"There was no holocaust"

[Raisa]

All right....so there is some people who think there was no Holocaust.
Its beyond me. How do you explain there not being a holocaust?
:huh:

[Individual]

The only answer:

If you are an ignorant, un-intelligent, Nazi arse wipe.

A believer in the Holocaust not being as bad as described could also be explained by this word/or title: Bolshevika.

That just about sums it up. Ignorant, un-intelligent, and Nazi are three ways that one could be able to deny the Holocaust.

;)

[Nickademus]

i actually studied holocaust denial for a while .... during a holocaust history class. the tactics that some of the 'head honcho' deniers used are quite interesting. The guy who i'm thinking of, his name escapes me ... but he's here in canada. anyway, he was tried for hate crimes because of his holocaust denial. he actually sent a scientist to some of the concentration camps to try to prove that there was no holocaust denial. and a report was written, sounding very scientific 'prooving' that no jews were killed. but the scientist did some silly things ... for example he would do tests for the residue of the chemicals in some gas chambers ... but he'd test gas chambers that had been bombed during the war and subsequently rebuilt, and no one would have been killed in that particular gas chamber.

i have read lots of holocaust denial literature, all for that class. while it was extremely frustrating (especially because my focus in university was modern german history), i could see how some people who didn't have the facts available to them could actually believe some of the denial literature. frustrating that its really just ignorance (and by ignorance i mean lack of knowledge) that creates such horrific things.

i've had the opportunity to speak to 2 holocaust survivors and i don't know how anyone could even think that these people were making up such horrific stories.

[Hoppe]

the tactics that some of the 'head honcho' deniers used are quite interesting. The guy who i'm thinking of, his name escapes me

Probably David Irving. He is one of the most wellknown.

[El Che]

Here is an excerpt from an article dealing with Deborah Lipstadt's book: Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory (New York: The Free Press, 1993).

"In framing her responses, Lipstadt does a further great service by setting out a sort of typology of Holocaust revisionism. Not everyone involved, she maintains, is as crude as the outright deniers like Butz, Faurisson, Leuchter, Carto, Irving and Zundel. Others, like Rassinier, Barnes, Hoggan and App, might be better understood as "minimizers"; that is, those who engage in a range of sophistries designed to make the magnitude of the Holocaust appear less than it was. From there, by carefully mixing known facts with their fictions, the latter group advances false sets of moral comparisons--e.g., the nazi extermination center at Auschwitz was "really no different" than the concentration camps at Dauchau (false); and Dauchau wasn't all that different from the camp at Manzanar in which Japanese Americans were interned by the U.S. government during the war (true). Therefore the nazi treatment of untermenschen was "no worse than" that accorded by the U.S. to its "Jap" minority (false)--which the author rightly describes as being "immoral equivalencies.""

[Y2A]

I believe that they think that the concentration camps were detention camps and that the reason that a large number of jews died is because the Allied bombing of Grerman supply lines to the camps, thus causing the jews to starve and die to no fault of their own. They also believe that the number of jews dead(6 million) is ridiculous. However, as this is indeed a "communist site", I doubt you'd find anyone that actually believe that the holocaust was a lie.

[elijahcraig]

Go to The Phora and you can find some of this Nazi meat ideology.

thephora.org

[elijahcraig]

http://www.revisionists.com/index.html

[elijahcraig]

UH! They used Campbell as a reference!

“Lying, or mythologizing, is a common human trait according to Joseph Campbell/”

[Y2A]

Wow....just wow. These people are insane.

http://www.revisionists.com/photos/prision_conditions1.jpghttp://www.revisionists.com/photos/prision_conditions2.jpg

[Left] Germans prisoners of war living in holes in the ground, hardly any food or shelter and no heat in the winter, with [right] the so-called "inhumanity" of the Auschwitz Barracks with mowed lawns, heated barracks, comfortable beds, flush toilets, running water, and even a swimming pool for inmates.

