It's a rather specific topic but in recent weeks, we have noticed a general uptick of Holocaust Denial and "JAQing" in this sub and with the apparently excellent movie Denial coming out soon, we expect further interest.

We have previously and at length argued why we don't allow Holocaust denial or any other forms of revisionism under our civility rule but the reasons for doing so will – hopefully – also become more apparent in this post. At the same time, a post like this seemed necessary because we do get questions from people who don't ascribe to Holocaust Denial but have come in contact with their propaganda and talking points and want more information. As we understand this sub to have an educational mission and to be a space with the purpose of presenting informative, in-depth, and comprehensive information to people seeking it, we are necessarily dedicated to values such as the pursuit of of historical truth and imparting historical interpretations based on fact and good faith.

With all that in mind, it felt appropriate to create a post like this where we discuss what Holocaust Denial is, what its methods and background are, what information we have so far comprised on some of its most frequent talking point, and how to combat it further as well as invite our user to share their knowledge and perspective, ask questions, and discuss further. So, without further ado, let's dive into the topic.

Part 1: Definitions

What is the Holocaust?

As a starting point, it is important to define what is talked about here. Within the relevant scholarly literature and for the purpose of this post, the term Holocaust is defined as the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of approximately six million Jews and up to half a million Roma, Sinti, and other groups persecuted as "gypsies" by the Nazi regime and its collaborators. It took place at the same time as other atrocities and crimes such as the Nazis targeting other groups on grounds of their perceived "inferiority", like the disabled and Slavs, and on grounds of their religion, ideology or behavior among them Communists, Socialists, Jehovah's Witnesses and homosexuals. During their 12-year reign, the conservative estimate of victims of Nazi oppression and murder numbers 11 million people, though newer studies put that number at somewhere between 15 and 20 million people.

What is Holocaust Denial?

Holocaust Denial is the attempt and effort to negate, distort, and/or minimize and trivialize the established facts about the Nazi genocides against Jews, Roma, and others with the goal to rehabilitate Nazism as an ideology.

Because of the staggering numbers given above, the fact that the Nazi regime applied the tools at the disposal of the modern state to genocidal ends, their sheer brutality, and a variety of other factors, the ideology of Nazism and the broader historical phenomenon of Fascism in which Nazism is often placed, have become – rightfully so – politically tainted. As and ideology that is at its core racist, anti-Semitic, and genocidal, Nazism and Fascism have become politically discredited throughout most of the world.

Holocaust Deniers seek to remove this taint from the ideology of Nazism by distorting, ignoring, and misrepresenting historical fact and thereby make Nazism and Fascism socially acceptable again. In other words, Holocaust Denial is a form of political agitation in the service of bigotry, racism, and anti-Semitism.

In his book Lying about Hitler Richard Evans summarizes the following points as the most frequently held beliefs of Holocaust Deniers:

(a) The number of Jews killed by the Nazis was far less than 6 million; it amounted to only a few hundred thousand, and was thus similar to, or less than, the number of German civilians killed in Allied bombing raids.

(b) Gas chambers were not used to kill large numbers of Jews at any time.

(c) Neither Hitler nor the Nazi leaderhsip in general had a program of exterminating Europe's Jews; all they wished to do was to deport them to Eastern Europe.

(d) "The Holocaust" was a myth invented by Allied propaganda during the war and sustained since then by Jews who wished to use it for political and financial support for the state of Israel or for themselves. The supposed evidence for the Nazis' wartime mass murder of millions of Jews by gassing and other means was fabricated after the war.

[Richard Evans: Lying about Hitler. History, Holocaust, and the David Irving Trial, New York 2001, p. 110]

Part 2: What are the methods of Holocaust Denial?

The methods of how Holocaust Deniers try to achieve their goal to distort, minimize, or outright deny historical fact vary. One thing though that needs to be stressed from the very start is that Holocaust Deniers are not legitimate historians. Historians engage in interpretation of historical events and phenomena based on the facts found in sources. Holocaust Deniers on the other hand seek to bend, obfuscate, and explain away facts to fight their politically motivated interpretation.

Since the late 70s and early 80s, Holocaust Deniers have sought to give themselves an air of legitimacy in the public eye. This includes copying the format and techniques used by legitimate historians and in that process label themselves not as deniers but as "revisionists". This is not a label they deserve. As Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman point out in their book Denying History:

Historians are the ones who should be described as revisionists. To receive a Ph.D. and become a professional historian, one must write an original work with research based on primary documents and new sources, reexamining or reinterpreting some historical event—in other words, revising knowledge about that event only. This is not to say, however, that revision is done for revision’s sake; it is done when new evidence or new interpretations call for a revision.

Historians have revised and continue to revise what we know about the Holocaust. But their revision entails refinement of detailed knowledge about events, rarely complete denial of the events themselves, and certainly not denial of the cumulation of events known as the Holocaust.

Holocaust deniers claim that there is a force field of dogma around the Holocaust—set up and run by the Jews themselves—shielding it from any change. Nothing could be further from the truth. Whether or not the public is aware of the academic debates that take place in any field of study, Holocaust scholars discuss and argue over any number of points as research continues. Deniers do know this.

