|
On November 13 2012 01:51 Fruscainte wrote:
I just want to play devils advocate for a moment but maybe it's a bit hard not to look back at the early days of the Nazi Regime and see how it could be beneficial in some ways. Perhaps some of these people are not so much for the killing of jews and antisemitism but for the National Socialism and the absolutely unprecedented and, in my opinion, still unmatched level of economic growth it gave for the German people.
And how can you blame them? Look at the economic situation in Europe. Two years ago we had the greatest recession since the Great Depression and it hit Europe just as hard. Germany is having to pick up all the slack for the rest of the EU and it's starting to get to them, and some people are looking back at how NSDAP saved the German Economy 80 years ago.
With that said, I do not believe Nazi-ism is the answer to any economic issue nor do I think National Socialism is a good economic system for anything other than a wartime economy, but I think that might play into the mindset of some of these people.
It actually wasn´t even for a wartime economy, but this kind of nuanced discussion is impossible in modern day germany because of the taboos that still govern discussion.
This pedestal actually makes them attractive for a certain fringe hence the satanism comparison...
|
You think German Nazi's are scary? Go to Greece or Russia...
|
9% of any countries' population is probably willfully ignorant to a disgusting level. the 9% furthest 'right' in the US are bible-thumping, bigoted, over-nationalistic idiots that give us a bad name, particularly in Europe. (when in reality most right voters are just brainwashed that they can become rich and dont want to pay taxes in future or super selfish and not really as dumb)
9% most right people in india run religious tv networks, do staged interviews, actually postulate that india has a stronger energy industry than saudi arabia, etc...
|
It's just sensationalist crap journalism in my opinion.
I'm fed up of the terms right and left wing: they are meaningless and out of date.
From the article: "The Immortals, for example - anti-globalisation, anti-capitalist and anti-democratic" - that could just as easily describe a bunch of hippies!
They then compare that (by proxy) with a crazy terrorist cell.
I hate articles like that; it's just so dumb.
|
Neo nazis at least finland seem to be generally poor, often have mental illnesses, drug addicts, are on average less intelligent and social outcasts/dropouts that often have/feel like they have nothing to lose, so they cling on to this ideology to feel more worthy and to gain more power over others. Also some of them just simply seem to enjoy/are used to the feeling of hate and to be hated.
I think we dont have too many of them, but what i hear is that numbers are slowly growing. In my opinion this is due to growing unemployement and growing drug abuse (some drugs like meth is sold by local neo nazis so their customers often become followers)
|
A recent study by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, a foundation to promote democracy, has shown that an alarming number of Germans, to be precise: 9%, embrace far right political views an sympathize with the Nazi-Party or its (rather pathetic and ineffectual) reincarnation: NPD.
ONE recent study, which could be totally wrong (aka never trust a statistic you didn't faked youself)! I highly doubt the 9%, maybe in some (very very few) regions but never overall. You should at least link the source to these statistic not just linking spiegel-online.
Don't get me wrong, I think we have to be aware of upcoming parties from the right wing. BUT they will never gain any significant political influence anytime soon.
I would have preferred a question mark behind your thread title.
|
Sigh.
"Your political ideology is one I disagree with. Other people who subscribed to this ideology took it too far. Therefore, no one shall ever have this ideology again."
It's a bit over the top to assume that everyone who is a modern day national socialist is therefore anti-semitic or pro-aryan or whatever. People have every right to support an ideology of unity and national pride if they so wish. When that comes down to race issues the problem arises, but it's foolish to assume that all of the 15% of these people is an anti-Semite who wishes the Nazis were back and the Holocaust never stopped.
The sad reality that so many national socialists mistakenly believe in anti-Semitism or whatever is another debate entirely. But if people are sick of the bullshit politics in the western world and want to have something a little more potent, I can't sit here and judge them for it, let alone call them neo-Nazis.
|
On November 13 2012 01:17 kafkaesque wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 01:11 ppshchik wrote:Germany pretty much gave the moral high ground to the neo Nazis by the time they made Holocaust denial a crime. Poll: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime?No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech (69) 63% Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail (41) 37% 110 total votes Your vote: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime? (Vote): Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail
(Vote): No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech
There's a rather large misconception about holocaust denial laws. Nobody's ever been incarcerated due to holocaust denial, these laws are only in place to control anti-democratic propaganda. Your posts suggests that one could land in jail for that, but I could go up to a police-officer, stating that the holocaust never happened and be totally fine. These rules only apply to a political entity or public forums. A teacher can be sacked for it, a book can be banned for it, a member of parliament will lose their seet for it, but certainly nobody is going to jail for it.
