The Holocaust, also known as the Shoah, was a genocide during World War II in which Nazi Germany, aided by local collaborators, systematically murdered some six million European Jews. Around two thirds of the Jewish population of Europe was murdered between 1941 and 1945. Some conspiracy theorists claim that the Holocaust didn’t even happen, or that not as many Jews died as people claim they did. Conspiracy theorists claim that just over 240,000 Jews died – opposed to over 6 million.
Holocaust denial ignores or minimizes the tens of thousands of pages of documentation and photographs prepared by the Nazis themselves that survived the war. Historians have provided precise responses to Holocaust deniers’ claims, debunking their arguments and falsifications.
There are also claims that:
- Documentary evidence of the Holocaust, from photographs to The Diary of Anne Frank, is fabricated.
- Survivor testimonies are filled with errors and inconsistencies, and are thus unreliable.
- Interrogators obtained Nazi prisoners’ confessions of war crimes through the use of torture.
- The Nazi treatment of Jews was no different from what the Allies did to their enemies in World War II.
Some Holocaust deniers claim that Nazi Germany’s Final Solution was aimed only at deporting Jews from the Reich and did not include their extermination. This would suggest that the Nazis did not kill the Jews, but instead ‘deported’ them, which seems highly unlikely considering the violence involved. Some citizens were bound to have died in this process, and even then, the mere concept of mass-deportation still paints the Nazis in a hellish, murderous light. Theorists have also conspired that the Nazis, whilst operating under the reign of Adolf Hitler, did not use extermination camps and gas chambers for the genocidal mass murder of Jews; or the actual number of Jews killed is significantly lower than the historically accepted figure of 5 to 6 million, typically around a tenth of that figure.
Apparently, Nazis did not use cremation ovens to dispose of extermination victims. The amount of energy required to fire the ovens far exceeded what the energy-strapped nation could spare in wartime. Also, theorists claim that the figure of 5-6 million Jewish deaths is an irresponsible exaggeration, and many Jews who actually emigrated to Russia, Britain, Palestine and the United States are included in the number.
It is important to note that no matter how delirious these claims are, it is worth looking into them because they could yield some truth. It is illegal to claim falsity of the Holocaust in many European countries and Israel; due to to how many of their people were affected by the genocide. Surprisingly enough, Holocaust Denial is actually supported in some countries such as Iran and Syria… Scholars use the term ‘denial’ to describe the views and methodology of Holocaust deniers in order to distinguish them from legitimate historical revisionists, who challenge orthodox interpretations of history using established historical methodologies.
Evidence to prove the Holocaust happened
Much of the backlash surrounding the claims of ‘Holocaust deniers’ focuses on the methods used to present arguments that the Holocaust allegedly never happened as commonly accepted. Numerous accounts have been given by Holocaust deniers (including evidence presented in court cases) of claimed facts and evidence. However, independent research has shown these claims to be based upon flawed research, biased statements, or even deliberately falsified evidence.
- Written documents; hundreds of thousands of letters, memos, blueprints, orders, bills, speeches, articles, memoirs, and confessions.
- Eyewitness testimony; accounts from survivors, Jewish Sonderkommandos (who helped load bodies from the gas chambers into the crematoria in exchange for a chance of survival), SS guards, commandants, local townspeople, and even high-ranking Nazis who spoke openly about the mass murder of the Jews.
- The camps themselves; concentration camps, work camps, and extermination camps that still exist in varying degrees of originality and reconstruction.
- Inferential evidence or argument from silence  ; population demographics, reconstructed from the pre-World War II era; if six million Jews were not killed, what happened to them?
 To make an argument from silence is to express a conclusion that is based on the absence of statements in historical documents, rather than their presence.
Revisionism or Denial?
Holocaust deniers generally do not accept ‘denial’ as an appropriate description of their activities and use the euphemism revisionism instead. The methodologies of Holocaust deniers are often based on a predetermined conclusion that ignores overwhelming historical evidence to the contrary.
Most conspiracy theorists do not entirely deny the Holocaust, like aforementioned; they believe that we have been fed false news. But, why would we have been fed false news? Are we being forced to hate the Germans and what the Nazis did, because of a discrete political agenda? I will be looking into this, so keep reading.
