:?

How can you have such strong opinions about someone whose works you have not read? I consider it to be quite narrow-minded to dismiss someone because you don’t like what he or she has written or believes. It’s no different to the stupid deniers refusing to read scholarly works because the authors are Jewish or whatever.

A wide variety of opinions and conclusions are good for debates and make discussing a subject interesting. I don’t agree with a lot of things Irving has said and believes, but he is entitled to his opinions. If you look on YouTube you will see that he has changed his opinions and now admits things such as the Nazis did gas the Jews.

His comments about the Hitler Diaries were a few years before he got involved with Holocaust denial. Also, I hope you are aware that most of his books were written before he became involved with the Holocaust denial nonsense.

Before he became involved with Holocaust denier/revisionist BS, although at times controversial, he was respected for his ability to look into the archives and find new material (especially documents) and his knowledge of the Third Reich.

Even Kershaw still cited him in his two-volume biography of Hitler and that was after Irving was widely known to have been involved with Holocaust denial.

Irving’s association with Holocaust denial starting in the late 1980s does not change anything he wrote in books or said years before then. If you were to read his biographies of Rommel and Goebbels, you would not think they had been written by the same man who is now (and rightly so) associated with denying the Holocaust.
Sorry, can’t do it. Balmoral’s read his stuff and is better suited to give an opinion on his works.

Goody, I’ve seen Irving’s videos, read interviews he did, looked into his bio, etc. I give him some credit for trying to be original and also for taking the time to track down Hitler’s entourage and interview them. But he went off the rails and is completely discredited IMO. At this point he’s also dated. To me he will always be an annoying weathervane.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Goody67 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:04 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:53 pm
I read much of it in “Lying About Hitler.” He’s a pathetic dinosaur.
I’ve read that book. I enjoyed it because it exposed Irving’s tactic of cherry-picking evidence to suit his conclusions.

I am not even defending Irving’s views, but to dismiss his works because you have some preconceived thoughts about him is ridiculous.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:34 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:04 pm
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:53 pm
I read much of it in “Lying About Hitler.” He’s a pathetic dinosaur.
I’ve read that book. I enjoyed it because it exposed Irving’s tactic of cherry-picking evidence to suit his conclusions.

I am not even defending Irving’s views, but to dismiss his works because you have some preconceived thoughts about him is ridiculous.
:)

Right now I’m so swamped under the things I want to read I couldn’t work Irving in if I wanted to.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:39 pm

That's the thing, choices have to be made, and the criteria are often, well, imperfect because obtaining perfect criteria would also be a choice. I've not read Pat Buchanan's Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War. I am sure it's something. I don't read much denial these days either - not because it offends me or on account of bias, it just isn't worth the time.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Goody67 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:40 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:03 pm
Sorry, can’t do it. Balmoral’s read his stuff and is better suited to give an opinion on his works.
Why on earth do you want someone else to form your own opinion? Surely you would want to read the works of someone and make your own judgement.
Goody, I’ve seen Irving’s videos, read interviews he did, looked into his bio, etc. I give him some credit for trying to be original and also for taking the time to track down Hitler’s entourage and interview them. But he went off the rails and is completely discredited IMO. At this point he’s also dated. To me he will always be an annoying weathervane.
I’m not defending Irving’s views on the Holocaust, either in the past or in the present. He certainly never did himself any favours when he said things like Hitler was trying his best to save the Jews and then cherry-picked a couple of documents from the archives to support the claim.

I am just stating that I think it’s too easy to try and dismiss him because of his affiliation with Holocaust denial. However, Irving is not stupid and would not want to be associated with the loonies on Scott’s shitty little forum. Can you imagine if Berg were to meet Irving? The latter would run rings around the former.

Have you watched the recent videos of Irving? He still questions the overal figure, but he admits that the Nazis gassed the Jews.