That's not true. Why would you make such a claim?
Laws against holocaust denial ban... holocaust denial. People get punished under those laws for research or opinions which are contrary to officially sanctioned holocaust dogma.
For example Germar Rudolf served 3 years in prison for publishing a scientific paper on the gas chambers of Auschwitz. There is nothing political or anti-Democratic about it. It's just a scientific paper.
You should read it yourself to understand what exactly is being criminalized in your country. Unless of course it is illegal for you to read it? Then I wonder: how can you know it is okay to imprison people for years on thought crime charges if you don't understand what thoughts are criminalized?
The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/
Three years in prison. For writing a scientific paper.
|
|
|
On November 13 2012 02:04 Huyugu wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 01:17 kafkaesque wrote:On November 13 2012 01:11 ppshchik wrote:Germany pretty much gave the moral high ground to the neo Nazis by the time they made Holocaust denial a crime. Poll: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime?No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech (69) 63% Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail (41) 37% 110 total votes Your vote: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime? (Vote): Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail
(Vote): No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech
There's a rather large misconception about holocaust denial laws. Nobody's ever been incarcerated due to holocaust denial, these laws are only in place to control anti-democratic propaganda. Your posts suggests that one could land in jail for that, but I could go up to a police-officer, stating that the holocaust never happened and be totally fine. These rules only apply to a political entity or public forums. A teacher can be sacked for it, a book can be banned for it, a member of parliament will lose their seet for it, but certainly nobody is going to jail for it. That's not true. Why would you make such a claim? Laws against holocaust denial ban... holocaust denial. People get punished under those laws for research or opinions which are contrary to officially sanctioned holocaust dogma. For example Germar Rudolf served 3 years in prison for publishing a scientific paper on the gas chambers of Auschwitz. There is nothing political or anti-Democratic about it. It's just a scientific paper. You should read it yourself to understand what exactly is being criminalized in your country. Unless of course it is illegal for you to read it? Then I wonder: how can you know it is okay to imprison people for years on thought crime charges if you don't understand what thoughts are criminalized? The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitzhttp://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/Three years in prison. For writing a scientific paper.
While I agree with you that scientists shouldn't be subject to this crap, come on. What did he expect publishing a paper about the finer technical aspects of gas chambers in Germany.
|
On November 13 2012 02:04 Huyugu wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 01:17 kafkaesque wrote:On November 13 2012 01:11 ppshchik wrote:Germany pretty much gave the moral high ground to the neo Nazis by the time they made Holocaust denial a crime. Poll: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime?No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech (69) 63% Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail (41) 37% 110 total votes Your vote: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime? (Vote): Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail
(Vote): No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech
There's a rather large misconception about holocaust denial laws. Nobody's ever been incarcerated due to holocaust denial, these laws are only in place to control anti-democratic propaganda. Your posts suggests that one could land in jail for that, but I could go up to a police-officer, stating that the holocaust never happened and be totally fine. These rules only apply to a political entity or public forums. A teacher can be sacked for it, a book can be banned for it, a member of parliament will lose their seet for it, but certainly nobody is going to jail for it. That's not true. Why would you make such a claim? Laws against holocaust denial ban... holocaust denial. People get punished under those laws for research or opinions which are contrary to officially sanctioned holocaust dogma. For example Germar Rudolf served 3 years in prison for publishing a scientific paper on the gas chambers of Auschwitz. There is nothing political or anti-Democratic about it. It's just a scientific paper. You should read it yourself to understand what exactly is being criminalized in your country. Unless of course it is illegal for you to read it? Then I wonder: how can you know it is okay to imprison people for years on thought crime charges if you don't understand what thoughts are criminalized? The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitzhttp://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/Three years in prison. For writing a scientific paper.
You left out that Germar Rudolf is a holocaust denier, and if you look at the sources for this "scientific paper" they link to works published by holocaust deniers. I'm not saying it's right to imprison someone for holding a belief, but don't pretend this was some guy innocently publishing an objective scientific paper.
|
On November 13 2012 01:46 Probe1 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 01:36 WP_Insanity wrote:
I think you can separate the followers of the NPD in roughly 3 groups:
1) Young Neo-Nazis who truly believe in the third reich in the the way it was under hitlers dictatorship because of bad education and the will to have a different and extreme opinion to separate from others.