[sparky44]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2004, 05:02 AM
i actually studied holocaust denial for a while .... during a holocaust history class. the tactics that some of the 'head honcho' deniers used are quite interesting. The guy who i'm thinking of, his name escapes me ... but he's here in canada. anyway, he was tried for hate crimes because of his holocaust denial. he actually sent a scientist to some of the concentration camps to try to prove that there was no holocaust denial. and a report was written, sounding very scientific 'prooving' that no jews were killed. but the scientist did some silly things ... for example he would do tests for the residue of the chemicals in some gas chambers ... but he'd test gas chambers that had been bombed during the war and subsequently rebuilt, and no one would have been killed in that particular gas chamber.

i have read lots of holocaust denial literature, all for that class. while it was extremely frustrating (especially because my focus in university was modern german history), i could see how some people who didn't have the facts available to them could actually believe some of the denial literature. frustrating that its really just ignorance (and by ignorance i mean lack of knowledge) that creates such horrific things.

i've had the opportunity to speak to 2 holocaust survivors and i don't know how anyone could even think that these people were making up such horrific stories.
The mans name is Ernst Zundel.

[Robert Edward Lee]

I shall address Y2A's post as a serious one, although it appears to be a bit too 'tongue in cheek'......

I believe those 'barracks' buildings are in fact modern structires built opon the original foundations. Auschwitz now has a history trail chronicling the story of the camp - it is complete incorrect to suggest that the inamtes lived in such buildings.

Inmates at Auschwitz III (I think) may indeed have worked in brick structures, but this way mainly because private German business has funded their construction and (quite rightly) believed that cheap wooden shacks would have lead to the deterioration of expensive machinery.

Flushing toilets? Mown grass? None of these existed. The Extermination camps were to be kept secret and the guards themselves did not have flushing facilities. They would have required the laying of a vast pipe-network. Too costly and too questionable. As for mowing the grass, we can safely assume that this is purely a modern endeavour to make the place look slightly more attractive.

[Y2A]

I didn't say that I CP'ed it from his link.

[Nyder]

The Nazis were socialists, you do know that right?

[Misodoctakleidist]

yeah, becuase they called themselves national socialists and of course hitler would never lie, would he?

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 04:06 PM
yeah, becuase they called themselves national socialists and of course hitler would never lie, would he?
National socialism as an economic ideology is hardly far-right. So there is some truth to it being a left-wing economic ideology, although it is not socialist. It wasn't a lie, National Socialism was socialist as they saw it, about as socialist as the old Labour party.

[RedAnarchist]

The Nazis were nationalistic scum who brainwashed a population and persecuted people just beacuse of small differences such as race, religion, political orientation and mental ability.

The Earth has been scarred by the Nazi virus, and we must ensure that no repeat of the "third riech" occurs. Our planet is not for Nazis! It is for humanity and our animal friends.

As for the Holocaust, denying it is about as illogical and idiotic as denying that its raining when youre stuck in a flood. The Holocaust happened. It was an evil act of opression and persecution against the Jewish, who had done nothing wrong.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 04:06 PM
yeah, becuase they called themselves national socialists and of course hitler would never lie, would he?
That's the best argument I've ever heard.


National socialism as an economic ideology is hardly far-right. So there is some truth to it being a left-wing economic ideology, although it is not socialist. It wasn't a lie, National Socialism was socialist as they saw it, about as socialist as the old Labour party.

I'd say it was centrist. You know, government tries to control the market and help the Aryan race so that they don't criticize it. Closer to Y2A than he might think.
Fascism on the other hand is capitalist, because they emphasize the market and private property. It should be obvious that fascism and nazism aren't the same thing.

[Y2A]

Fascism on the other hand is capitalist, because they emphasize the market and private property

Fascism is far-right ideology and calls for the juncture of corporations and government. Also it calls for militarization of police and a "president for life" usually a militant general. But some people are delusional and think that all rightwingers are fascist, whick is like saying I am a Communist just because I'm left. In any case some rightwingers, most likely libertarians. would argue that it was not "rightwing" since the right advocates no government infuence on the market what so ever.


I'd say it was centrist. You know, government tries to control the market and help the Aryan race so that they don't criticize it.

Nazism is not "centerist", it's far-right fascism because takes a socialist approach of controling vast parts of industry and does it for the better of the economy. The only real difference between fascism and nazism is that the fascists don't really care as much about ethnic groups as do the nazis. Mussolini for example didn't give up the Italian jews to Hitler because most jews in Italy made up a large portion of economic gain and giving them up would most certainly hurt the Italian economy.


Closer to Y2A than he might think

What!!! You think I'm a Nazi now! That just fucking ridiculous that you would suggest such a thing!



















Heil Hitler!

