The very act itself of entering into a scholarly debate with Holocaust deniers results in giving them a public forum and thus some perceived legitimacy. Why would anyone want to lend even the slightest bit of credibility to their claims by agreeing to debate with them? What is the point of "debating" with blatant liars?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Why would anybody agree to "debate" with a Holocaust denier?
- Thread starter marcuss
- Start date
Karl S JPA
New member
Giving overwhelming evidence and destroying their weird claims.
The K!LLER Anna
New member
i wouldn't...i would think it would be a waste of my time, much like trying to convince a fundamentalist that christianity is probably not the best way to go. but i'd imagine that those who -would- actually undertake such a feat, would want to give the deniers actual information, or even plant a seed of doubt in their mind...if in fact they are that idiotic to believe that the holocaust did not, in fact, occur.
G
Gorgeoustx Swimmer
Guest
You're right. Anyone dumb enough to ignore the millions of testimonies does not have the mental ability to think independent thoughts.
darkvelvetrain
New member
Millions of people either deny that the Holocaust ever happened and a great many more that it happened to the extent claimed. If things are so clear cut about the Holocaust, this would not be a subject of discussion. Some of people point to the wide range of "official" numbers, some are angry because not only Jews were killed, and some are angry that Holocaust survivors and their families have received and continue to receive large cash settlements. To deny a debate on the most fundamental, undeniable fact - that the Holocaust occurred - would simply feed the flames of doubt. Who is getting these settlements? Why are the International Red Cross numbers different from the U.S. military numbers, that are different from the Russian numbers, that are different from the Nuremburg trial numbers, that are different from the Auschwitz memorial numbers? Why are people arrested in Germany for asking questions? Sure, in the U.S. and other places where there is room for open debate, there are no problems, but in Germany in particular I can see why some people would continue to be iffy on the subject. There is, unfortunately, plenty to debate.
Yes, there was a Holocaust, yes, people were killed en masse, but why not answer the nagging questions with evidence so that people can have all of the facts so all of these nut jobs can be made to shut up?
To refuse to debate on the topic and set the record straight would be awfully suspicious in the eyes of those millions that say it never happened. The best way to garner support for a cause is to have someone oppose it and refuse to give it credence. It works for religious cults, it works for unpopular political systems, and it would probably work for Holocaust deniers.
The whole idea is "show me evidence or it didn't happen". If one were to scoff at what to a great number of people would be seen as a legitimate debate would simply indicate to those people that there is something to hide. Besides, who would turn down a debate with the evidence stacked in their favor?
Yes, there was a Holocaust, yes, people were killed en masse, but why not answer the nagging questions with evidence so that people can have all of the facts so all of these nut jobs can be made to shut up?
To refuse to debate on the topic and set the record straight would be awfully suspicious in the eyes of those millions that say it never happened. The best way to garner support for a cause is to have someone oppose it and refuse to give it credence. It works for religious cults, it works for unpopular political systems, and it would probably work for Holocaust deniers.
The whole idea is "show me evidence or it didn't happen". If one were to scoff at what to a great number of people would be seen as a legitimate debate would simply indicate to those people that there is something to hide. Besides, who would turn down a debate with the evidence stacked in their favor?
christianman
New member
I agree with you.
One of the signs of Armageddon.
One of the signs of Armageddon.
On the one hand you are correct. Engaging them in a "debate" suggests that there is anything to debate about and gives them a legitimizing forum for them to spout their idiocy.
On the other hand, sometimes the madness has to be dragged out into the sunlight to whither. That's what happens sometimes with the Creationists. The YECs keep repeating their own lies to themselves and their believers over and over again until they get up the courage to try to push their nonsense into the real world. "Intelligent Design" was the result of the more recent propaganda efforts by the Creationist crowd and didn't get properly shot down until they finally pushed the issue into court.
Most recently Creationists have been trying to connect evolution to Nazism (irony of ironies, since both groups use the exact same tactics) and--incredibly--have been getting an audience for it. If that sort of thing isn't confronted eventually it will fester and become much harder to discredit.
On the other hand, sometimes the madness has to be dragged out into the sunlight to whither. That's what happens sometimes with the Creationists. The YECs keep repeating their own lies to themselves and their believers over and over again until they get up the courage to try to push their nonsense into the real world. "Intelligent Design" was the result of the more recent propaganda efforts by the Creationist crowd and didn't get properly shot down until they finally pushed the issue into court.
Most recently Creationists have been trying to connect evolution to Nazism (irony of ironies, since both groups use the exact same tactics) and--incredibly--have been getting an audience for it. If that sort of thing isn't confronted eventually it will fester and become much harder to discredit.