2) People who dont like the situation who are sick of the "empty talk" of politicians think NPD can change something with their aggressive attitude. These People often dont really think about that it could end in another third reich thought.
3) Older people who have the "back then everything was better" mindset.
So how can this change?
I think 3) will solved by time itself. Solving 2) should be the task of the big partys and/or the way the media presents stuff (media seems biased in politic stuff anyways, so why not in a good direction?).
What about 1? Well to be honest i dont think you can completly rule out the problem but that should be fine. What "Good old times" would older people remember? The 20s? The 30s? The 6 years of war, 10 years of rebuilding destroyed cities and 40 years of US and Soviet occupation? Or are there like, 130 year olds I haven't heard of that still remember the days of Wilhelms.
Maybe they are old enough to remember the miraculous economic recovery that took place as a result of National Socialist policies, and the brief but booming and prosperous time before Britain and France declared war? You post so confidently about a subject where your knowledge seems to be severely lacking.
How Hitler Tackled Unemployment And Revived Germany’s Economy
[...]
As he had promised, Hitler and his National Socialist government banished unemployment within four years. The number of jobless was cut from six million at the beginning of 1933, when he took power, to one million by 1936. / 7 So rapidly was the jobless rate reduced that by 1937-38 there was a national labor shortage. / 8
For the great mass of Germans, wages and working conditions improved steadily. From 1932 to 1938 gross real weekly earnings increased by 21 percent. After taking into account tax and insurance deductions and adjustments to the cost of living, the increase in real weekly earnings during this period was 14 percent. At the same time, rents remained stable, and there was a relative decline in the costs of heating and light. Prices actually declined for some consumer goods, such as electrical appliances, clocks and watches, as well as for some foods. "Consumer prices rose at an average annual rate of just 1.2 percent between 1933 and 1939," notes British historian Niall Ferguson. "This meant that Germans workers were better off in real as well as nominal terms: between 1933 and 1938, weekly net earnings (after tax) rose by 22 percent, while the cost of living rose by just seven percent." Even after the outbreak of war in September 1939, workers’ income continued to rise. By 1943 average hourly earnings of German workers had risen by 25 percent, and weekly earnings by 41 percent. / 9
The “normal” work day for most Germans was eight hours, and pay for overtime work was generous. / 10 In addition to higher wages, benefits included markedly improved working conditions, such as better health and safety conditions, canteens with subsidized hot meals, athletic fields, parks, subsidized theater performances and concerts, exhibitions, sports and hiking groups, dances, adult education courses, and subsidized tourism. / 11 An already extensive network of social welfare programs, including old age insurance and a national health care program, was expanded.
Hitler wanted Germans to have “the highest possible standard of living,” he said in an interview with an American journalist in early 1934. “In my opinion, the Americans are right in not wanting to make everyone the same but rather in upholding the principle of the ladder. However, every single person must be granted the opportunity to climb up the ladder.” / 12 In keeping with this outlook, Hitler’s government promoted social mobility, with wide opportunities to improve and advance. As Prof. Garraty notes: “It is beyond argument that the Nazis encouraged working-class social and economic mobility.” To encourage acquisition of new skills, the government greatly expanded vocational training programs, and offered generous incentives for further advancement of efficient workers. / 13
Both National Socialist ideology and Hitler’s basic outlook, writes historian John Garraty, “inclined the regime to favor the ordinary German over any elite group. Workers … had an honored place in the system.” In accord with this, the regime provided substantive fringe benefits for workers that included subsidized housing, low-cost excursions, sports programs, and more pleasing factory facilities. / 14
In his detailed and critical biography of Hitler, historian Joachim Fest acknowledged: “The regime insisted that it was not the rule of one social class above all others, and by granting everyone opportunities to rise, it in fact demonstrated class neutrality … These measures did indeed break through the old, petrified social structures. They tangibly improved the material condition of much of the population.” / 15
A few figures give an idea of how the quality of life improved. Between 1932, the last year of the pre-Hitler era, and 1938, the last full year before the outbreak of war, food consumption increased by one sixth, while clothing and textile turnover increased by more than a quarter, and of furniture and household goods by 50 percent. / 16 During the Third Reich’s peacetime years, wine consumption rose by 50 percent, and champagne consumption increased five-fold. / 17 Between 1932 and 1938, the volume of tourism more than doubled, while automobile ownership during the 1930s tripled. / 18 German motor vehicle production, which included cars made by the US-owned Ford and General Motors (Opel) works, doubled in the five years of 1932 to 1937, while Germany’s motor vehicle exports increased eight-fold. Air passenger traffic in Germany more than tripled from 1933 to 1937. / 19
German business revived and prospered. During the first four years of the National Socialist era, net profits of large corporations quadrupled, and managerial and entrepreneurial income rose by nearly 50 percent. / 20 Between 1933 and 1938, notes historian Niall Ferguson, Germany's "gross domestic product grew, on average, by a remarkable eleven percent a year," with no significant increase in the rate of inflation. / 21 “Things were to get even better,” writes Jewish historian Richard Grunberger in his detailed study, The Twelve-Year Reich. “In the three years between 1939 and 1942 German industry expanded as much as it had during the preceding fifty years.” / 20
[...]