Rather, the Holocaust Deniers' modus operandi is to use arguments based on half-truths, falsification of the historical record, and innuendo to misrepresent the historical record and sow doubt among their audience. They resort to fabricating evidence, the use of pseudo-academic argumentation, cherry-picking of sources, outrageous and not supported interpretation of sources, and emotional claims of far-reaching conspiracy masterminded by Jews.

Let me give you an example of how this works that is also used by Evans in Lying about Hitler, p. 78ff.: David Irving, probably one of the world's most prominent Holocaust Deniers, has argued for a long time that Hitler was not responsible for the Holocaust, even going so far as to claim that Hitler did not know about Jews being killed. This has been the central argument of his book Hitler's War published in 1977 and 1990 (with distinct differences, as in the 1990 edition going even further in its Holocaust Denial). In the 1977 edition on page 332, Irving writes that Himmler

was summoned to the Wolf's Lair for a secret conference with Hitler, at which the fate of Berlin's Jews was clearly raised. At 1.30 PM Himmler was obliged to telephone from Hitler's bunker to Heydrich the explicit order that Jews were not to be liquidated [Italics in the original]

Throughout the rest of the book in its 1977 edition and even more so in its 1990s edition, Iriving kept referring to Hitler's "November 1941 order forbidding the liquidation of Jews" and in his introduction to the book wrote that this was "incontrovertible evidence" that "Hitler ordered on November 30, 1941, that there was to be ‚no liquidation‘ of the Jews." [Hitler's War, 1977, p. xiv].

Let's look at what the phone log actually says. Kept in the German Bundesarchiv under the signature NS 19/1438, Telefonnotiz Himmler v. 30.11.1941:

Verhaftung Dr. Jekelius (Arrest of Dr. Jekelius)

Angebl. Sohn Molotov; (Supposed son of Molotov)

Judentransport aus Berlin. (Jew-transport from Berlin.)

keine Liquidierung (no liquidation)

Richard Evans remarks about this [p. 79] that it is clear to him as well as any reasonable person reading this document that the order to not liquidate refers to one transport, not – as Irving contends – all Jews. This is a reasonable interpretation of this document backed up further when we apply basic historiographical methods as historians are taught to do.

On November 27, we know from documents by the Deutsche Reichsbahn (the national German railway), that there was indeed a deportation train of Berlin Jews to Riga. We know this, not just because the fact that this was a deportation train is backed up by the files of the Berlin Jewish community but because the Reichsbahn labels it as such and the Berlin Gestapo had given an order for it.

We also know that the order for no liquidation for this transport arrived too late. The same day as this telephone conversation took place, the Higher SS and Police Leader of Latvia, Friedrich Jeckeln, reported that the Ghetto of Riga had been cleared of Latvian Jews and also that about one thousand German Jews from this transport had been shot along with them. This lead to a lengthy correspondence between Jeckeln and Himmler with Himmler reprimanding Jeckeln for shooting the German Jews.

A few days earlier, on November 27, German Jews also had been shot in great numbers in Kaunas after having been deported there.

Furthermore, neither the timeline nor the logic asserted by Irving match up when it comes to this document. We know from Himmler's itinerary that he met Hitler after this phone conversation took place, not before as Irving asserts. Also, if Hitler – as Irving posits – was not aware of the murder of the Jews, how could he order their liquidation to be stopped?

Now, what can be gleaned from this example are how Holocaust Deniers like Irving operate:

• In his discussion and interpretation of the document, Irving takes one fragment of the document that fits his interpretation: "no liquidation".

• He leaves out another fragments preceding it that is crucial to understand the meaning of this phrase: "Jew-transport from Berlin."

• He does not place the document within the relevant historical context: That there was a transport from Berlin, whose passengers were not to be shot in contradiction to passengers of an earlier transport and to later acts of murder against German Jews.

• He lies about what little context he gave for the document: Himmler met Hitler after the telephone conversation rather than before.

• And based on all that, he puts forth a historical interpretation that while it does not match the historical facts, it matches his ideological conclusions: Hitler ordered the murder of Jews halted – a conclusion that does not even fit his logic that Hitler didn't know about the murder of Jews.

A reasonable and legitimate interpretation of this document and the ongoings surrounding it is put forth by Christian Gerlach in his book Krieg, Ernährung, Völkermord. p. 94f. Gerlach argues that the first mass shooting of German Jews on November 27, 1941 had caused fear among the Nazi leadership that details concerning the murder of German Jews might become public. In order to avoid a public outcry similar to that against the T4 killing program of the handicapped. For this reason, they needed more time to figure out what to do with the German Jews and arrived at the ultimate conclusion to kill them under greater secrecy in camps such as Maly Trostinecz and others.

Part 3: How do I recognize and combat Holocaust Denial

Recognizing Denial

From the above given example, not only the methods of Holocaust Deniers become clear but also, that it can be very difficult for a person not familiar with the minutiae of the history of the Holocaust to engage or even recognize Holocaust Denial. This is exactly a fact, Holocaust Deniers are counting on when spreading their lies and propaganda.

