Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

This board is open for all subject matters. Post information and discussion materials about open-debate and censorship on other boards (including this one) here. Memory Hole 2 is a RODOH subforum for alternate perspectives.
User avatar
Blogbuster
Posts: 2959
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:36 am
Contact:

Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by Blogbuster » Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:35 am

An interesting poll found here: http://www.google.com/search?client=tab ... 24&bih=606

The responses appear to be from non standard Holocaust debaters, I.e not people who post on CODOH or RODOH or the usual forums.
Blogbuster

Get the facts about the strange phenomenon of Holocaust hate blogging!
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=667

http://hateblogwatch.nazihunter.net/forum

User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 1904
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 9:43 pm
Location: USA, West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by Scott » Fri Feb 01, 2013 11:48 pm

I read the comments at this URL:

http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-h ... al-offense

It seems that although most people didn't really know much about the Big-H, or much if anything about what "Denier" arguments were or were-not, nearly everyone nevertheless clearly understood the importance of freedom of speech, i.e, the important principle being that it is easily more important to protect the speech that is unpopular than necessarily vouchsafing for the plurality of safe ideas, the ones that nobody dislikes, of course.

That open-mindedness was somewhat encouraging but this bozo begs to differ:
It may seem harsh but a Holocaust denial should be a criminal offense, especially if you are a public figure, because you are denying and trivializing a factual genocide.

Most of the denials occurred immediately after the period, as if SS officers were really in denial. Nowadays it's a drunken actor, washed-up celebrity or fame-seeking historian who just wants notoriety for their denials, and they should be made an example of for this. It's embarrassing for them to be denying such historical facts, but would the same punishment seem out of place if one were to deny the events of 9/11? The distinction should be made between revisionists and denials, but trivializing such a mass genocide is unconscionable, and there should be legal repercussions for this.

Posted By: R053Neddy
Well, R053Neddy here just doesn't get it. Not only are not all ideas equal, but more importantly, some ideologues are more unequal than others.

More specifically, he applauds criminal sanctions against thought that doesn't properly square with the Big-H, whatever that is, of course. The pot always calls the kettle black. Exact definitions of what it is that we are all supposed to dutifully believe are rarely forthcoming. We just know that we must eschew what we are told, because it is clearly beyond the pale.

What is a "factual Genocide"? Who gets to decide on the canon of "facts"?

For that matter, what is meant by Genocide? Whose ox has to be gored to get it to count?

Whose ideology must be approached only on bended knee? Which "trivializers," or at least which non-trivial ones, should be punished and severely made examples of?

A scientific approach to History is not monolithic. The facts are empirically observable and otherwise based on discernible evidence, and these truths are then critically evaluated like different grades of fish. Any kind of real-world knowledge is not a canon of orthodoxy at all but highly contingent to new information and new interpretation. Somebody is always pealing back another layer of onion. Even where a body of concrete facts supposedly underwrites the mix of narrative, one must always be wary of ex cathedra semantics. To do otherwise is closer to Faith than a quest for understanding.

What is more important, the truth or the true ideology? How can we not be skeptical of both?

It seems that for most of the commentators at the URL, there was a marketplace-of-ideas at play, and this even with offensive and unpopular viewpoints that were nonetheless entitled to be heard, or at least certainly free to be held, especially by the stupid and harmless.

Thus, the views that most need to be protected--irrespective of merit--should be protected from the narrow-minded caprice of the few--or of the many. Anybody is entitled to be wrong, and their ideas must then stand on the case of their merits or lack thereof. It might even be the case that the minority view is the one with the most merit. But in any case, there is no way to know how the merits hold up in a barren intellectual vacuum.

Most of the commentators thought that "Holocaust Denial" was stupid but that this stupidity was not itself a crime, and that the contrarians are at least Constitutionally entitled to be wrong.

That is at least the right "do no harm" spirit of the law, but unfortunately it is also a view which suffers from its own "self-evident truths." Ultimately this is still a mentality that implies the existence of a Great Charter of Truth somewhere, just sitting on a dusty shelf and imperiously waiting to be consulted by our betters. At least the consensus here is that while there is Truth with a capital-T, and that it is stupid to dispute what everybody knows to be the case, it should nevertheless never to be illegal to dispute it on democratic principle. Intellectual diversity is at least a Constitutional right if not an epistemological necessity.

I think this poster comes closest to actually getting it right, however:
Denial of the right of free speech is much more dangerous than holocaust denial. Human and constitutional rights are far more important than historical truisms. If anything, throw the yes side in jail first and then we discuss the issue. Even worse, imagine what your not-so-honest politicians would do with this tool to preserve their version of history. Read some Orwell to get the idea.

