The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Why are holocaust revisionist persecutor any better than Islamic terrorists?

Scroll to see replies

Then I completely missed the point of your post :wink: Apologies.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Simes
It is only illegal in a very few countries.


Indeed. But the OP was making the point that criticism of the Holocaust is illegal in modern liberal nations like Germany and Austria and asks an important question as to why people seem to accept that example of curtailing of the freedom of speech, but when it comes to the act of drawing Muhammad, everyone is suddenly a supporter of freedom of speech. The question asked was what the difference was.


Original post by Simes
Deny it here if you want. But you will be ripped to shreds for being an ignorant idiotic f**kwit.


As I stated in my post that you quoted, "Debate is important and all sides have the right to voice their opinion regardless of how wrong it might be." So this merely is in agreement to the point I raised.

Original post by Simes
That's because those that do, are. And you dislike it because it offends you. I wonder why? :rolleyes:


Many people who deny it are anti-Semitic. But the problem I am stating is that it is a false dichotomy to assume that there are only two positions, namely denial or acceptance of the Holocaust. One can merely question the figures for example, whilst still actively agreeing that the Holocaust happened and that it was an awful event. But the danger of silencing any disagreement leads us to dangerous territory where any conservative figures could lead to one be brandished an anti-Semite. That would be an anti-intellectual position.

As for the bold, I am unsure what you are trying to state here? Would you please elaborate as to what you are trying to imply?


Original post by Simes
Yes, millions or millions. It happened. They're dead. People killed them. Accept it. Then get on with your life.


Where have I at any point said that millions didn't or that it didn't happen? I am merely supporting the position of intellectuals to debate and discuss the Holocaust without having to fear being tarnished by anti-intellectual ad-hominems. I am merely making a case for the freedom to criticise. Unless you think you are in a position of knowledge to be able to debate the intellectuals who produce more conservative figures, I don't think you can merely brush them aside.

And as a side note, because you seem to be jumping to hasty conclusions, I do believe the Holocaust happened and I do believe the current estimates of 6million, which is agreed by a majority of experts on the subject. Your hasty generalisations are dangerous and as much of an attack against freedom of speech as those who oppose the drawing of Muhammad.

Original post by Simes
That's because it was a special genocide: industrialised killing by a civilised nation with a well-educated population.


Genocide is genocide. I don't believe the fact that it was committed by a "well-educated" population makes a difference. Well educated people are just as capable of being swayed by propaganda. The Nazi's were able to use the Jewish people as a scapegoat for the gentile German population who had suffered during the financial crisis, ignoring the fact that Jewish people also suffered during the hyperinflation. To quote from 'Antisemitism: Myth and Hate from Antiquity to Present' by Marvin Perry and Frederick Schweitzer:


"Jews, who wholeheartedly embraced German culture (the much-remarked “love affair”), were proud of their contributions to that culture and to economic life. But many Germans, viewing Jews as an alien “Asiatic race,” or still harboring medieval anti-Judaic sentiments, resented their success and engaged in antisemitic polemics.... As has happened so often, indeed predictably, in economic crises and downturns, scapegoats are needed, and antisemites quickly come to the fore. “Antisemitism rises as the stock market falls” went a German saying"

Pg. 145


And, whilst this statistics are from Hungary, I think they are a good representation of Jewish achievement and are reflective of similar statistics in Germany:

"In independent Hungary in 1930, a Jewish population of 5.1 percent accounted for 34.4 percent of doctors, 49.1 percent of lawyers, 45.1 percent of pharmacists, 31.7 percent of journalists, 28.9 percent of musicians, 24.1 percent of actors, and stood at the “commanding heights” of banking, trade, and industry, so that a fifth to a quarter of the national wealth was “Jewish."

Pg. 137



Original post by Simes
Stalin's mass killing of his own people is well known about.

Because nobody is denying it.


So is the Holocaust. People do deny the Holodomor. Quite a number of intellectuals on the left throughout the 20th century chose to deny the Holodomor. Here is a wikipedia article dedicated to the subject of Holodomor denial:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor

Original post by Simes
It's not, except in a very few countries. Watch:

The Holocaust never happened.