Many dated works are still worthy reads and cited e.g. Bullock’s biography of Hitler.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:46 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:39 pm
That's the thing, choices have to be made, and the criteria are often, well, imperfect because obtaining perfect criteria would also be a choice. I've not read Pat Buchanan's Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War. I am sure it's something. I don't read much denial these days either - not because it offends me or on account of bias, it just isn't worth the time.
I agree. I rely on others to help me fill in the blanks on things I can’t get to. I also go through phases where I find some things more interesting than others and concentrate on aspects or areas to the exclusion of others.

As for Pat Buchanan’s book, meh. I read it. My older brother found it useful but I didn’t.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:58 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:40 pm

Why on earth do you want someone else to form your own opinion? Surely you would want to read the works of someone and make your own judgement.
I don’t. Balmoral read Irving and I haven’t. He is better suited to give you an opinion on what he thinks.

Goody, I often follow suggestions and give suggestions of my own. I’ve read some books lately that weren’t worth the time. I’ve given my honest opinion on those books and the people that read them can either take my suggestions or ignore them. They might find some of the books I disliked worth reading. Or they might agree with me.
Goody, I’ve seen Irving’s videos, read interviews he did, looked into his bio, etc. I give him some credit for trying to be original and also for taking the time to track down Hitler’s entourage and interview them. But he went off the rails and is completely discredited IMO. At this point he’s also dated. To me he will always be an annoying weathervane.


I’m not defending Irving’s views on the Holocaust, either in the past or in the present. He certainly never did himself any favours when he said things like Hitler was trying his best to save the Jews and then cherry-picked a couple of documents from the archives to support the claim.

I am just stating that I think it’s too easy to try and dismiss him because of his affiliation with Holocaust denial. However, Irving is not stupid and would not want to be associated with the loonies on Scott’s shitty little forum. Can you imagine if Berg were to meet Irving? The latter would run rings around the former.

Have you watched the recent videos of Irving? He still questions the overal figure, but he admits that the Nazis gassed the Jews.

Many dated works are still worthy reads and cited e.g. Bullock’s biography of Hitler.
LOL, I actually didn’t like Bullock’s book on Hitler. But I did like his book “Parallel Lives,” the one on Hitler and Stalin .

Yes, I’ve watched his recent videos. I like using the one where he admits that yes about 5-6 million Jews died to freak out deniers.

As for dated works I don’t discard them. I’m getting ready to purchase Gerald Reitlinger’s
The Final Solution: The Attempt to Exterminate the Jews of Europe, 1939-1945 and Léon Poliakov’s
Harvest of hate;: The Nazi program for the destruction of the Jews of Europe. Both are almost 70 years old but I want to read them to see how views on the subject changed.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

Balmoral95
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3076
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Balmoral95 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:09 am

Jeff, your study of this material won't in anyway be diminished by skipping Irving.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:11 am

Opportunity costs.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

Balmoral95
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3076
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Balmoral95 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:20 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:11 am
Opportunity costs.
If you're talking time here, most of his stuff is fairly short and reads very easily.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:22 am

I am. But seriously, I can't get to what I very much want to read . . . I have 5-6 tall stacks of unread books. Irving ain't gonna push any titles out of contention. Plus, I seem to keep buying new titles.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:24 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:22 am
I am. But seriously, I can't get to what I very much want to read . . . I have 5-6 tall stacks of unread books. Irving ain't gonna push any titles out of contention. Plus, I seem to keep buying new titles.
I’m the same. I can’t see any point in tossing in an Irving.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

Balmoral95
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3076
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Balmoral95 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:26 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:22 am
I am. But seriously, I can't get to what I very much want to read . . . I have 5-6 tall stacks of unread books. Irving ain't gonna push any titles out of contention. Plus, I seem to keep buying new titles.
Sure, if, eg, a choice came down to reading Irving versus Reuth and/or Longerich on Goebbels, Irving loses...

