Since I constantly see how there's no direct order given for the Holocaust (even though the Nazis destroyed millions of documents before the end of the war), would it be better to think that it was Himmler working semi-autonomously to enact the Holocaust, with Hitler having a varying amount of knowledge and giving tacit approval? The image is Himmler's speech at Posen, in 1943, to SS officers. Can someone prove me wrong on this (Himmler being responsible for the Holocaust)? I often see people with sympathy towards Nazi Germany deny that the Holocaust happened.
>>18713117This is now your opportunity to post Hitler's direct order to do Operation Barbarossa. If you can't, you have to accept it never happened.
>>18713123Führer Directive 21 issued in 1940
>>18713117Even if Himmler was responsible, Hitler would still be culpable.
>>18713126Oh, Hitler wrote his orders in English did he?
>>18713127Hitler would have to be the most incompetent moron to ever live if the Holocaust was taking place entire behind his back without him noticing the numbers of troops and supplies being used to gather up, hold and kill the Jews, or the output of their use as slaves
>>18713128this is translated>>18713127Fair enough. I don't see any direct responsibility though, or words that show direct guilt. I think there was a Reichstag speech in 1939 that threatened to rain hell on the Jews if war started but that could be a figure of speech.>>18713129This is the same man that tried to Blitzkrieg Russia into submission and who allowed the British forces to escape at Dunkirk.
>>18713134>translated How convenient. No original documents survived huh?
>>18713138idk man, is that really the best you can do?
>>18713149>some random typed documentWhere is Hitlers signature? There is a documents where Hitler personally says "do Barbarossa" , right?
>>18713117>Can someone prove me wrong on this (Himmler being responsible for the Holocaust)? I often see people with sympathy towards Nazi Germany deny that the Holocaust happened.Holocaust deniers don't do it out of hunger for knowledge, they do it to forward their political agenda. They're usually either chicano neckbeards looking for acceptance from actual white people (the "it never happened because MY PEOPLE would never do such a thing and it's all a conspiracy" kind of denier), or butthurt Muslims trying to gather sympathy for the Arabs oppressed by Israel (the "maybe it happened, maybe not, but I can prove that the Jews deserved and still deserve extermination, btw have I mentioned Palestine yet?" kind of denier). They don't care about proof, historicity or research.Also it's pointless to debate who came up with the Final Solution first, whether Hitler, Himmler, Heydrich, Rosenberg, etc. Or whether it was their plan all along (like the intentionalist school believes). There were really too many actors who implemented the Final Solution, Germans and non-Germans, to just point fingers at one guy.
>>18713161>Holocaust deniers don't do it out of hunger for knowledgeI do, both for a desire to know more about reality, as well as abject disgust at authorities clamping down on anyone investigating it. In my mind, David Irving is the premiere example of this mindset:He didn't give a fuck about what is politically correct and simply followed the evidence.>They're usually either chicano neckbeards...or butthurt MuslimsMy ancestors :) were all from Britain going back to the 1750's at least. I have no clue where this idea that "everyone who says or believes a non-PC thing is brown" comes from, but I assume it's just liberals et al rediscovering racism after realising their compliant groups aren't so compliant, while simultaneously annoying the actual Whites professing it.>They don't care about proof, historicity or research.Well that's the thing, there isn't any proof. It was all very conveniently destroyed by the Nazis, with what's left being circumstantial at best. Hell, even the term "Final Solution" is taken to be a euphemism. The blog that regularly that gets linked here, the name escapes me, also has this issue. When you get past the vindictive language, he just presents the same aforementioned evidence.This isn't even getting into how the Nuremberg trials went. Did you know that it was simply taken as defacto true that the Nazis did the holocaust, and the trials were only about how guilty they were for it? It's little nuggets like that that stay with me and make me think "hmm, it probably did happen, but that's weird".This is all without getting into most of the "rebuttals" being "You're a Nazi!", or hell here it's "You're brown!". Not to mention it's ALWAYS assumed that it's due to ideological motivations. I find it surprising no one thinks to ask whether it's the reverse, that poor argumentation contributing to ideological development.
I have the original Table Talk of Hitler with dates and stamps and everything and one night they discussed if the Jews should be sent to Asia or Africa.
>>18713203>didn't give a fuck about what is politically correct>literally sued someone for saying he wasn't politically correct
>>18713210>>literally sued someone for saying he wasn't politically correctThis is exactly what I'm talking about. Why do I believe that's not the case? How do I think it went down?You're not interested. You just say something that I believe is either untrue or misleading, which makes me believe you're either a dishonest actor, or simply ignorant.