http://www.ihr.org/other/economyhitler2011.html
|
Our system is cracking and extremely stupid mentality tends to come with crysis. In Italy, Greece and east-european countries there has been a lot of the same shit - our economic system is fucking people over, newsflash: people are losing all they have from one day to another. It is already time to wake up. We(the people) need to make it stop. I think we have come to a decisive hour in human history, will we embrace hate or love? Will we embrace division or union? We can't let ourselves be blinded by imaginary lines! Raise your kids to love all people, don't ignore xenophobia, racism, sexism, homophobia, fight those for if we can't accept other people how will we care for them? And if we don't care for them why would they care for us?
Here in my city there are some gay-bashing, anarchopunk-bashing skinheads - sometimes I can't even go to some places with the clothes I'd like to go because of that, and think about it this happens to all women. It is not only about "innocent nationalistic pride", and "innocent racial-ethnic" pride. This all comes donw to some kind of exclusive behavior. And this is fucking our society for too long! Caring for other's people welfare won't make you worse but not caring will make us live in a shitty place where we can't come and go as we please. Embrace your individuality, but fuck individualism.
PS: urgh nazi apologists making me throw up a little bit in my mouth.
|
Why should this be surprising, fascism has historically always had at least 15% of the public behind it. Many people are scum.
I can't really fathom the deeper psychological reasoning behind this though, maybe it has to do with fancying that Germany was 'strong' during the Nazi era. Or maybe it is about deliberately provoking authority figures that look down on nazism?
|
On November 13 2012 00:16 solidbebe wrote:
Neonazis make me feel sick to the stomach. Worst part of it are the people who know exactly what happened with Hitler and are still neonazis. Scum of the earth...
I guess fucked up people will always be around, its when they get to power that things go wrong.
Nazis have nothing against the Jews that was strictly Hitler, so whats your big problem with them?
|
Interesting to note is table 2.4.1 (p54) where the 9% is coming from and that while it increased compared to 2010 and 2008, we're still below 2002 & 2004.
It also clearly shows how it's a bigger problem in eastern Germany (big surge in the last 2 years, double the value from 10 years ago) while western Germany is staying constant.
The questions used are on p 29 & p30.
Another interesting thing:
People (living in Germany) without German citizenship have a higher primary antisemitism rate compared to people with German citizenship (p111, table 3.4.8). (questions page 78). On the other hand a ~24% rate of secondary antisemitism for people with German citizenship (and no immigration background).
For those who are clueless like me:
"Due the ideas of Jews there is always dispute" = primary
"Due to Israeli politics, I dislike Jews more and more" = primary
"I'm sick of hearing from German crimes against the Jews" = secondary
"We should focus on current problems, and not on events from 60 years ago" = secondary
|
On November 13 2012 02:15 kamkerx wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 00:16 solidbebe wrote:
Neonazis make me feel sick to the stomach. Worst part of it are the people who know exactly what happened with Hitler and are still neonazis. Scum of the earth...
I guess fucked up people will always be around, its when they get to power that things go wrong. Nazis have nothing against the Jews that was strictly Hitler, so whats your big problem with them?
Nazi(fascism is general..) ideology believes that force is the way to go. I think that's shitty and make the world a shitty place to live, you can't have freedom if you're afraid people are gonna kill you because of the way you look.
|
On November 13 2012 00:45 MWY wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 00:32 Osmoses wrote:
I believe you are misreading the data. I very much doubt 15% of east-germans think of themselves as "neo-nazis" or even "far-right". If it's anything, it's less about being a jew-hater and more about discontent regarding the current policies on immigration. There is currently this terribly popular idea in the media that the muslims, or islamists, are taking over Europe, and that eventually the whole world will be come Iran.