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:30 am

Sadly for me I’ve stumbled onto Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum’s collection of books which means I’m now perusing their catalogue.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:40 am

Ha I just received a shipment from the museum:

* Gradowski's manuscript
* a new book of Olere's art work
* a conversation with SK member Henryk Mandelbaum
* VOM on evacuation of the camp (document collection)
* an evaluation of Höss written by a Catholic priest
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:41 am

Damnit.... :D
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:49 am

They publish interesting stuff, usually heavily empirical, and it is very inexpensive.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:55 am

I may push it back, I’ve got this as something I want:
Wendy Lower
Nazi Empire-Building and the Holocaust in Ukraine
New edition Edition
And this:
Waitman Wade Beorn
The Holocaust in Eastern Europe: At the Epicenter of the Final Solution (Perspectives on the Holocaust)
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:16 am

Beorn is likely not a must-read, based on my having read one of his books and having seen him give two papers.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

Balmoral95
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3076
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Balmoral95 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:52 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:36 pm
If you want to read something sad and maddening, read his testimony in the Lipstadt-Irving trial. There needs to be a new word beyond pompous, pretentious, imperious, pontifical, tendentious, and narcissistic. No word I know quite captures his performance.
Mills was at the Lipstadt Trial? :mrgreen:

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26397
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Feb 18, 2019 2:31 am

LOL
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 11897
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:23 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:46 pm
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:39 pm
That's the thing, choices have to be made, and the criteria are often, well, imperfect because obtaining perfect criteria would also be a choice. I've not read Pat Buchanan's Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War. I am sure it's something. I don't read much denial these days either - not because it offends me or on account of bias, it just isn't worth the time.
I agree. I rely on others to help me fill in the blanks on things I can’t get to. I also go through phases where I find some things more interesting than others and concentrate on aspects or areas to the exclusion of others.

As for Pat Buchanan’s book, meh. I read it. My older brother found it useful but I didn’t.
I did see Buchanan’s book listed on CODOH. Buchanan doesn’t deny the Holocaust in his book but seems to think the sacrifice of Eastern Europe’s Jewish worthwhile to keep Britain, France and the US out of the war.
A sober appraisal would put Himmler himself in the racially average band, or to some extent even below it: his face was round rather than oval, his nose more broad than slim, his normal bearing more ‘sagging’ than erect...
Longerich: Himmler

Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, is it possible that Carlo Mattogno is the greatest scholar the world has ever known?
:lol: :lol:
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=31585&p=713843#p713843

User avatar
Nessie
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3073
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Nessie » Mon Feb 18, 2019 10:19 am

Some denier claims of revisions just show how dreadful they are when it comes to chronology. There have been cases where a denier has realised an error, without realising it had already been pointed out by an academic. The denier crows about their amazing discovery, the rest applaud. The only reason they think denial has caused revisions is because they heard about the denier claim before they became aware of the academic historical work and so they think denial came first. But, ask them to date when the academic historical work appeared and when the denier claim was first made and that just makes their head explode. Camp number revisions are examples of that.

Then there may be instances where a denier has made a claim, which is unevidenced and really just a guess. Later, an academic has done some research and found that the claim is correct. Deniers would claim credit for that, but the real credit is to the academic who did the research work. I cannot think of any examples of that.

Then there are pseudo-revisions, for example; how much wood was used on the pyres at TII? Mattogno produces a lot of "figures" claiming not enough trees had been chopped down to fuel the pyres. All that does is show how much we do not know about they set the pyres at TII. Deniers think it shows they cannot have burnt the bodies as described, but that is just an argument from ignorance and incredulity. They think they have caused a revision, when all they have done is just revealed something we do not know.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Goody67 » Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:23 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:58 pm
I don’t. Balmoral read Irving and I haven’t. He is better suited to give you an opinion on what he thinks.

Goody, I often follow suggestions and give suggestions of my own. I’ve read some books lately that weren’t worth the time. I’ve given my honest opinion on those books and the people that read them can either take my suggestions or ignore them. They might find some of the books I disliked worth reading. Or they might agree with me.
Why is Balmoral better suited? An opinion is just an opinion.

In all fairness, I don't need anyone's opinion about Irving's books, I read his works years ago. Most of his books do not mention anything that can be really considered Holocaust denial - even when he questioned Hitler's involvement in the Holocaust in his book Hitler's War, he still wrote wrote extensively about the horrors unleashed against the Jews, including mentions of the extermination of the Jews - however, his argument was that there is no document evidence that Hitler knew of what was happening to the deported Jews. He also wrote that if the Nazis had won the war then the future would not have been good for the Jews, the Slavs and Bolsheviks (especially if they were Jewish). So, despite there being some text in the book that one may find troublesome to believe e.g. Hitler never knew what was happening to the deported Jews, there is still a lot of excellent information to read.

A PDF version of Hitler's War is free to read:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Hitler/2001/HW_Web_dl.pdf

Most of his books are available to read via PDF.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/index.html

I think Irving is a great example of why a historian should not get involved with Holocaust denial. Before Irving's involvement with the BS, his works were widely read, different editions of his books were published, his books were translated into different languages and often cited by other authors. Then, by his own doing, he lost everything and became bankrupt in the early 2000s and is now only thought of as being a Holocaust denier.

I do think it's quite sad that an intelligent man who has such an extensive amount of knowledge of the Hitler, the Third Reich and WW2 is now and more than likely forever only associated with Holocaust denial. He did bring it all on himself, but some of his works are really good reads and yet people think that only far-right neo-Nazis, fascists, etc, are attracted to his works when they have probably never even read any of his books! Similarly, if one cites Irving then he or she runs the risk of being described as any of what I mentioned.

I think that over the years Irving has said some awful things, made some ridiculous judgments and conclusions, but I don't think his works should be ignored.

As I have already mentioned, historians like Kershaw cited Irving in their works after he was openly involved with Holocaust denial, but most people do not bother checking the footnotes of books. But, if you were to mention Irving and Kershaw in a conversation then I'm sure you would notice the different tones of voice.
LOL, I actually didn’t like Bullock’s book on Hitler. But I did like his book “Parallel Lives,” the one on Hitler and Stalin .
I think it was a good book for its time. His book Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives is arguably one the most definitive book explaining how similar the two dictators were in many ways. As far as the similarities between the two dictatorships, I recommend you, if you have not already, to read Richard Overy's The Dictators: Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia and Ian Kershaw's Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.

The Wikipedia article Comparison of Nazism and Stalinism also has some very good references.
Yes, I’ve watched his recent videos. I like using the one where he admits that yes about 5-6 million Jews died to freak out deniers.
Exactly. Despite his association with Holocaust denial and at one point being a key figure, I do make a distinction between Irving and nutjobs like Berg.
As for dated works I don’t discard them. I’m getting ready to purchase Gerald Reitlinger’s
The Final Solution: The Attempt to Exterminate the Jews of Europe, 1939-1945 and Léon Poliakov’s
Harvest of hate;: The Nazi program for the destruction of the Jews of Europe. Both are almost 70 years old but I want to read them to see how views on the subject changed.
Good. There are many older books, especially from the 1960s and 1970s that are worth reading.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 514
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Did deniers actually manage to cause "revisions" ?

Post by Goody67 » Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:29 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:22 am
I am. But seriously, I can't get to what I very much want to read . . . I have 5-6 tall stacks of unread books. Irving ain't gonna push any titles out of contention. Plus, I seem to keep buying new titles.
The point I was trying to make is that I think it's wrong to just refuse categorically to read the works of someone because of preconceived opinions of that person.

Some people regard Churchill as controversial (e.g. his statements about Indian people), does that mean we should not read any of his works?

Hitler was an absolute bastard, should people not read Mein Kampf and try to get inside the head of the nutjob?

I think sometimes it's important for one to just bite the bullet and read certain books that he or she does like.
"Good friends, good books, and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life." - Mark Twain