[synthesis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 08:36 AM
The Nazis were socialists, you do know that right?
Hmm...

“We stand for the maintenance of private property... We shall protect free enterprise as the most expedient, or rather the sole possible economic order.”

— Adolf Hitler

Having said that, what's your basis for calling them socialists? What's your definition of a socialist? Are the Nazis socialist because they called themselves National Socialists?

Then was the German Democratic Republic actually a democratic republic simply because that is what they termed themselves?

[Anarchist Freedom]

i think the starter of the American nazi party denied that the holocause happend even though he fought in WWII and saw them for himself and said he felt evil for killing his brothers and sisters(germans) its really pretty bad personally nazism truly fucks up your head.


:che:


CGLM! (http://www.cglm.net)

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 03:36 PM
The Nazis were socialists, you do know that right?
The ignorance of the right never ceases to astound me.

THoughHitler did incorporate a few, and I emphasise few, leftwing policies to relieve the depression, his general economic ideology was centralist, if not a little right. His support for corporatism and his policy for freetrade within his own land was rightwing. His use of government funded projects to reduce unemployment and inturn inflation is only leftwing to a mild extent. It is the exact same stratagy used by FDR, and he was no leftist.

However the simple proof is that hitler dispised socialists, and had them all murdered.

Read a book... if you can.

[Kurai Tsuki]

The writer Willam Blum compares WW2 era Germans not knowing about the holocaust to Americans not knowing about American interventionism in his book Killing Hope.

[Eastside Revolt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 08:27 PM

Fascism on the other hand is capitalist, because they emphasize the market and private property

Fascism is far-right ideology and calls for the juncture of corporations and government. Also it calls for militarization of police and a "president for life" usually a militant general. But some people are delusional and think that all rightwingers are fascist, whick is like saying I am a Communist just because I'm left.
Actually it calls for the juncture of corporations and the millitary (centralized millitaristic authority, is not what I call government). Now does "military-industrial complex" sound familiar?

[Nyder]

"Hitler was not a socialist" - that is complete nonsense. Hitler was VERY socialist and left-wing in his policies. He may have said differently on occassion, but who is stupid enough to believe politicians?

Extract from Hitler's 25 point plan:


9. All citizens of the State shall be equal as regards rights and duties.

10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good.

Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in life and property, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as a crime against the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material.

13. We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels.

14. We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.

15. We demand extensive development of provision for old age.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle-class, the immediate communalization of department stores which will be rented cheaply to small businessmen, and that preference shall be given to small businessmen for provision of supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

17. We demand a land reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to confiscate from the owners without compensation any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

If that isn't socialist then I'm Karl Marx.

Here is an excerpt from TIME Magazine, dated Jaunuary 2, 1939:

Hitler was named "Man of the Year" in 1938 by Time Magazine. They noted Hitler's anti-capitalistic economic policies:


"Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on other what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for food- stuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism."

Just because Hitler had a few disagreements with other 'leftists' and maybe even proclaimed himself against communism, his actions speak louder then words.

Now face the horrible truth - if someone like Hitler started a party right now you would vote for him on the basis of policies such as above, bringing yourself in another dictator. The only difference is his anti-semitic policies, which due to many leftists hatred of Israel, wouldn't be that out of place at the moment.

[Nyder]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2004, 01:33 AM




THoughHitler did incorporate a few, and I emphasise few, leftwing policies to relieve the depression, his general economic ideology was centralist, if not a little right.

Centralist? What does that supposed to mean?

Actually you are wrong - Hitler was one of the first 'Governments' to use Keynesian macroeconomic policies.


However the simple proof is that hitler dispised socialists, and had them all murdered.

So what? How many different factions of leftists do you think there are - and how many leftist groups actually agree with each other? There are always in fighting amongst leftists. Hitler probably didn't want to call himself a communist though he was anti-private property which makes him Karl Marx's prodigy in my book.

[Eastside Revolt]

Take Mein Kamph (spelling?), and the "American" or "god fearin' 'mercan" wherever you see "aryan" and you have the republican party.

[synthesis]

"Hitler was not a socialist" - that is complete nonsense. Hitler was VERY socialist and left-wing in his policies.

The fact that you have consistently ignored every attempt I make to actually show you what Marxism is means that you have no qualifications whatsoever to judge who is and is not a socialist.