Only it did.


But the OP's post was making a relevant point about how some liberal Western nations such as Germany and Austria have made it illegal.

I never denied the Holocaust. I merely defend free speech, the freedom to criticise and the freedom to hold unpopular opinions. To quote Christopher Hitchens, himself quoting John Stuart Mill, "if all of society were agreed on the truth and beauty and value of one proposition, all except one person it would be most important, in fact it would become even more important, that that one heretic be heard because we would still benefit from his perhaps outrageous or appalling view."

The quote above is a powerful quote and one that underlines how important I believe free speech to be and why, regardless of whether you denigrate me if you must with ad hominems, I will not accept anyone trying to attack my freedom of speech.


Original post by Simes
And the others can say those who deny it are anti-Semitic liars and those who defend them are ignorant idiotic f**kwits.

Next?


Yes they may say that. They are free to criticise those who deny the Holocaust, although an intelligent person would not need to resort to such puerile name calling but merely present the facts.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Guybrush Sheepgood
Because the holocaust was so blindingly obviously true that the only possible reason to deny it is due to antisemitic views and an intention to incite hatred.

Holocaust denial poses a real danger to Jews.


If it is so blindingly true then anyone denying it would seem like a fool and the law should not exist stopping them portraying their foolish, despicable views which should be protected by 'freedom of speech' as promoted by those who support Charlie Hebdo (summed up by Voltaire's: 'I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to death your right to say it.') we cannot be selective over freedom of speech and only extend the privilege to those who wish to insult Islam.

It can very easily be argued that the cartoons ridiculing Islam were made to incite hatred (which they did) and so should be illegal.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by yabbayabba
I agree that the fact that it is illegal to express religion in public in France is hypocritical, and makes no sense in conjunction with the idea of freedom of expression.

But Holocaust denial is denying something that actually happened and can be proven physically. Religion isn't something that can be physically proven so far more debatable.

I for one don't think total freedom of speech is a good idea or practical, and in fact it doesn't exist - people aren't entirely 'free' as some people don't express ideas they may have for fear they will be socially excluded.


So? I'm free to deny all sorts of things if I so wish. I'm allowed to hold onto and express my belief in the theory of phlogiston if I so please. Such laws are dangerous because they put a stop to any enquiry. What if there were (hypothetically) a completely mythical genicide, if laws were put in place to stop denial of that genicide can you not see how dangerous it would be?

If freedom of speech is not total it doesn't exist. North Koreans have free speech, so long as they don't say anything offensive about their leader etc.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Guybrush Sheepgood
Because the holocaust was so blindingly obviously true that the only possible reason to deny it is due to antisemitic views and an intention to incite hatred.

Holocaust denial poses a real danger to Jews.


How? Holocaust deniers as a general group might, but how does holocaust denial?
Interesting that free speech being banned at the state level does not attract the same attention. What are people really protesting when they say Je Suis Charlie?

If Holocaust denial offends you, either suck it up or don't listen to the deniers, right? :indiff:
Original post by Reptilian
If it is so blindingly true then anyone denying it would seem like a fool and the law should not exist stopping them portraying their foolish, despicable views which should be protected by 'freedom of speech' as promoted by those who support Charlie Hebdo (summed up by Voltaire's: 'I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to death your right to say it.') we cannot be selective over freedom of speech and only extend the privilege to those who wish to insult Islam.

It can very easily be argued that the cartoons ridiculing Islam were made to incite hatred (which they did) and so should be illegal.


Posted from TSR Mobile


The law is not there to protect the Jewish religion, it is there to protect the Jewish people. The law does nothing to say you cannot criticise the Jewish religious beliefs, just as the law does nothing to say you cannot criticise Islamic religious beliefs.
Original post by Guybrush Sheepgood
The law is not there to protect the Jewish religion, it is there to protect the Jewish people. The law does nothing to say you cannot criticise the Jewish religious beliefs, just as the law does nothing to say you cannot criticise Islamic religious beliefs.