While the media coverage may be somewhat exaggerated, I do feel much like alot of other people, in my country and yours, that my own country is becoming less and less mine every time there is a mosque built or a compromise made in parliament for "sensitivity towards immigrants". I don't hate immigrants, I don't hate muslims, but I can't help but feel angry when they come into my country and demand more and more "rights" while at the same time refusing to assimilate.
At the same time, I recognize that this is a somewhat demonized image of immigrants. Of course they are not all a collective group of dicks that come into another man's house and make demands. The vocal minority always give the majority a bad rap. And as long as I do not have to give up freedoms of my own, what's the harm in anything anyone else does? Either way, if I want to hear people shouting praise of Allah from the rooftops, I'd sooner go to Afghanistan than have to hear it in my own country, where I have my own culture and traditions.
I may have rambled a bit but TL:DR => people are not nazis just because they feel unease at the growing amount of foreign influences in their countries. So what party did you vote for? Just curious. Because if you feel that way, and it's an important political aspect for you, you basically have no other choice but to vote for the NPD. (Thing is, you basically can't vote for them because they can't be taken serious by anyone.) And i feel like that's a big problem.
The two largest parties in Sweden are the Socialdemocrats and Moderaterna. The Socialdemocrats are more socialist than Moderaterna but both are pretty red imo. I voted for Moderaterna, because economic stability is more important to me than immigration. Though I resent it, I realize that 100 years from now, Sweden will be nothing like it is now, it's the way it's always been and the way it's always gonna be. Things change.
|
You can't understand racist people for the simple fact that they don't understand themselves why they are. I tried to talk sometimes with people from my college class, asking why they were voting for the FN (racist french party). They could not justify anything, aside from blaming arabs for a lot of things blacks, white and whatever do as much.
This kind of people just needs to blame a community for the things that go wrong, and don't bother or can't seriously think about the why and who of said things.
You also have the kind of people that need to pick an "ideal" to feel like they exist, and some sadly pick those ones. They don't have a reason, nor real convictions about the ideas that are supposed to be tied to this, they just need to feel like they are thinking and fighting for something. See all those 20 years old people that go to meetings and sell t shirts and whatnot for politicals that don't give a damn about them.
The real scary thing about that, is that those people don't think like they should, therefore they sadly categorize more and more as animals than humans. I mean, how can you nowadays be "educated" (everybody goes a bit to school and knows what happened in WW2 and about all those retarded ethnic conflicts still going on around the world, right?), and still be neo nazi or whatever? Because you are dumb as fuck, pretentious and irresponsible. You never learned any notion of humanity or respect, not talking about philosophy or actually thinking about why you are doing/thinking things.
That's what scares me. While I can try and understand what got people caught in the nazi propaganda before WW2 (less education, less awareness of media's potential disinformation, plus economic crisis and debts from WW1, hatred from loss of WW1), the only reason I can put on people going the same way nowadays is utter stupidity.
So yeah, maybe school should focus on teaching people how to be people, as it seems many parents are unable to. Culture is not intelligence. And it's sad that humanity doesn't evolve in the right way, which is in my opinion having each individual capable of a proper reflection about things. But that may be against the interest of both politicals, commercials and financials.
(if anybody reads this, sorry for the potential awful english, some sentences may not make any sense as I never had to use some expressions and had no clue how to translate some things \o/)
|
On November 13 2012 02:07 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 02:04 Huyugu wrote:On November 13 2012 01:17 kafkaesque wrote:On November 13 2012 01:11 ppshchik wrote:Germany pretty much gave the moral high ground to the neo Nazis by the time they made Holocaust denial a crime. Poll: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime?No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech (69) 63% Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail (41) 37% 110 total votes Your vote: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime? (Vote): Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail
(Vote): No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech
There's a rather large misconception about holocaust denial laws. Nobody's ever been incarcerated due to holocaust denial, these laws are only in place to control anti-democratic propaganda. Your posts suggests that one could land in jail for that, but I could go up to a police-officer, stating that the holocaust never happened and be totally fine. These rules only apply to a political entity or public forums. A teacher can be sacked for it, a book can be banned for it, a member of parliament will lose their seet for it, but certainly nobody is going to jail for it. That's not true. Why would you make such a claim? Laws against holocaust denial ban... holocaust denial. People get punished under those laws for research or opinions which are contrary to officially sanctioned holocaust dogma. For example Germar Rudolf served 3 years in prison for publishing a scientific paper on the gas chambers of Auschwitz. There is nothing political or anti-Democratic about it. It's just a scientific paper. You should read it yourself to understand what exactly is being criminalized in your country. Unless of course it is illegal for you to read it? Then I wonder: how can you know it is okay to imprison people for years on thought crime charges if you don't understand what thoughts are criminalized? The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitzhttp://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/Three years in prison. For writing a scientific paper. While I agree with you that scientists shouldn't be subject to this crap, come on. What did he expect publishing a paper about the finer technical aspects of gas chambers in Germany.