In some post-Soviet states, Holocaust deniers do not deny the very fact of mass murder of Jews, but they deny the participation of their own nationals in the Holocaust. While the Second World War was still underway, the Nazis had already formed a contingency plan that if defeat was imminent they would carry out the total destruction of German records. In the infamous Posen speeches of October 1943 such as the one on October 4th, Himmler explicitly referred to the extermination of the Jews of Europe and further stated that the genocide must be permanently kept secret, saying:
I also want to refer here very frankly to a very difficult matter. We can now very openly talk about this among ourselves, and yet we will never discuss this publicly. Just as we did not hesitate on June 30, 1934, to perform our duty as ordered and put comrades who had failed up against the wall and execute them, we also never spoke about it, nor will we ever speak about it. Let us thank God that we had within us enough self-evident fortitude never to discuss it among us, and we never talked about it. Every one of us was horrified, and yet every one clearly understood that we would do it next time, when the order is given and when it becomes necessary. I am now referring to the evacuation of the Jews, to the extermination of the Jewish people. — Heinrich Himmler, October 4, 1943
What would anybody gain from lying about the holocaust?
Many photos and much of the film footage shown after World War II were specially manufactured as propaganda against the Nazis by the Allied forces. In World War II the chief Allied powers were Great Britain, France (except during the German occupation, 1940–44), the Soviet Union (after its entry in June 1941), the United States (after its entry on December 8, 1941), and China. There is an American, British or Jewish conspiracy to make Jews look like victims and to demonize Germans.
Stories of the Holocaust were a myth initially created by the Allies of World War II to demonize Germans, Jews having spread this myth as part of a grander plot intended to enable the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, and now to get continuing support for the state of Israel. Claims of what the Nazis supposedly did to the Jews were all intended to facilitate the Allies in their intention to enable the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, and are currently used to garner support for the policies of the state of Israel, especially in its dealings with the Palestinians.
The Allies of World War II, called the “United Nations” from the 1st January 1942 declaration, were the countries that opposed the Axis powers during the Second World War. The Allies promoted the alliance as a means to control German, Japanese and Italian aggression. Despite this, there are tens of thousands of documents which provide evidence to support the claim that near enough to 6 million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust.
However, there are also claims that have been made to suggest that the holocaust was made up in order to give Jews worldwide more protection. For a long time they have had fingers pointed at them and simply made to look as if they are one of the problems in the world, and it is said that Hitler himself didn’t like them. The thing is, Hitler had many Jews in his army. Even some of his most trusted men were in fact, Jews. Was Hitler really that evil and hated the Jews? Perhaps we will never know.
Scholarly response to Holocaust denial can be roughly divided into three categories. Some academics refuse to engage Holocaust deniers or their arguments at all, on grounds that doing so lends them unwarranted legitimacy. A second group of scholars, typified by the American historian Deborah Lipstadt, have tried to raise awareness of the methods and motivations of Holocaust denial without legitimizing the deniers themselves. “We need not waste time or effort answering the deniers’ contentions,” Lipstadt wrote. “It would be never-ending…. Their commitment is to an ideology and their ‘findings’ are shaped to support it.” A third group, typified by the Nizkor Project, responds to arguments and claims made by Holocaust denial groups by pointing out inaccuracies and errors in their evidence.
The fact that some academics actually refuse to engage with Holocaust deniers speaks volumes – they, educated scholars, choose to not even acknowledge the deniers’ claims; in their educated views the deniers simply to not warrant the attention that comes alongside the academic explaining the ‘truth’ to the denier. This is understandable, but with some scholars from different backgrounds; they might have more patience and motivation to persuade and educate the ‘wrong’ denier. Let’s analyse more reactions from educated scholars and academics…
Scholarly responses can trigger vigorous rebuttals. In 1996, the British Holocaust denier David Irving brought a civil defamation suit against Lipstadt and her publisher, stemming from Lipstadt’s book ‘Denying the Holocaust’, in which she named Irving as “one of the more dangerous” Holocaust deniers, because he was a published author, and was viewed by some as a legitimate military historian. He was “familiar with historical evidence,” she wrote, and “bends it until it conforms with his ideological leanings and political agenda”.
Irving, who appeared as a defense witness in Ernst Zündel’s trial in Canada, and once declared at a rally of Holocaust deniers that “more women died in the back seat of Edward Kennedy’s car than ever died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz,” claimed that Lipstadt’s allegation damaged his reputation.
After a two-month trial in London, the trial judge issued a 333-page ruling against Irving. It is dangerous, and not to mention embarrassingly fake, that Irving made claims to be a ‘military historian’ – giving himself false credibility, therefore giving himself the power to influence a substantial audience. The masses love to get their teeth into a good conspiracy theory, and when the public is as easily influenced as it is when a ‘military historian’ publishes a book, scholars can be outnumbered and the ‘truth’ as we know it is hidden. THIS is why the judge issued a 333-page ruling against Irving, because he dangerously and irresponsibly published fake news.