We do not believe in creating the type of government that Hitler installed and therefore you must judge us on different standards should you want us to differentiate between your own views and that of other capitalists with whom you do not which to be associated unless you are interested in engaging in blatant hypocrisy.

[synthesis]

P.S. (just some reading material):

Wall Street Paves the Way for Hitler (http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/chapter_01.htm)

General Electric Funds Hitler (http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/chapter_03.htm)

Henry Ford and the Nazis (http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/chapter_06.htm)

Wall Street-Nazi Collaboration in World War II (http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/chapter_11.htm)

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 08:27 PM
Fascism is far-right ideology and calls for the juncture of corporations and government. Also it calls for militarization of police and a "president for life" usually a militant general. But some people are delusional and think that all rightwingers are fascist, whick is like saying I am a Communist just because I'm left. In any case some rightwingers, most likely libertarians. would argue that it was not "rightwing" since the right advocates no government infuence on the market what so ever.
Left = socialism, right = capitalism
I don't get what you're trying to say.
Fascists defend private property but claim to oppose how capitalism uses it (usually not on a beneficial way for the "Glorious Nation and it's equally Glorious State"). The state tries to control the market for his own benefit and that of some corporations by corporatism. The state must govern the individual, or so they say, becuase that's his "duty". That's at least my conclusion out of reading and hearing the fascist propaganda.


Nazism is not "centerist", it's far-right fascism because takes a socialist approach of controling vast parts of industry and does it for the better of the economy. The only real difference between fascism and nazism is that the fascists don't really care as much about ethnic groups as do the nazis. Mussolini for example didn't give up the Italian jews to Hitler because most jews in Italy made up a large portion of economic gain and giving them up would most certainly hurt the Italian economy.

Nazism is centrist. Nazism has a different attitude than fascism because of all that aryan race crap.


What!!! You think I'm a Nazi now! That just fucking ridiculous that you would suggest such a thing!

I knew that was going to piss you off. That wasn't my intention. I was talking about the economical system. In my personal political spectrum they are on the center, on the most authoritarian level, to the left of fascism and to the right of certain national-bolshevik/ultra-authoritarian stalinist groups. The racil aspect doesnt influde this too much.

Hey, just because you have a left-right mental spectrum you think this insane idiots are on the far-right. It is true that they are capitalists to an extent but the only difference between libertarians and fascists is the state issue.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2004, 03:02 AM
"Hitler was not a socialist" - that is complete nonsense. Hitler was VERY socialist and left-wing in his policies. He may have said differently on occassion, but who is stupid enough to believe politicians?
Exactly. How can you believe all his socialist part of his "platform" ignoring the capitalist part?
It seems you are an ignorant right-winger who does everything you can to difamate the left and evade many facts. Or that's how you are making yourself look like.


9. All citizens of the State shall be equal as regards rights and duties.

Many "Western" "liberal conservative" constitutions say simmilar things. And they don't necessarilly follow that in practice.


10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good.

Most ideologies claim the same. The problem is that you cappies are some lazy "workers" and claim that those "poor lazy idiot socialist who are trying to steal my hard-earned job" have to "work hard" in order to survive. Every single political/economical system agrees that people HAVE to work to survive, but not all of them specify HOW.


Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in life and property, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as a crime against the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material.

13. We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels.

14. We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.

15. We demand extensive development of provision for old age.

Populism for the "Aryan race".


16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle-class, the immediate communalization of department stores which will be rented cheaply to small businessmen, and that preference shall be given to small businessmen for provision of supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

17. We demand a land reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to confiscate from the owners without compensation any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

Corporatism and more populism.


Just because Hitler had a few disagreements with other 'leftists' and maybe even proclaimed himself against communism, his actions speak louder then words.

Now face the horrible truth - if someone like Hitler started a party right now you would vote for him on the basis of policies such as above, bringing yourself in another dictator. The only difference is his anti-semitic policies, which due to many leftists hatred of Israel, wouldn't be that out of place at the moment.

Blah blah blah. That's a very stupid way of arguing: making one argument "black or white", or "you are with us or you are with them". Plus, WHO THE HELL SAID THAT ISRAEL = JEWS???????????
You are an idiot. You can't seem to make differences between simple concepts as "state", "country", "Jews", "leftists", "anti-semitism".
So this means that if you disagree with another capitalist it is because you are against capitalism? So, if some "libertarian" takes power in Israel but decides to kill all the Palestinians you will support him? If you do, you are a racist, such as the nazis, but against palestinians. Such as the Israeli government, NOT ALL JEWS. If you don't, then you are an anti-semite. This also apllies to the current Israeli government and shows how ridiculous you are.