Posted By: Anonymous
Anonymous here correctly observes in my opinion that purging Thoughtcrime is more dangerous than suffering Holodenial--whatever it is that is meant by that. Apparently at least the Doubters are willing to discuss. The Believers maybe not. At least he correctly sees dogmatism as more ominous than the occasional impiety of open-minded enlightenment.

:)

“Now we have forced Hitler to war so he no longer can peacefully annihilate one piece of the Treaty of Versailles after the other.”
~ Major General J.F.C. Fuller,
historian – England

randomforumguy
Posts: 3625
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 1:14 am
Contact:

Re: Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by randomforumguy » Tue Feb 05, 2013 5:22 am

* edited by Blogbuster!

Nonsense post deleted. This forum is for on topic posts please. Kindly restrict the trolling and spam to the SE forum.
Thank you

NSDAP
Posts: 2480
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:33 am
Location: München, Deutschland

Re: Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by NSDAP » Mon Jan 15, 2018 2:35 am

In many countries there is a crime of "blasphemy" which is speaking about Christianity and god or God in a profane manner, though this has never stopped atheism, secularism or debate. Is it possible to have a debate on the alleged holocaust in these countries without being labelled a criminal denier? Seems not. If the same rules were applied about the blasphemy laws then such people as Richard Dawkins would be spending many years behind bars. Why is it that the alleged genocide of Juden attracts such blatant disregard to the rights of free speech and expression.
Ich bereure nichts...Arbeit macht frei
Wir glauben an Nationalismus ohne Kapitalismus und Sozialismus ohne Internationalismus

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 23290
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 12:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by Nessie » Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:49 am

I certainly do not think denial should be illegal. The correct way to deal with denial is by asking them to evidence their beliefs. The comedy that ensues from that is enough to prove denial is bogus :lol:

I also think making denial illegal also makes it attractive to those who like think they are rebels fighting for free speech and who dare to challenge the law and governments. They like the idea they are risking their freedom by denying what took place. Like a child who is bad so as to get attention.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 23290
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 12:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by Nessie » Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:57 am

NSDAP wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 2:35 am
In many countries there is a crime of "blasphemy" which is speaking about Christianity and god or God in a profane manner, though this has never stopped atheism, secularism or debate. Is it possible to have a debate on the alleged holocaust in these countries without being labelled a criminal denier? Seems not. If the same rules were applied about the blasphemy laws then such people as Richard Dawkins would be spending many years behind bars. Why is it that the alleged genocide of Juden attracts such blatant disregard to the rights of free speech and expression.
Richard Dawkins has not broken any blasphemy laws, of which I do not think there are any in the countries he has spoken in. Even in Ireland, where the law has fallen from use in the statute books.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

NSDAP
Posts: 2480
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:33 am
Location: München, Deutschland

Re: Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by NSDAP » Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:57 pm

Nessie wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:57 am
Richard Dawkins has not broken any blasphemy laws, of which I do not think there are any in the countries he has spoken in. Even in Ireland, where the law has fallen from use in the statute books.
Duh I was trying to say if blasphemy laws were treated in the same manner as holocaust denial laws.
Ich bereure nichts...Arbeit macht frei
Wir glauben an Nationalismus ohne Kapitalismus und Sozialismus ohne Internationalismus

Frankie
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by Frankie » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:52 am

NSDAP wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:57 pm
Nessie wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:57 am
Richard Dawkins has not broken any blasphemy laws, of which I do not think there are any in the countries he has spoken in. Even in Ireland, where the law has fallen from use in the statute books.
Duh I was trying to say if blasphemy laws were treated in the same manner as holocaust denial laws.
NSDAP = Mathis.

NSDAP
Posts: 2480
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:33 am
Location: München, Deutschland

Re: Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by NSDAP » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:57 am

Frankie wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:52 am
NSDAP = Mathis.
Ha ha ha I think not. But from my research that might be an honour. I did not know who Dr Mathis was until the other day.
Ich bereure nichts...Arbeit macht frei
Wir glauben an Nationalismus ohne Kapitalismus und Sozialismus ohne Internationalismus

aemathisphd
Posts: 823
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Should Holocaust Denial be a criminal offense!

Post by aemathisphd » Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:19 am

Frankie wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:52 am
NSDAP wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:57 pm
Nessie wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:57 am
Richard Dawkins has not broken any blasphemy laws, of which I do not think there are any in the countries he has spoken in. Even in Ireland, where the law has fallen from use in the statute books.
Duh I was trying to say if blasphemy laws were treated in the same manner as holocaust denial laws.
NSDAP = Mathis.
Idiotic. What reason would I have to conceal my identity here, or all places? I welcome the RODOH mods’ interference here — if you could, please confirm for our friend “Frankie” here that NSDAP does not post from any of my regular IP addresses, nor I from his/hers.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest