Michael Dorosh said:
Austria bears no responsibility for Hitler's rise to power, so why blame them for 'spawning Hitler'?
Mike,
I 'blamed' Austria for 'spawning Hitler' as it is the country of his birth. While that nation may have not have contributed directly to Hitler's rise to power, there was massive and wide-spread support for the National Socialist ideology in Austria. This is most evident when you consider the number of German military causalities-zero-during the Third Reich's 'invasion' of Austria.
I may be wrong in stating that their were no causalities...there were likely some traffic mishaps en route and a few cases of alcohol poisoning as the Wehrmacht 'garrisoned' the nearest Gasthaus' wine cellar.
Michael Dorosh said:
As for Irving - couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. He's the same whacko who refers to Hitler as "der Führer" and "Herr Hitler". Perhaps he'd be better off in an asylum, but the law is the law.
This law is unjust and should be repealed. I'm with you on calling this gentleman a 'wacko' but I have made it clear that I feel he should be able to speak his mind.
Michael Dorosh said:
I think there is legitimate cause to question certain aspects of the Holocaust - for example, the exact number of victims. But I have no doubt it numbered in the millions - and Irving has not presented his questions in a very scholarly way.
Surprisingly, I completely agree with you here. I concur that there was an systematic and abhorrant attempt to exterminate European Jewry by the Third Reich, but I do question the accuracy of the statistics provided-likely millions as you said. But history is written by the victors, and the fact of the matter is that detailed knowledge of the Holocaust first came to light shortly after WW 2 was over. This was a time when the Allies were very fearful of a German resistance to their occupation.
And what better way to help defuse such a potentially disastrous situation than to demonize-rightfully, I might add-the Third Reich based on it's crimes? The vast majority of the German people loved the Third Reich but would naturally be disgusted by the Nazi genocide of Jews. By causing the German people to equate National Socialism with nauseating genocide caused the majority of Germans to be completely disgusted with Nazism, thus neatly defusing the very real threat of a German resistance; much to the relief of all of the Allies, who were busy tooling up for the Cold War, and didn't want to have to deal with civilian unrest on their chosen potential battleground.
I also find it very telling that most of the anti-Holocaust denial laws were passed during the same era.
In my opinion, the lawmakers who passed these laws were basically admitting that while they knew the Holocaust happened, they were not sure of the extent of it based on the evidence available to them at that time, and that, given that knowledge of the Holocaust was serving very effectively to defuse any potential German revolt in support of the defeated regime, they, the lawmakers, felt that banning any discourse on this contentious topic would be an effective means of stifling any debate on the details of this enormous crime.
Pretty sh***y and undemocratic of them, but it seems to have worked. However, it is pathetic that 60 years later an old man can be sent to jail for the 'crime' of denying / trivializing the Holocaust. I say let him out of jail and see if the world thinks that if, it turns out that only 5 million died instead of 6 million, (Purely arbitrary figure used for the purposes of this argument.), whether or not this crime against humanity is any less horrible and disgusting.
We all know history is written by the victors...perhaps it is time to let the defeated have their say as well. While I am sure some new details would come to light, I am certain that the Nazi atrocities will be proven by all parties to be nauseating and morally wrong, no matter what the actual statistics regarding it turn out to be.
Edited for grammer.