Surely it's laws against Murder, Violent Crime, Arson etc. that protect the jewish people no?
Original post by Guybrush Sheepgood
The law is not there to protect the Jewish religion, it is there to protect the Jewish people. The law does nothing to say you cannot criticise the Jewish religious beliefs, just as the law does nothing to say you cannot criticise Islamic religious beliefs.


That's BS. Historical events should not be exempt from questions and criticism. I, for one, do not believe that the Holocaust occurred in the magnitude that they tell us it did and these laws affirm my belief but that does not mean that my belief somehow endangers Jews.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 109
Avatar for Josb
Josb
6
Original post by Reptilian
Why is it that the French will bang on about freedom of speech and freedom to say the most despicable things is a bastion of their culture and one which is essential for democracy but:

1. Holocaust denial is an imprisonable offence in France and many other European countries

2. It is illegal to express your religion in public.

Is this not major hypocrisy?


Posted from TSR Mobile

It's also illegal to deny slavery trade.

These memorial laws were passed by JC Gayssot and Christiane Taubira, the current minister of Justice. Historians have been strongly against them.
(edited 9 years ago)
Holocaust denial endangers people, stupid.
Satire just leaves you with a load of butthurt folks.
Reply 111
Avatar for Josb
Josb
6
Original post by Reptilian
That's BS. Historical events should not be exempt from questions and criticism. I, for one, do not believe that the Holocaust occurred in the magnitude that they tell us it did and these laws affirm my belief but that does not mean that my belief somehow endangers Jews.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Write a book to support your thoughts.
Original post by Josb
Write a book to support your thoughts.


Well depending upon where they live, they may not be able to write such a book. Hence the problem, wherever you stand on this you have to admit that holocaust denial laws completely stifle debate.
Original post by Dani California
Holocaust denial endangers people, stupid.
Satire just leaves you with a load of butthurt folks.


Oh and I'm sure these terrorist attacks directly due to satire didn't endanger anyone *whistles*


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 114
Avatar for uer23
uer23
15
Original post by Guybrush Sheepgood
The law is not there to protect the Jewish religion, it is there to protect the Jewish people. The law does nothing to say you cannot criticise the Jewish religious beliefs, just as the law does nothing to say you cannot criticise Islamic religious beliefs.


You seem to get the two conflated. Denying the holocaust is not a direct link to murder and violence. It's not a prerequisite to violence against Jews. It is just what it is, an idea. In idiotic one of that.
Original post by Reptilian
Oh and I'm sure these terrorist attacks directly due to satire didn't endanger anyone *whistles*


Posted from TSR Mobile

C'mon, we both know that most people don't respond this way to satire. T'was a slight over reaction.
Original post by yabbayabba

But Holocaust denial is denying something that actually happened and can be proven physically.


Not necessarily. Sure, outright denial is a bit ridiculous considering the number of witness accounts, Nazi documentation and the fact that Auschwitz still stands along with all the box cars.
But did it happen the way we're told it did? Some people believe the 6 million figure is a huge exaggeration, and that a large portion of prisoners died from a typhoid outbreak rather than mass execution.
If it's illegal to express religion in France, then **** france. Bunch of hypocrites.

Je ne suis pas Charlie.
Original post by limetang
Surely it's laws against Murder, Violent Crime, Arson etc. that protect the jewish people no?


Well these laws existed in WW2 and they didn't work, so no.

Original post by uer23
You seem to get the two conflated. Denying the holocaust is not a direct link to murder and violence. It's not a prerequisite to violence against Jews. It is just what it is, an idea. In idiotic one of that.


I am not getting anything conflated.

I never said it was a 'direct' link, or a prerequisite, that would of course be nonsense.
Original post by bittr n swt
If it's illegal to express religion in France, then **** france. Bunch of hypocrites.

Je ne suis pas Charlie.


The French take seperation of Church and State far, far more seriously than the UK does. The laws against public displays of religion have, as far as I know, their roots in the revolution and freedom FROM religion rather than an oppression of ones personal beliefs.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you