Maybe he expected countries with free speech like America would give him asylum? After all, he was deported to Germany to be imprisoned there.
I bet if a Muslim was facing speech crime laws in their home country they would not be deported. Instead they would given asylum to protect them from such backwards totalitarian laws.
On November 13 2012 02:10 Tewks44 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 02:04 Huyugu wrote:On November 13 2012 01:17 kafkaesque wrote:On November 13 2012 01:11 ppshchik wrote:Germany pretty much gave the moral high ground to the neo Nazis by the time they made Holocaust denial a crime. Poll: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime?No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech (69) 63% Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail (41) 37% 110 total votes Your vote: Should Holocaust denial be considered a crime? (Vote): Yes, Holocaust deniers should be in jail
(Vote): No, Holocaust denial laws are against freedom of speech
There's a rather large misconception about holocaust denial laws. Nobody's ever been incarcerated due to holocaust denial, these laws are only in place to control anti-democratic propaganda. Your posts suggests that one could land in jail for that, but I could go up to a police-officer, stating that the holocaust never happened and be totally fine. These rules only apply to a political entity or public forums. A teacher can be sacked for it, a book can be banned for it, a member of parliament will lose their seet for it, but certainly nobody is going to jail for it. That's not true. Why would you make such a claim? Laws against holocaust denial ban... holocaust denial. People get punished under those laws for research or opinions which are contrary to officially sanctioned holocaust dogma. For example Germar Rudolf served 3 years in prison for publishing a scientific paper on the gas chambers of Auschwitz. There is nothing political or anti-Democratic about it. It's just a scientific paper. You should read it yourself to understand what exactly is being criminalized in your country. Unless of course it is illegal for you to read it? Then I wonder: how can you know it is okay to imprison people for years on thought crime charges if you don't understand what thoughts are criminalized? The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitzhttp://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/Three years in prison. For writing a scientific paper. You left out that Germar Rudolf is a holocaust denier, and if you look at the sources for this "scientific paper" they link to works published by holocaust deniers. I'm not saying it's right to imprison someone for holding a belief, but don't pretend this was some guy innocently publishing an objective scientific paper.
As I said, he was punished for holocaust denial. Someone claimed there are no punishments for holocaust denial, when that is clearly not even close to being true.
The paper itself is very objective and well done. Germar obviously cites some skeptical sources, but much of his paper involves firsthand chemical testing done by himself and exterminationist sources. He addresses exterminationist claims and studies directly. I encourage you to read it so you can understand what points of view are being criminalized.
The only attempt I have ever seen to rebut The Rudolf Report is a paper by Richard Green which Rudolf replied to. They had an exchange of a few articles. I highly encourage you to read the original Rudolf Report, followed by these articles in order.
Frankly after reading these articles I can't help but think holocaust denial laws are passed because exterminationists wouldn't have a leg to stand on if they couldn't "win" arguments by imprisoning their opponent. Germar Rudolf comes across as intelligent, reasonable, and scientifically minded. Green comes across as vitriolic, evasive, and deliberately deceptive.
The Rudolf Report: Expert Report on Chemical and Technical Aspects of the ‘Gas Chambers’ of Auschwitz (Rudolf)
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/
Leuchter, Rudolf and the Iron Blues (Green)
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/blue/
Some considerations about the ›Gas Chambers‹ of Auschwitz and Birkenau (Rudolf)
http://vho.org/GB/c/GR/Green.html
Chemistry is Not the Science (Green)
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/not-the-science/
Character assassins (Rudolf)
http://vho.org/GB/c/GR/CharacterAssassins.html
Postscript to Chemistry is not the Science: Rudolf's Character Suicide (Green)
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/not-the-science/postscript.shtml
Dr. Richard Green's Evasions (Rudolf)
http://vho.org/GB/c/GR/Evasions.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