Your arguments to prove that hitler was a leftist also suck. Nowadays a "socialist" is considered to be a "keynesian", or someone who keeps the capitalist order but makes changes to it through the so called "welfare state". This kind of economy is to me a mix of capitalism and socialism, so it is in the center. So such people, including Hitler are actually in the center. It seems you are obsessed to prove that all those who disagree with you and those who you don't like to be related with are in the same "collectivist" side of the spectrum, while you and other exploitation lovers are in the other side.

[Raisa]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 08:27 PM
In any case some rightwingers, most likely libertarians. would argue that it was not "rightwing" since the right advocates no government infuence on the market what so ever.

They do! Cause I always have that arguement with people like that.

[Nyder]

What is all this crap about centrist, right-wing, etc..

When I talk about communism/socialism, I mean the expansion of government.

Remember, the main point about all of communism and socialism is the abolition of private property. That is central to what Marx is talking about.

Well, that's what Hitler did. It doesn't matter if Wall Street invested in Germany or if Hitler used some of the money to fund corporations. Capitalism is voluntary exchange. Hitler was about force and control.

It really is naive to think just because the Nazis collaborated with some businesses during their reign that they were 'capitalists'. The policies they enacted were collectivist and anti-trade, anti-property and anti-individual. Like it or not - this was communism (like Marx said - the Government has to nationalise the economy before communism will 'work').

Keep it Simple, Stupids

[synthesis]

When I talk about communism/socialism, I mean the expansion of government.

Yeah, and there's your problem. You seem to stubbornly grasp this idea that Marxism must be about governmental confiscation of private property, when that isn't what it's about at all.

Marxism is about taking privately owned means of producing wealth and putting them into the public domain, the machinery and industrial technology working for the public good rather than for that of businessmen.

When a government discrete from the interests of the people confiscates the means of production, this is not abolition of private property at all. This is the continuation of private property, simply with a different set of individuals - the Party - owning the means of production. You seem utterly determined to avoid recognizing this crucial fact. Socialism is about democratic control, not Party control.


It really is naive to think just because the Nazis collaborated with some businesses during their reign that they were 'capitalists'

It wasn't just collaboration, major corporations actually sponsored Hitler's rise to power with his promise to defend their interests against the burgeoning Leninist parties of the era. Fascism is the last refuge of the intimidated capitalist.

It's also ridiculous to propose that Hitler was in any way a Communist. Exhibit one: the two major engines behind the Night of the Long Knives were the military and the industrialists. Ernst Rohm was shot because he wanted to integrate the German army into the S.A., angering military leaders, and because he leaned more towards pro-working class policies than the German capitalists who backed Hitler felt comfortable with. His homosexuality was then used to justify the murder.


The policies they enacted were collectivist and anti-trade, anti-property and anti-individual.

The status of the individual is wholly irrelevant to the degree of economic leftism or rightism of a political system. You should know that.

For further information, read Oscar Wilde's The Soul of Man under Socialism (http://www.readbookonline.net/readOnLine/457/).

[RedCeltic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 10:36 AM
The Nazis were socialists, you do know that right?
Only someone who have never opened up a history book would make such a statement.

Hitler's NAZI party, "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei " or "National Socialist German Labor Party" Was anti-Socialist and anti-communist.

In fact, Marxism as a whole was considered by them to be a Jewish conspiracy, as Marx was after all born a Jew.

Perhaps if you had actually read a bit about the history, you would know that the United States actually took a position of isolationism party by the influence of Charles Lindbergh and "America First" which saw communism as a greater threat and Hitler and the NAZI party as a strong ally against such a threat.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2004, 02:50 AM
What is all this crap about centrist, right-wing, etc..

When I talk about communism/socialism, I mean the expansion of government.

Remember, the main point about all of communism and socialism is the abolition of private property. That is central to what Marx is talking about.
You sound like some paranoid rich bastard who is scared of all those "red masses" that are out there to get your so "hard-earned" money. You are so close-minded and you think you are some kind of "exceptional man". I guess you live in America, that might explain why hardly anybody advocates that libertarian free market crap out of that country. :rolleyes:


Well, that's what Hitler did. It doesn't matter if Wall Street invested in Germany or if Hitler used some of the money to fund corporations. Capitalism is voluntary exchange. Hitler was about force and control.