>>18713203>David Irving is the premiere example of this mindset:>He didn't give a fuck about what is politically correct and simply followed the evidence.Irving is the perfect example of what you shouldn't do if you want to be taken seriously as a historian. He dismissed the historical method, cherry-picked quotes from Nazi officials while ignoring others, and straight up fabricated his "sources" or translations. He isn't some misunderstood genius, he's an embarrassing amateur. The only genocide deniers I respect are the Turks when asked about the Armenian genocide, because they genuinely understand that they didn't do anything out of the ordinary given the context of the time. What the Axis did, however, was extraordinary for its time.>Well that's the thing, there isn't any proofSo you haven't even TRIED to look for proof. Ever heard of the CPR? The Einsatzgruppen reports, e.g. the Jäger report? Jan Karski? Hermann Höfle? Markiewicz' paper? And that's not even taking into consideration what diplomats of Axis-aligned countries wrote and did during the Holocaust, who had no interest in an Allied victory, but were appalled by the intended extermination of Jews.>This isn't even getting into how the Nuremberg trials went. Did you know that it was simply taken as defacto true that the Nazis did the holocaust, and the trials were only about how guilty they were for it?That's not what the Nuremberg trials were about, not even close. The defendants were accused of crimes against peace and crimes against humanity, against the peoples of France, USSR, Yugoslavia, Greece, Netherlands, Norway, Czechoslovakia and so on. The "Persecution of the Jews" (not "The Holocaust") was only one of the subsections of the Nuremberg verdict; Jews were never the protagonists at Nuremberg.
>>18713226But he DID sue someone for saying he wasn't politically correct. You are aware of this, yes?
>>18713158Holy goalpost moving.
>>18713306Holy no quote from Hitler saying "Do Barbarossa"
>>18713288>Irving is the perfect example of what you shouldn't do if you want to be taken seriously as a historian.My initial opinion can be summarised as "Really?" upon reading that. Poisoning the well only works when the audience in a debate is ignorant, not in a conversation. >He dismissed the historical methodIn what context? Because, as mentioned before, lack of evidence is a persistent issue regarding the topic.>cherry-picked quotes from Nazi officials while ignoring othersDo you have any examples? Because you're implying that they were added/rejected purely by what was convenient, but from what I've read he certainly had a system for categorising their validity and relevance.>and straight up fabricated his "sources" or translationsAgain, do you have any examples?>He isn't some misunderstood genius, he's an embarrassing amateurPlease, seriously, knock it off with the vindictiveness. It's not convincing in the slightest. If it helps, imagine if I ended every argument with "He's just a seething Kike", that should give you an idea of how effective it is.>What the Axis did, however, was extraordinary for its time.Allegedly.>You haven't even TRIED to look for proofOr I have, and my determination was as already said. Or I haven't, and all of those come as a shock to me, shining a brilliant light on the dark history that I've been ignorant of; You have no idea, you're just assuming.To be fair, it has been like a decade since I last seriously took a look at everything, so maybe my mindset will have changed in the interim.>The defendants were accused of crimes against peace and crimes against humanityThe first of which is a bad joke, which was effectively just arbitrarily prosecuting them for daring to prepare for and wage war. You won't be able to convince otherwise.The second of which, yes absolutely. cont.
>>18713343>Knock it off with the vindictiveness Says the little cunt who'll have a melty and start screaming that everyone is a Jew within the next 10 replies.
>>18713314Read the text in the image belonging to this post >>18713126the first line is "The German Wehrmact must be prepared to crush Soviet Russia in a quick campaign (Operation Barbarossa)". That's exactly what you requested>>18713158at the end appears the words gen adolf hitler as a signature
>>18713343>The "Persecution of the Jews" (not "The Holocaust")The point I was trying to make is that it is commonly believed that it was definitively proved there to have happened, when in reality it was mostly about the legal persecutions, rather than unveiling a systematic genocide.Regardless of my issues with the individual points, thank you for at least responding, as opposed to this...specimen >>18713305 , who only wishes to have le ebin gotchas. He doesn't deserve an argument, or to be taken seriously.
>>18713356Bro, your side can't produce even a single fucking document mentioning what happened with the Jews deported to the East.
Here are Poles "evacuated" and "placed somewhere else". Nazis used the same wording for Jews deported to the East. What happened to them, what do you think?
>>18713354Anyone can type that. Try harder.
>>18713374The people who proposed that nothing happened to the Jews still owe us an explanation why they all, collectively and globally, stopped having babies for the duration of the war.
>>18713356>It's a gotcha to say David Irving did a thing he did in fact do and is famous for.
>>18713374Pardon, what would I have to prove? I have alternative hypothesis, plural, for where and how exactly 6 million* Jews disappeared without invoking systematic extermination as the cause, but that's not something I care to prove, nor could I given my amateur status.Besides, again, due to lack of evidence, I think it would be exceedingly difficult to prove any alternative theory either.>>18713351JEW, KILL IT
>>18713394>I can totally disprove the holocaust and be both the greatest historian in history and single handedly save the white race from genocide>I just don't wanna
>>18713386No, the "gotcha"ness of your posts is due to your reliance on single line posts ">implying implications". I've correctly clocked you as only being interested in such a thing, not a discussion, so why should I entertain you besides repeatedly pointing out what you're doing?Actually nevermind, even these (You)s probably fulfill your needs.
>>18713406>Noooooo you can't use green text on 4chan!!! You just can't!!!!Lurk moar faggot.