“The American Historical Association Council strongly deplores the publicly reported attempts to deny the fact of the Holocaust. No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place.” -American Historical Association, December 1991
This followed a strong reaction by many of its members and commentary in the press against a near-unanimous decision that the AHA had made in May 1991 that studying the significance of the Holocaust should be encouraged. The association’s May 1991 statement was in response to an incident where certain of its members had questioned the reality of the Holocaust. The December 1991 declaration is a reversal of the AHA’s earlier stance that the association should not set a precedent by certifying historical facts.
Literary theorist Jean Baudrillard has likened ‘Holocaust denial’ to “part of the extermination itself”. This claim holds truth, to some extent. To deny the murder of 6 million+ citizens is harmful in itself, and it is part of the erasure that we are battling in this chapter. Our aim for this chapter is to discuss the relevant and important points alluding to the Holocaust erasure and this includes the toxic disacknowledgement of the genocide of the victims of the Holocaust. In January 2007, the United Nations General Assembly condemned “without reservation any denial of the Holocaust”, though Iran disassociated itself from the resolution.
Response from former SS members
Critics of Holocaust denial also include members of the Auschwitz SS. Camp physician and SS-Untersturmführer Hans Münch considered the facts of Auschwitz “so firmly determined that one cannot have any doubt at all”, and described those who negate what happened at the camp as “malevolent” people who have “personal interest to want to bury in silence things that cannot be buried in silence”.
“Anyone who maintains that nobody was gassed at Auschwitz must be crazy or in the wrong”- Zyklon B handler and SS-Oberscharführer Josef Klehr
SS-Unterscharführer Oswald Kaduk stated that he did not consider those who maintain such a thing as ‘normal’ people.
“I would like you to believe me. I saw the gas chambers. I saw the crematoria. I saw the open fires. I was on the ramp when the selections took place. I would like you to believe that these atrocities happened because I was there.”- Former SS-Rottenführer Oskar Gröning
Holocaust Erasure and ‘revisionism’ has been defined as: “A new form of anti-Semitism, but one that hinges on age-old motifs,”
By The Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity. The Anti-Defamation League has stated that “Holocaust denial is a contemporary form of the classic anti-Semitic doctrine of the evil, manipulative and threatening world Jewish conspiracy” and French historian Valérie Igounet has written that “Holocaust denial is a convenient polemical substitute for anti-semitism.”
“The primary motivation for most deniers is anti-Semitism, and for them the Holocaust is an infuriatingly inconvenient fact of history. After all, the Holocaust has generally been recognized as one of the most terrible crimes that ever took place, and surely the very emblem of evil in the modern age. If that crime was a direct result of anti-Semitism taken to its logical end, then anti-Semitism itself, even when expressed in private conversation, is inevitably discredited among most people. What better way to rehabilitate anti-Semitism, make anti-Semitic arguments seem once again respectable in civilized discourse and even make it acceptable for governments to pursue anti-Semitic policies than by convincing the world that the great crime for which anti-Semitism was blamed simply never happened—indeed, that it was nothing more than a frame-up invented by the Jews, and propagated by them through their control of the media? What better way, in short, to make the world safe again for anti-Semitism than by denying the Holocaust?” – Walter Reich
Walter Reich was a psychiatrist and then senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, one-time director of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, and now professor of international affairs at George Washington University. The French historian Pierre Vidal-Naquet described the motivation of deniers more succinctly, “One revives the dead in order the better to strike the living.”
Is it illegal to deny the Holocaust?
Holocaust denial is explicitly or implicitly illegal in 17 countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, and Switzerland. Romania officially denied the Holocaust occurred on its territory up until the Wiesel Commission in 2004. The European Union’s Framework decision on Racism and Xenophobia states that denying or grossly trivializing “crimes of genocide” should be made “punishable in all EU Member States”.
Does this impede on our freedom of speech?
Freedom of Speech doesn’t mean that a person can say whatever they want to say. Freedom of Speech means that someone’s right to say something is protected within certain limits. A person may have to suffer consequences for saying some things, but they still have the right to say them. Freedom of Speech includes non-speech also. What someone wears and how they behave is considered “freedom of expression” and is a protected right. The Supreme Court has even said that burning the American Flag is protected speech because it expresses an opinion.
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
A number of deniers have been prosecuted under various countries’ denial laws. French literature professor Robert Faurisson, for example, was convicted and punished under the Gayssot Act in 1990. Some historians oppose such laws, among them Pierre Vidal-Naquet, an outspoken critic of Faurisson, on the grounds that denial legislation imposes “historical truth as legal truth”. Other academics favor criminalization. Holocaust denial, they contend, is “the worst form of racism and its most respectable version because it pretends to be a research”.
