Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

This is the place for your questions, propositions, formal debate topics, etc. but they do have to be approved by the Moderator before they will be published visibly, and must not address opponents disrespectfully, if at all. The subjects have to be simple or straightforward and kept on topic.

Moderator: been-there

User avatar
been-there
Posts: 10840
Joined: 30 Apr 2013, 08:59

Re: Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

Post by been-there »

°°°
We all adopt and structure our lives around belief-systems, whether they be social, political, religious belief-systems or whatever.
There are light, undemanding, flexible ways to adopt belief systems.
And then there are cultish ways.

Some belief-systems are themselves intrinsically rigid, bigoted, dictatorial and intolerant of rival belief-systems: i.e cultish.
And some are not.

Some people are able to retain trust in an intrinsically cultish belief system in a way that is flexible, non-dogmatic, open-minded, tolerant, honest, critical, intelligent (e.g. Prof. Norman Finkelstein with the holocaust).
And some can not (e.g. Prof Deborah Lipstadt with the holocaust).

The following is analysing the way ‘holocaust’ is an intrinsically cultish belief-system.
Jonathan Rauch wrote:Cults enmesh their adherents in infinite,
impenetrable loops of self-reinforcing beliefs.

They encourage and often require their members to
isolate themselves from outside ideas and authorities.

......Inside the cultic bubble, every question has an answer,
every implausibility an explanation,
even if the answer is ...the explanation that
you cannot believe your own eyes and ears
.

Image
Here is the BBC regularly repeating one of the loops of self-reinforcing beliefs

Cults have impenetrable loops of self-reinforcing beliefs.
The cultish approach to ‘holocaust’ belief, claims its narrative is the most historically confirmed and conclusively evidenced history throughout human time.
Yet despite claiming the ‘evidence’ supporting the holocaust narrative is so irrefutable, the cult of holocaust insists its adherents should not debate with skeptics about this ‘evidence’.
Plus it insists its ‘evidence’ is in danger of not being believed once its ‘survivor witnesses’ die out. :o :? :lol:
Erm... so they are saying that without eye witnesses (lie-witnesses?) to relate to impressionable, captive school children, their necro-pornographic, emotionally-manipulative, claimed-experiences during WW2, then the ‘holocaust’ narrative is in danger?! :?
Q: In danger of what? Not being believed and of being forgotten? If so, what’s the problem, either way?
A: The problem is that like many cults, ‘holocaust’ cultists want it to be the predominant religiously-historical belief, so constantly seeks new cult-members.

Image
Here is Wikipedia repeating one of the loops of self-reinforcing beliefs

Cults isolate themselves from outside ideas and authorities.
Cultish believers in the protected narrative of ‘the holocaust’ are advised not to give any attention to revisionist literature or to skeptics of their belief as anyone who has any doubts, questions or contrary viewpoints is a wicked, dangerous person and all contact should be avoided. Adherents of the cult of H are instructed to isolate themselves from ideas that question or refute the officially sanctioned and approved, government-protected narrative.
And according to Elie Wiesel, a high-priest of this cultish approach to history: "Any survivor has more to say than all the historians combined about what happened". Here, this cultish approach to history proudly gives the questionable stories of individuals a higher prominence and credibility than academia and historians.

In a cult, every implausibility has an explanation.
Ask questions or point out flaws and implausible details in the holocaust narrative and they are either denied, or are explained away with illogical rhetoric.
E.g. no evidence of big enough mass graves at Treblinka, Sobibor, Chelmno, Majdanek, etc? Ah, well that’s because the evil Nazties destroyed all the evidence. Oh and simultaneously Caroline Sturdy-Colls and others also actually found the evidence. So the Nazties didn’t destroy it.
Q: Er... Which is it?
A: Both!
:?

The explanation that you cannot believe your own eyes and ears.
You see and hear witness survivors talking utter nonsense, repeating racist mythology and claiming memories of things they in reality learnt about later when they were much older.
You see that so many ‘survivor’ biographies and memoirs are full of contradictions, exaggerations, impossibilities and outright lies.
You see TV documentaries repeating lies and distortions and clearly deceiving by omission.
But in the cult of Holocaust, questioning or contradicting a clearly lying ‘survivor’ is considered insensitive and possibly anti-semitic. They went through so much, don’t humiliate them or apply normal expectations of honesty and credibility.
In the cult of Holocaust, any academics and historians who challenge, question, refute or just document the analysis of skeptics are demonised and ostracised... IF THEY ARE LUCKY!
E.g. Joel Hayward, Henri Roques, Paul Rassinier, Prof. Anthony Hall, Prof Norman Finkelstein, Nick Kollerstrom, Arthur Butz, Timothy Dalton (pseudonym), etc.

So don’t believe your own eyes and ears when they perceive any aberrations.
The holocaust narrative must only be believed and respected. NEVER questioned or doubted — and certainly not critically investigated.
Welcome to the cult of holocaust!
Leave your intellect and any ability for independent, critical thinking
at the door. :)
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous
User avatar
been-there
Posts: 10840
Joined: 30 Apr 2013, 08:59

Re: Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

Post by been-there »

Signs that ‘the holocaust’ is an intrinsically cultish belief-system.

Here is an excerpt from an article discussing the signs of cult-like behaviour.
https://www.ncregister.com/blog/4-dange ... -antidotes
A trait of a cult is that complete loyalty is demanded of the followers. Dissent and criticism are not permitted.
Those who dissent will be marginalized, excluded from decision-making and demonised.
If the leaders cannot get rid of the dissenters they will be isolated and given a name. They will be ‘the troublemakers’ or ‘the grumblers’ [or in this case ‘the deniers’].

The dissenters from within will be considered the most dangerous ones and you will find that there are divisions — those who are loyal followers and those who are suspected of being “disloyal” or “rebellious”. The disloyal and rebellious ones will be deemed “unspiritual” or “difficult”. In extreme cases the dissenters will become scapegoats and all the negativities of the group will be projected on to them.

Another characteristic of a group that has become a cult or is behaving in a cult-like manner is that there will be a persecution complex. A group of outside forces will be identified who are ‘the enemy’. A little fortress will be built in which all those on the inside are the “faithful ones” while all those on the outside will increasingly be demonised and feared.
There will be no real effort to build bridges or get to know those on the outside.
There will be no real effort to treat the outsiders as real people.
Instead they are the enemy to be kept at arms’ length and against whom the faithful will usually project their fears and suspicions. At worst the enemy will have all the sins and fears and dark negativities projected on them.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous
Post Reply