It's fun watching stormtrannies squirm as they attempt to square the circle of the current zeitgeist requiring them to be free speech absolutists but also worshipping David Irving for Knowing even though he tried to silence a critic with lawfare.
>>18713397>>18713409>>18713422I'm guessing these are all the same, well, I was going to say person but that's stretching it.
>>18713384This. Also why media in the Yiddish language suddenly stopped being a thing, after decades and decades of Yiddish publications. No other language had declined so fast in Europe before, not even Prussian or Etruscan.
>>18713425>Squirming continuesWhy do you hate freeze peach?
>>18713384>>18713431And also why subgroups like the Romaniots who had maintained a distinct culture for thousands of years, all decided to give it up and just blend in with wherever they ended up. Not just blended in, but became utterly indistinct from the natives, instantly, without anyone noticing thousands of newcomers arriving.
>>18713394>I have alternative hypothesis, plural, for where and how exactly 6 million* Jews disappeared without invoking systematic extermination as the causelike abduction by aliens?
>>18713117At the very least, Hitler know about the Einsatzgruppen killing, their reports were sent directly to him. > The massacres of the four Einsatzgruppen, the task forces consisting of SS and police personnel subordinate to the Reichssicherheitshauptamt, commenced with the beginning of the war in the East. They are extensively documented, above all in the situational reports (Ereignismeldungen) for the UdSSR, put out by the Reichssicherheitshauptamt; these reports openly describe the murder of hundreds of thousands of people, more of 90% of them Jews. These reports were relatively widely circulated: for example 45 copies of situational report No. 40 of 1 August 1941 were distributed; they were sent not only to numerous offices of the SS and police but also to the Leadership staff of the Wehrmacht. In a radio telegram to the Einsatzgruppen on 1 August, Gestapo Chief Müller, who was responsible for the compilation of situational reports, ordered that "especially interesting illustrative material" should be sent to Berlin because "the Führer should be presented with continuous reports on the work of the Einsatzgruppen in the East from here".143 The distribution list of the situational report No 128 of 3 November 1941, of which there were 55 copies, included the Party Chancellery144 (Hitler’s office responsible for communication between him and the Nazi Party). It is therefore not possible to argue that the mass murders by the Einsatzgruppen were kept secret from other agencies by the Reichssicherheitshauptamt; in fact, these reports were available to many—including also to Hitler.https://www.hdot.org/longrole/#longrole_15
Meh, deniers are boring. It's always some vague crap. They never cite documents or anything. By the way, there are Himmlers reports to Hitler about Jews executed in the East. Yeah, there are scans in our favorite blog. >Report to the Führer on Combating PartisansYou can easily find that one. And let's be fucking serious here. No one will believe that all those Jews were partisans as the document clearly states that the Germans executed 14257 bandits and 363211 Jews.
>>18713441Epidemics? Starvation? Reduced population growth, or even shrinkage due to displacement and internment? Resettlement within Soviet controlled areas? Hell, even individual camp commandants deciding to be more "proactive". Any and all of them (probably most of them occuring at once) could have reduced the population significantly without the need for some top down extermination plan, as much as some very special individuals think parts of it can't be a factor.
i'm on the fence as to whether or not the holocaust happened to the extent of the numbers they claim but i uniformly deny it all the same if only as way to undermine jewish power
>>18713457No, no. You have to tells us where the Nazi deported the Jews. Then we can talk about starvation. Russian East means literally nothing. Name of cities, camps, number of Jews and so on.
>>18713457>Epidemics? Starvation? Reduced population growth, or even shrinkage due to displacement and internment?Aren't you aware that epidemics and starvation are the most effective killers? Usually this is how ethnic cleansings and genocides are done, in Ottoman Armenia, Biafra, East Timor, the South African and Kenyan camps, etc. Even now in the current Israeli massacre of Gazans, starvation is playing an important part. The Nazis did kill a shitload of people (not only Jews) via forced starvation, Vernichtung durch Arbeit and unsanitary conditions. Those deaths are part of the Nazi crimes, not some separate toll. They are murders according to international law.
>>18713381see, first it was a direct order to do Barbarossa, then upon the evidence, it was criticized for being in English (as in translations don't exist), then upon providing the order in German, a signature is demanded, upon showing the document ended in a typed signature, the criticism lays on the fact that it's typed. All I see is someone making smaller and smaller nitpicks and ignoring the actual evidence.
>>18713459yeh, I'd understand doubting the 6 million number, and that's a more reasonable position to take, but denying the whole thing happened at all is something I don't really understand.
>>18713448ahh, never knew about this. Thanks for the info
>>18713466Pardon, but you're again asking me to prove something, when the question was about what the reasonable hypothesis was.>>18713489>Aren't you aware that epidemics and starvation are the most effective killersYes, that's why I listed them.>They aren't seperatedReally? So they know specifically which epidemics were intentionally started to kill them all off, which were intentionally starved and which were of either incidentally?Or do they just lump them all together?>Those deaths are part of the Nazi crimes, not some separate toll. They are murders according to international law.Then I demand that Trump and Biden face justice for their handling of COVID. Those deaths? All on their hands.
