Holocaust anti-denial laws

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 25 Oct 2004 06:17

There is an interesting article, published in 2000, discussing the efficacy of anti-denial laws, the countries which have them, and the dates the laws were enacted at:

http://www.jpr.org.uk/Reports/CS_Report ... 0/main.htm

waffen · Post by **waffen** » 25 Oct 2004 09:40

intersting david that these laws have all been updated .. good link..

Dan · Post by **Dan** » 25 Oct 2004 11:09

It's still out of date, there are now others like Romania.

Konrad · Post by **Konrad** » 25 Oct 2004 21:48

The article is quite an eye opener.

Interesting is the fact that the introduction of such laws is publicly discussed in Great Britain.

In Germany the anti-denial paragraph §130 was simply pushed down the throats of the Germans by the politicians, who may have needed something like that in order to deal with Israel and the US-East Coast.

Interesting are also the consequences in Germany by many Germans: Strong anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist, anti-Israel sentiments. Of course not by the media and the German politicians so much. They are OK and play along.

I am talking here of the man on the street.

When will anti-denial laws finally come to the US?

White Rose · Post by **White Rose** » 26 Oct 2004 03:58

Konrad wrote:[...]Interesting is the fact that the introduction of such laws is publicly discussed in Great Britain.

In Germany the anti-denial paragraph §130 was simply pushed down the throats of the Germans by the politicians, who may have needed something like that in order to deal with Israel and the US-East Coast.

Interesting are also the consequences in Germany by many Germans: Strong anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist, anti-Israel sentiments. Of course not by the media and the German politicians so much. They are OK and play along.

I am talking here of the man on the street.

I'm not sure of the actual motivation inside of Germany for these laws, but outside pressure for her to control her more extreme right are probably definately a factor, and rightfully so.

While I'm not sure repression is the right tool, there are many people (not just "Israel and the US East Coast") that would be offended to hear the German extreme denying the attrocities of the Nazis.

I'm interested in your "man on the street" perspective though. Did you take a survey (or read about one), or is this through contacts you know inside the country?

I do know that there is some discontent lingering after reunification, with the East not performing as well as everyone expected. In these areas there is a resurgence of both the left and the right, as people feel as though the deal isn't great in the post-communist era.

Konrad wrote:When will anti-denial laws finally come to the US?

I don't think the US will go big guns on anti-denial, as the hate laws they have are pretty strong.

One of the interesting things in the piece is that it points out that education, not legislation, is the more effective tool to fight denial. Light, not heat, will carry the day in a democratic arena.

WalterS · Post by **WalterS** » 26 Oct 2004 14:21

Very interesting, David. Thanks for the link.

The first paragraph of the report is worth repeating here:

Holocaust denial is an especially pernicious form of antisemitism. Claims that the Holocaust did not happen imply that the idea of the Holocaust is a myth created by Jews for their own ends. Holocaust denial is therefore not the expression in good faith of a legitimate interpretation of history; it is designed to engender hostility against Jews, and is insulting and offensive to Jews, other victims of the Holocaust and all who value truth and the lessons we can learn from history

One hopes that the moderators and administrator of this forum keep this in mind when deciding whether or not to enforce the posted denial rules.

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 26 Oct 2004 16:05

A rambling, off-topic opinion post by cyberdaemon, which raised several unsourced claims as well, was deleted by the moderator. His previous warning on these violations was posted at http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=45757 -- DT.

The topic is holocaust anti-denial laws. Please stay on it.

White Rose · Post by **White Rose** » 26 Oct 2004 17:39

David Thompson wrote:The topic is holocaust anti-denial laws. Please stay on it.

As a contrast, is there any legislation in any of these countries mandating holocaust education? I'm a very strong proponent of education, and I think that is the real key to this. Of course, to be effective the courses should address the subject of denial as well.

I think the key is to teach critical thinking. In high school, I took a course in Ancient History. For almost a week, we read a book and watched films about how it was "impossible" for humans to have constructed various structures (Easter Island's statues, the Pyramids, etc), and showed how they were built by aliens. At the end of the week, we had a test, and the teacher asked the class how many people thought this theory was "credible". Almost 1/3 of the class put up their hands. We then watched a film which, point by point, debunked EVERY point we had been shown.

What I came away with was that theories are great, and if they are neatly packaged and well sold, that uncritical people will "buy" them. So, just because something is dressed in scholarly robes, it shouldn't be given credit until it is challenged and shown to be credible.

Marcus · Post by **Marcus** » 26 Oct 2004 17:46

Two posts made in response to the previously removed post by cyberdaemon has been removed.

/Marcus

Major Santiago · Post by **Major Santiago** » 26 Oct 2004 19:06

I agree with White Rose, we must question, is human nature.

My question to the Moderator or anyone is ?

Is there a difference between denial and just questioning the subject ?
As I read the document it makes me believe that the Law was made to protect the population in questions as a preferred person, we have no laws to protect in this way any other group ,only this exception ?

I don’t deny it happened, many people died, Gays, Germans, and Gypsies, how about them ?
Do we need to legislate thought? If we are not allowed to question a subject?
What happens next ?
I question the first paragraph of the report, but respect their point. Is that wrong ?

I have noticed a preferred line in this forum, sad.

“which raised several un-sourced claims as well”

David Thompson · Post by **David Thompson** » 26 Oct 2004 19:15

Major Santiago -- You asked:

(1)

My question to the Moderator or anyone is ?

Is there a difference between denial and just questioning the subject ?

The forum and section rules are posted at:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962

The explanation for the rule on holocaust denial can be seen at:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=10881

(2)

I don’t deny it happened, many people died, Gays, Germans, and Gypsies, how about them ?