So how can one as a lay person recognize Holocaust Denial?

Aside from an immediate red flag that should go up as soon as people start talking about Jewish conspiracies, winner's justice, and supposed "truth" suppressed by the mainstream, any of the four points mentioned about Holocaust Denier's beliefs above should also ring alarm bells immediately.

Additionally, there is a number of authors and organizations that are well known as Holocaust Deniers. Reading their names or them being quoted in an affirmative manner are also sure fire signs of Holocaust Denial. The authors and organizations include but are not limited to: The Institute for Historical Review, the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust, David Irving, Arthur Butz, Paul Rassinier, Fred Leuchter, Ernst Zündel, and William Carto.

Aside all these, anti-Semitic and racist rhetoric are an integral part of almost all Holocaust Denial literature. I previously mentioned the Jewish conspiracy trope but when you suddenly find racist, anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant, and white supremacists rhetoric in a media that otherwise projects historical reliability it is a sign that it is a Holocaust Denier publication.

Similarly, there are are certain argumentative strategies Holocaust Deniers use. Next to the obvious of trying to minimize the numbers of people killed et. al., these include casting doubt on eyewitness testimony while relying on eyewitness testimony that helps their position, asserting that post-war confessions of Nazis were forced by torture, or some numbers magic that might seem legit at first but becomes really unconvincing once you take a closer look at it.

In short, recognizing Holocaust Denial can be achieved the best way if one approaches it like one should approach many things read: By engaging its content and assertions critically and by taking a closer look at the arguments presented and how they are presented. If someone like Irving writes that Hitler didn't know about the Holocaust, yet ordered it stopped in 1941, as a reader one should quickly arrive at the conclusion that he has some explaining to do.

How do we combat Holocaust Denial

Given how Holocaust denial is part of a political agenda pandering bigotry, racism, and anti-Semitism, combating it needs to take into account this context and any effective fight against Holocaust Denial needs to be a general fight against bigotry, racism, and anti-Semitism.

At the same time, it is important to know that the most effective way of fighting them and their agenda is by engaging their arguments rather than them. This is important because any debate with a Holocaust Denier is a debate not taking place on the same level. As Deborah Lipstadt once wrote: "[T]hey are contemptuous of the very tools that shape any honest debate: truth and reason. Debating them would be like trying to nail a glob of jelly to the wall. (...) We must educate the broader public and academe about this threat and its historical and ideological roots. We must expose these people for what they are."

In essence, someone who for ideological reasons rejects the validity of established facts is someone with whom direct debates will never bear any constructive fruits. Because when you do not even share a premise – that facts are facts – arguing indeed becomes like nailing a pudding to the wall.

So, what can we do?

Educate ourselves, educate others, and expose Holocaust Deniers as the racist, bigots and anti-Semites they are. There is a good reason Nazism is not socially acceptable as an ideology – and there is good reason it should stay that way. Because it is wrong in its very essence. The same way Holocaust Denial is wrong at its very core. Morally as well as simply factually.

Thankfully, there are scores of resources out there, where anybody interested is able to educate and inform themselves. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum has resources as well as a whole encyclopedia dedicated to spread information about the Holocaust. Emory University Digital Resource Center has its The Holocaust on Trial Website directly addressing many of the myths and lies spread by Holocaust Deniers and providing a collection of material used in the Irving v. Lipstadt trial. The Jewish Virtual Library as well as the – somewhat 90s in their aesthetics – Nizkor Project also provide easily accessible online resources to inform oneself about claims of Holocaust Deniers. (And there is us too! Doing our best to answer the questions you have!)

Another very important part of fighting Holocaust Denial is to reject the notion that this is a story "that has two sides". This is often used to give these people a forum or argue that they should be able to somehow present their views to the public. It is imperative to not walk into this fallacious trap. There are no two sides to one story here. There are people engaging in the serious study of history who try to find a variety of perspectives and interpretation based on facts conveyed to us through sources. And then there are Holocaust Deniers who use lies, distortion, and the charge of conspiracy. These are not two sides of a conversation with equal or even slightly skewed legitimacy. This is people engaging in serious conversations and arguments vs. people whose whole argument boils down to "nuh-uh", "it's that way because of the Jews" and "lalalala I can't hear you". When one "side" rejects facts en gros not because they can disprove them, not because they can argue that they aren't relevant or valid but rather because they don't fit their bigoted world-view, they cease to be a legitimate side in a conversation and become the equivalent of a drunk person yelling "No, you!" but in a slightly more sophisticated and much more nefarious way.

For further information on Holocaust Denial as well as refuting denialist claims, you can use the resources abvove, our FAQ, our FAQ Section on Holocaust Denial and especially

• /u/elm11 's post on Holocaust Denial

• This previous thread on how to deal with Holocaust Denial

• and as an example, this thread where /u/Georgy_K_Zhukov and I engage a couple of denialist talking points.