Capitalism isn't "voluntary exchange". If to suvive i have to work for some damn rich boy who inherited millions from his daddy who did the same (and that chain goes back to the point where their wealth was stolen by conquering those "barbarians") because I am from a poor family i don't see where the "voluntary exchange" is.


It really is naive to think just because the Nazis collaborated with some businesses during their reign that they were 'capitalists'. The policies they enacted were collectivist and anti-trade, anti-property and anti-individual. Like it or not - this was communism (like Marx said - the Government has to nationalise the economy before communism will 'work').

Keep it Simple, Stupids

Capitalism, private property and the so called free market = right wing.
Capitalist order but with state intervention to improve the situation of the poorest sectors of the society = center.
Socialism, with collective property and more economical planning = left wing.
Add attitude towards the state and social issues as an up-down and you have many other levels.

That's simple. It's just that you are a close-minded individualist who thinks that the spectrum is a simple line. You are on one side. The "collectivists" (about 12 other systems who fight each other in the same way they do with your side) are all together in the other side. How do all those systems so different from each other have a place on such a small place, i have no damn idea... :rolleyes:
You ignore concepts such as the difference between dicrect democracy, representative "democracy" and no democracy, attitude towards that state's role and the principles it has, various beliefs, personal freedoms, and how does different "idealists" attract the masses to support them.

[El Tipo]

Maybe they should hire iraq information minister to tell us that. :lol:

[Hitman47]

LOL!


Well I had this ex-Nazi soldier friend, he was more like a family friend. Well he was like a grandpa to me. :D

Well anyways, he says the same thing. That the "Holocaust" never happened and that Hitler was a "good man." He says that its all propaganda, its all lies.

LOL!

Well anyways, not so long ago, he went to Cuba, and he liked it there, because of the Cuban prostitutes. :rolleyes:

[dark fairy]

i can understand why someone would deny the fact the there was a holocaust...
but then again they're just ass-holes... everyone can approach it there own way but that doesn't mean that they're going to sit there and deny the fact that it even happened... but all i can say is that im not one of them ... it happened that was a lot of dead jews enough to call that a holocaust so to me it happened :unsure: :(

[Y2A]

Would anyone here disagree that the number was 6 million.

[Raisa]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2004, 02:50 AM



<<Like it or not - this was communism>>

The Nazis were not communist. They did not work to make communism. They hated communism, and they killed communists in the holocaust.

Communism is an enemy to Nazism.

Communism wants to unite the workers every where, which angers groups of people who want be the supreme race.

<<Keep it Simple, Stupids>>

looks like you kept it too simple.

[LSD]

It really is naive to think just because the Nazis collaborated with some businesses during their reign that they were &#39;capitalists&#39;. The policies they enacted were collectivist and anti-trade, anti-property and anti-individual. Like it or not - this was communism (like Marx said - the Government has to nationalise the economy before communism will &#39;work&#39;).


This argument has been covered several times before and I really don&#39;t want to go into it again. Here, read this (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=21887&hl=keynsian&st=0).


Would anyone here disagree that the number was 6 million.

Yes,
It was 5,896,351 Jews by the last count I saw. The total number including Slavs, homosexuals, gypsies, and the disabled is closer to ten million.


And by the way, in a rather shocking turn around, noted holocaust denier David Irving now says that more than four millions jews died&#33;&#33;

hmmmm... that sounds like a holocaust to me....

[Saint-Just]

And by the way, in a rather shocking turn around, noted holocaust denier David Irving now says that more than four millions jews died&#33;&#33;

Have you got a link to an article on that?

[synthesis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2004, 11:08 AM
Would anyone here disagree that the number was 6 million.
Yes, the number is at least 15 million; some sources claim that it was possibly as high as 22 million or more.

[LSD]

Have you got a link to an article on that?

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving...cript-0795.html (http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving-david/australia/2gb-transcript-0795.html)


Yes, the number is at least 15 million; some sources claim that it was possibly as high as 22 million or more.