There's no shortage of discussions of the other victims of the holocaust in this section of the forum. You can find threads on these subjects in the German and Axis war crimes FAQs announcement or by using the forum search engine, available by clicking on the search link at the top of the page.

Erik · Post by **Erik** » 26 Oct 2004 22:13

WalterS quoted and wrote:

The first paragraph of the report is worth repeating here:

Holocaust denial is an especially pernicious form of antisemitism. Claims that the Holocaust did not happen imply that the idea of the Holocaust is a myth created by Jews for their own ends. Holocaust denial is therefore not the expression in good faith of a legitimate interpretation of history; it is designed to engender hostility against Jews, and is insulting and offensive to Jews, other victims of the Holocaust and all who value truth and the lessons we can learn from history.
One hopes that the moderators and administrator of this forum keep this in mind when deciding whether or not to enforce the posted denial rules.

White Rose came away with:

[…]We then watched a film which, point by point, debunked EVERY point we had been shown.

What I came away with was that theories are great, and if they are neatly packaged and well sold, that uncritical people will "buy" them. So, just because something is dressed in scholarly robes, it shouldn't be given credit until it is challenged and shown to be credible.

If you ”value truth and the lessons we can learn from history”, when will you decide to ”enforce […]denial rules”?

What time is the right time of a history lesson on "truth rulings"?

When truth is ”given credit” by those ”uncritical people” that will ”buy”[…] ”neatly packaged and well sold theories” that are ”great”?

Those that are suckers for something ”dressed in scholarly robes”?

Considering the ”lessons we can learn from history”what happened to truth when ”denial rules” waited ”until it is challenged and shown to be credible” before they were enforced?

They always wait until it is too late, don't they?

White Rose · Post by **White Rose** » 27 Oct 2004 02:03

Major Santiago wrote:Is there a difference between denial and just questioning the subject ?

Yes. I think everyone has questions. The sheer enormity makes it so. It is still hard to believe, even if you are _fully_ convinced.

Major Santiago wrote:As I read the document it makes me believe that the Law was made to protect the population in questions as a preferred person, we have no laws to protect in this way any other group ,only this exception ?

I think there are many laws that have been enacted to protect minorities. There are "hate laws" or other such names for them, their purpose is to protect smaller groups that are singled out for intimidation by fringe elements.

Major Santiago wrote:I don’t deny it happened, many people died, Gays, Germans, and Gypsies, how about them ?

Indeeed, what about them? Your implication is that they aren't important, and I don't think that is true. But denial isn't generally focused on these groups, but rather on Jews. I think it's important to remember all of the victims of this crime.

Major Santiago wrote:Do we need to legislate thought? If we are not allowed to question a subject? What happens next ?

Questions are the key to scholarly understanding. I don't think that legislation is the right approach personally. But this isn't about legislating thought, it's about legislating speech. A discussion isn't precluded, especially if it is done in private.

Major Santiago wrote:I question the first paragraph of the report, but respect their point. Is that wrong ?

I'm guessing that you are touching on the point about anti-semitism. While you are definately entitled to your opinion, look closely at any of the groups that support denial, and look for signs of hostility towards Jews. Many of the sites are openly anit-semitic, or carry links or associations with anti-semitic organizations.

Major Santiago wrote:I have noticed a preferred line in this forum, sad.
“which raised several un-sourced claims as well”

As this is a discussion forum on history, and such discussions should have a basis in historical fact. While there are places to postulate and theorize, we are here to interpret and argue about history, not create it.

White Rose · Post by **White Rose** » 27 Oct 2004 02:34

Erik wrote: White Rose came away with:

[…]We then watched a film which, point by point, debunked EVERY point we had been shown.

What I came away with was that theories are great, and if they are neatly packaged and well sold, that uncritical people will "buy" them. So, just because something is dressed in scholarly robes, it shouldn't be given credit until it is challenged and shown to be credible.
If you ”value truth and the lessons we can learn from history”, when will you decide to ”enforce […]denial rules”?

What time is the right time of a history lesson on "truth rulings"?

In a perfect world, we could craft a law against ignorance and humanity would then have well rounded backgrounds in all fields. Unfortunately, we live in the real world, and the only defence against ignorance is education.

Erik wrote: When truth is ”given credit” by those ”uncritical people” that will ”buy”[…] ”neatly packaged and well sold theories” that are ”great”?

Those that are suckers for something ”dressed in scholarly robes”?

Considering the ”lessons we can learn from history”what happened to truth when ”denial rules” waited ”until it is challenged and shown to be credible” before they were enforced?

They always wait until it is too late, don't they?

While it's nice to combine and twist together my comments with another member, you are trying to imply that "WalterS" and I are on the same side of the coin, when that just isn't true. He has advocated that deniers not be given any airing of their views, while I've argued that it's necessary to examine and address their viewpoints in the context of examing the holocaust.

However, this forum is run by neither WalterS or I, and we do not make the rules. In fact, I had a response censored (rightfully so) when it was deemed to be "in violation" of the rules. All of us agreed to these rules, so I'm not sure what the fuss is.

Back to the topic at hand... "holocaust denial laws".

WalterS · Post by **WalterS** » 27 Oct 2004 03:37

White Rose wrote:

While it's nice to combine and twist together my comments with another member, you are trying to imply that "WalterS" and I are on the same side of the coin, when that just isn't true. He has advocated that deniers not be given any airing of their views

I have argued no such thing. What I have argued is that since the forum has rules against denial, those rules should be enforced, or expunged. This is a history forum. Discussion and debate about accepted historical fact should be welcome. There is a difference, however, between discussion and debate about accepted historical facts and denial that those facts exist.