The David Irving Conviction
As aforementioned, David Irving claimed to be a ‘military historian’ and therefore published ‘fake news’ alluding to his beliefs that the Holocaust did not happen to the full extent that orthodox media sources claim that it did. In February 2006, Irving was convicted in Austria, where Holocaust denial is illegal, for a speech he had made in 1989 in which he denied the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz. Irving was aware of the outstanding arrest warrant, but chose to go to Austria anyway “to give a lecture to a far-right student fraternity”.
Although he pleaded guilty to the charge, Irving said he had been “mistaken”, and had changed his opinions on the Holocaust. We can see a link between this and the situation with Alex Jones, in which he claimed the Sandy Hook shootings were staged.
Although this topic is not directly linked to Holocaust Erasure, one can acknowledge the interesting collapse of each of the influential mens’ views. Alex Jones, upon conviction for spreading false news, redacted his views in fear for further prosecution. This can be seen reflected in this chapter, where Irving redacted his views in fear of prosecution – is this due to entirely free speech being illegal, or do these theorists genuinely believe that they were wrong? The concept of free-speech being policed is corrupt, however as noted in the subheading ‘does this impede on our freedom of speech?’, the individual is free to speak as they wish but they will not be protected if they break the law; just like this situation.
“I said that then, based on my knowledge at the time, but by 1991 when I came across the Eichmann papers, I wasn’t saying that anymore and I wouldn’t say that now. The Nazis did murder millions of Jews.” Irving served 13 months of a 3-year sentence in an Austrian prison, including the period between his arrest and conviction, and was deported in early 2007. According to CNN, upon Irving’s return to the UK, he “vowed to repeat views denying the Holocaust that led to his conviction” stating he felt “no need any longer to show remorse” for his Holocaust views.
The Red Cross Evidence
The Red Cross, we’ve all heard of it. The British Red Cross helps people in crisis, whoever and wherever they are. The American Red Cross, also known as ‘The American National Red Cross’, is a humanitarian organization that provides emergency assistance, disaster relief, and disaster preparedness education in the United States.
According to the World Jewish Encyclopedia, 2.5 million Jews, before the war, occupied Europe. After the war, 3.8 million Jewish Holocaust Survivors were recieving pensions from the German Government. The Jewish World Almanac depicts that the Jewish world population in 1933 was 15 million plus. It then says that the Jewish population in 1938 in Germany was 210,000. What happened to the other 5,790,000 Jews? According to various Jewish sources, the Jewis world population of 2015, is still just under 16,000,000, due to ethnic fertility and reluctance to ‘assimilate’…
Was it 6,000,000 killed, or 271,000? According to jimstonefreelance.com, Stone was taught from the information provided by the Red Cross – which follows the story line that 271,000 were killed rather than 6,000,000. This image is a record, provided by the Red Cross, pertaining to the Holocaust and how the numbers are dramatically far different to the ones we have been taught throughout history. These documents were recorded at the time of the war, rather than documents that were created later in history after ‘manipulations’ had taken place. Interesting, right?
There are some blurred lines regarding the possibility of flammable gases operating in such close proximity to explosive goods – but sceptics have reached the conclusion that the ‘clever’ Germans were able to operate special safety precautions so the whole camp didn’t blow up…
Zyklon B’s chemical name is ‘Hydrogen Cyanide’. Hydrogen is explosive, and Cyanide is poisonous. The Jewish allegation is that the Nazis used Zyklon B to kill people on an industrial scale, in gas chambers. On a map, it would show that the gas chambers are built right next to the crematorium. This setup is plausible; considering the fact that you should, under no circumstances, place a ready supply of flammable gases next door to thousands of bodies being burned by a naked flame.
There is also scientific evidence proving that these gas chambers were not used as ‘killing factories’… In the late 1980s a study was done by Professor Frederick Leuchter, who is a US certified expert in execution technology. Leuchter visited the sites and was videoed taking 31 samples from walls of the ‘gas chambers’, to try and find residue of the hydrogen cyanide that had allegedly been responsible for the deaths of 1.5 million people. This was a real experiment, conducted by someone who knows how to do these things and is trusted by the US government.
Now, cyanide sticks around, it’s a poison, so this should have been fairly easy. From calculations, taking into account time and degradation, we would’ve expected to find 1050 mg/kg. Instead, he found less than 1% of that: 1–9 mg/kg. There is no way that these facilities were used to poison the Jews.