Well, more than 50 million died because of the war, but identifying civilian casualties caused by the war and those caused by the government gets tough at a certain point. What is certain is that at least ten million people were deliberately killed by the German Government as part of a policy of racil extermination.

[synthesis]

I&#39;ve actually never heard anyone say 10 million before. According to Wikipedia, the Nazis killed 5,600,000-6,100,000 Jews, 2,500,000-3,500,000 Poles, 3,500,000-6,000,000 Slavs, 2,500,000-4,000,000 Russian POWs, 1,000,000-1,500,000 political dissidents, 200,000-800,000 gypsies, 200,000-300,000 disabled people, 10,000-25,000 homosexuals, and 2,000 Jehovah&#39;s Witnesses.

The number of zeroes there is simply staggering. Truly a disgusting regime.


http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving...cript-0795.html

I was just about to post that same link. Excellent site. Their responses to the IHR&#39;s "66 questions" is superb.

[LSD]

I wasn&#39;t including POWs or political murders. Only racial murders, or those under the RSHA racial plan.

If we were to include all civilians killed by the Third Reich than the number would indeed by closer to 20 million. The German invasion of Russia was the most brutal war in the history of the war. Durring the war more civilians died in Russia and Poland than in the rest of the world combined.


I was just about to post that same link. Excellent site. Their responses to the IHR&#39;s "66 questions" is superb.

Absolutely.

[synthesis]

I wasn&#39;t including POWs or political murders. Only racial murders, or those under the RSHA racial plan.

Fair enough. I was simply repeating those numbers which the site suggested.

[Nyder]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2004, 05:48 AM

When I talk about communism/socialism, I mean the expansion of government.

Yeah, and there&#39;s your problem. You seem to stubbornly grasp this idea that Marxism must be about governmental confiscation of private property, when that isn&#39;t what it&#39;s about at all.

Marxism is about taking privately owned means of producing wealth and putting them into the public domain, the machinery and industrial technology working for the public good rather than for that of businessmen.

When a government discrete from the interests of the people confiscates the means of production, this is not abolition of private property at all. This is the continuation of private property, simply with a different set of individuals - the Party - owning the means of production. You seem utterly determined to avoid recognizing this crucial fact. Socialism is about democratic control, not Party control.


The central idea of communism is abolition of private property.

From Marx and Engels 10 stage plan to achieve communism:

1. Eliiminate private land ownership and rent as applied to public property.
2. Institute a heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolish the right of inheritance.
4. Confiscate all properties owned by emigrants and rebels.
5. Establish a national bank where all money and loans are owned by the federal government and constitute a monopoly.
6. Nationally centralize the control of communication and transportation by the federal government.
7. Place ownership of factories and "instruments of production" in the hands of the federal government, cultivate the wastelands, improve the soil thereof according to a formed plan.
8. Everyone will be liable to work and labor. Industrial and agricultural armies will be formed, especially in agriculture.
9. Combine agriculture and manufacturing, eliminate the soverienty of town/state and federal government by distributing the population more evenly over the face of the country.
10. Free public education for all children, the elimination of children performing factory work, and combine education and manufacturing.

Notice that every one of these points is a further reduction in people&#39;s right to own personal possessions.


Notice, also, that the Nazis adopted every single method in this plan.

And a lot of so-called &#39;capitalist&#39; governments to some extent follow this creed.

If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and smells like a duck it probably is a duck.

[Nyder]

And here&#39;s the clincher: according to Marx, true communism (or socialism) can then be achieved when the Government &#39;dissolves&#39; itself.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Now, AS IF an all powerful Government is going to suddenly &#39;vote itself out of existence&#39;. This is why EVERY country that has &#39;attempted&#39; communism has got itself stuck with a dictatorship.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2004, 10:05 PM
I&#39;ve actually never heard anyone say 10 million before. According to Wikipedia, the Nazis killed 5,600,000-6,100,000 Jews, 2,500,000-3,500,000 Poles, 3,500,000-6,000,000 Slavs, 2,500,000-4,000,000 Russian POWs, 1,000,000-1,500,000 political dissidents, 200,000-800,000 gypsies, 200,000-300,000 disabled people, 10,000-25,000 homosexuals, and 2,000 Jehovah&#39;s Witnesses.

The number of zeroes there is simply staggering. Truly a disgusting regime.
Indeed. Thank god those bastards lost.

