You're not in the mood?
I had a bad day yesterday. Besides that, I don't like to continue discussing a topic with someone who ignores the majority of my arguments as I already mentioned.
Look, not every German was evil, and not every Allied soldier was good. It wasn't a Hollywood film and your nan encountered *people*, not Hollywood villains.
Obviously. Back then I was just a child (I guess I was about 10 yo) and at that age you tend to think in a less nuanced way.
Nevertheless, my grandmother's story created cognitive dissonance in my understanding of WW2. It wasn't just the fact that she described the Germans as decent people that shocked me but it was especially her description of the English as scary. Somehow I couldn't grasp how a "benign democratic nation" like the UK could produce scary people and an "evil tyrannical regime" like Germany could produce nice and gentle people. One would expect things to be the other way around.
For many years I pretty much ignored the cognitive dissonance created by that conversation. Meanwhile, there was increasing cognitive dissonance at the religious side of my views as I was a catholic who frequently discussed religion with his village priest and ever answer of his lead to more questions. ith regards to liberal politics and multi-culturalism, there was a similar increase of cognitive dissonance. As a consequence, at the age of 17 I decided that there was just too much coginitive dissonance resulting from the worldviews I had then accepted as self-evident and I decided to no longer accept ANYTHING as self-evident and critically analyse EVERYTHING I am told to believe.
While I was building up an entirely new worldview from scratch, the words of my grandmother came to mind and I became very curious about the Third Reich. Many other inconsistencies within the official story of WW2 had caught my attention in the meantime and I wanted to find out what had truely happened during that horrible war. I learnt there was an alternative explanation of the events that took place called "Holocaust revisionism" and found that this alternative explanation was far more consistent and far more in line with the evidence.
Meanwhile I had become an anarchist, but my anarchist views also started to build up a certain amount of cognitive dissonance. After realising that the Germans were actually the good guys during WW2 I decided to analyse national-socialist ideology and came to the comclusion that it was far more consistent and logical than the anarchist views I held before. So that's how I moved towards conservative revolutionary views. I would currently describe my political views as a mixture of Spenglerian conservatism, national-socialism, national-anarchism and the Nouveau Droite.
What matters more now is that one side committed genocide but the other did not. The evidence for what took place is vast, bloody incomprehensible, yet you and your ilk continue to deny it, nitpicking on details and ignoring proof that doesn't suit you while the truth is screaming in your ears, and now you're not in the mood?!?
The evidence for the events that took place during WW2 is indeed vast but the issue is far from incomprehensible. It is incompresensible to you because the evidence does not correspond to your views and leads to cognitive dissonance, as it did with me before I learnt about Holocaust Revisionism. Holocaust Revisionism provides a far more consistent and logical explanation for the facts. So what matters, is that the Germans did NOT commit genocide and that they actually were the good guys during WW2 (as much as it is possible to be a good guy in wartime).
I'm not the one ignoring proof, by the way. You ignored the vast majority of my arguments and now you expect me to address the few counterarguments that you could give. Why should I care to waste time on providing arguments when you're not even willing to address most of them?
Just two more questions, then, my little Nazi friend: Are you rich and do you have some spare time on your hands? I'm sure you know that you are breaking the laws of your country. The Belgian Holocaust denial law has been in effect since 1995, the European Court of Human Rights laughed your fellow nutters right out of the courtroom, and one of your soul mates served time *and* paid a fine for the same stupidities you now voice.
I'm the kind of idealist who isn't afraid to take risks for doing what he believes. In fact, I would feel like a coward if I didn't speak out.
Let me ask you a question : if it is so evident that there truely was a genocide, then why fight Holocaust Revisionism with laws rather than debate? Why must Holocaust revisionists be defamed and their arguments distorted by their critics? Why is the fate of the Jews during WW2 the ONLY historical event for which special censorship laws are created?
See, you may think this is a game, an intellectual exercise or an abstract academic matter, but it's really not. I do mean it when I say that the world should never be allowed to forget.
I also do mean it when I say that the world should not forget what really happened. I also mean it, however, when I say that the world doesn't know what truely happened and is being lied to by their governments, some of whom use special censorship laws to hide the truth from becoming mainstream.
I notice you didn't answer my question. I guess that means my suspicion is correct.
My personal beliefs are irrelevant.
I wasn't referring to your beliefs but to your ethnic background.
Most ancient aliens are secular, yet many of them consider themselves as Jewish as a Chassidic Jew. Even communist and liberal Jews have historically had a strong connection to Jewish culture and tradition, even though this conflicted with their cosmopolitan ideals. As such, being Jewish is more of an ethnic issue than a religious issue. This is also reflected by the laws of Israel, where Jewish ethicity is of greater importance than Jewish religion.
Those unwilling to look at the evidence with regards to the Holocaust myth while calling it "incomprehensible" and stressing how "the world should never be allowed to forget" are most often Jews because the events that took place had a large impact on their people and the Holocaust myth has been cultivated among Jewish circles almost as a secular religion. As such, the issue is loaded with emotions which blocks rational analysis of the facts. Thus, your behavior makes me suspect a Jewish background, which is further confirmed by your unwillingness to answer my question.
For a more in depth analysis on Judaism as an evolutionary group strategy, the Jewish identity of secular Jews and the cultivation of the Holocaust as a secular religion, I'd like to refer to the works of eg. Israel Shahak, Norman Finkelstein and Kevin MacDonald (all three are succesful academics and two of them are Jewish - Shahak even teaches in Israel).
Please note that I'm not an antisemite and I would not regard you as inferior or evil if my suspicions about your Jewish background turned out to be true. Nevertheless, I do see a conflict between Jewish and gentile culture and this conflict is (as wonderfully described by Shahak and MacDonald) the main cause of antisemitism. Basically, Jewish culture persists on attacking gentile culture which it considers as a threat and gentile culture consequently develops antisemitism as a defense mechanism.
What matters is that people like you must not be allowed to spread their lies without being confronted.
I am not spreading lies but spreading truth. Nevertheless, I agree with the statement that all sides should be heard so people can make up their own mind objectively.