[John Galt]

I think the whole problem here is that we are using a left/right spectrum to map 2 different terms.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

They use up/down and left/right. One to describe economics the other to describe social stuff.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2004, 10:05 PM
I&#39;ve actually never heard anyone say 10 million before. According to Wikipedia, the Nazis killed 5,600,000-6,100,000 Jews, 2,500,000-3,500,000 Poles, 3,500,000-6,000,000 Slavs, 2,500,000-4,000,000 Russian POWs, 1,000,000-1,500,000 political dissidents, 200,000-800,000 gypsies, 200,000-300,000 disabled people, 10,000-25,000 homosexuals, and 2,000 Jehovah&#39;s Witnesses.

The number of zeroes there is simply staggering. Truly a disgusting regime.


http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving...cript-0795.html

I was just about to post that same link. Excellent site. Their responses to the IHR&#39;s "66 questions" is superb.
The numbers ive heard (and Ive seen in textbooks and stuff) is 6,000,000 jews and then 5,000,000 others, for a sickening total of 11,000,000

[synthesis]

The central idea of communism is abolition of private property.

You&#39;re correct in your statement, but completely off-base in your conclusion. The point of communism is the passing of private property into public property; when the private property is held by a Party whose interests are seperated from those of the masses, it is not socialism, nor communism, but something else entirely.


From Marx and Engels 10 stage plan to achieve communism:

The majority of those procedures were taken against Jewish private property, not against bourgeois private property as a whole. As Communism is staunchly anti-nationalist, a group which acts for abolition of private property of only a certain ethnicity can never be considered Communist.

It is becoming increasingly clear that you view the greatest horror of the Nazi regime to be not the Holocaust, but the abolition of private property; you merely attempt to use the Holocaust to attempt to group us in with our fiercest enemies.

We won&#39;t fall for your crazy shenanigans ;)


And a lot of so-called &#39;capitalist&#39; governments to some extent follow this creed.

Your point being?

(Again, you seem to misunderstand Marxist terminology. A &#39;capitalist&#39; nation is simply one where private property exists; it has nothing to do with the level of government involvement.)


Now, AS IF an all powerful Government is going to suddenly &#39;vote itself out of existence&#39;. This is why EVERY country that has &#39;attempted&#39; communism has got itself stuck with a dictatorship.

Further misunderstanding. I am starting to wonder why I even bother.

If you demonstrate that you have not read what I have written below, I will cease to respond to your posts. It will be easier on both of us :)

The dictatorship of the proletariat is a misleading term. Marxists see capitalist democracies as being &#39;dictatorships of the bourgeois&#39;, that is, class rule, democratic to the extent that the ruling class is threatened.

The aim of socialism is to make the proletariat - the whole proletariat - the ruling class. A dictatorship of the proletariat will be democratic to the point where the position of the working people as the ruling class is threatened by reactionaries.

The purpose of the dictatorship of the proletariat is to abolish the bourgeoisie and other reactionary groups. Under Marxist sociology, history amounts to a series of ever-progressing class struggles. As all aspects of human society are tied back to class, it follows that government is a tool for class repression.

When class is abolished, the logical conclusion is that the state will be unnecessary and will "wither away." If it doesn&#39;t - well, I&#39;m not concerned. Under socialism, the state will be a democratic representation of the proletariat, which is good enough for me.


I think the whole problem here is that we are using a left/right spectrum to map 2 different terms.

In my opinion, the problem here is that we are attempting to classify Nazis as being in one &#39;group&#39; or the other. I think that we must seperate the Nazis from simply being &#39;socialist&#39; or &#39;capitalist&#39; and look at exactly who they were and what we can do to stop something like that from ever happening again. I will be the first to admit that I have been guilty of this sort of misleading classification, as have most political debators who have discussed the Holocaust at some point or another.


The numbers ive heard (and Ive seen in textbooks and stuff) is 6,000,000 jews and then 5,000,000 others, for a sickening total of 11,000,000

I suppose it depends on whether you want to qualify the prisoners of war under the death toll.

Also, it would depend on whether or not you are taking the minimums or the maximums from each group.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 12 2004, 09:57 PM

Have you got a link to an article on that?

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving...cript-0795.html (http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving-david/australia/2gb-transcript-0795.html)
Thanks. Its an interesting idea on how many ided in concentration camps from overwork, disease or starvation or how many were killed in gas chambers or shot.