What's for today's program? After the high voltage (and high) for the previous day and steadily moving towards a climax, now lurks the danger of a deep well. But then suddenly Herman Boswell to the fore, with "Rudolf Steiner in the Netherlands':
'Rudolf Steiner visited the Netherlands eight times: in 1904, 1908, 1913, 1921, 1922 (2x), 1923 and 1924. In ten different places he loved more than 90 lectures and speeches.
in the archives of the Library of the Anthroposophical Society and the Elizabeth Vreede Archives in The Hague are a quantity of material that this a pretty picture: posters, programs, tickets, newspaper reports, articles with memories and a few picture. Some of this material was published in 1994 in the book Rudolf Steiner in the Netherlands by publisher Pentagon.
Exhibition
in Zutphen on 26 February 2011 was a paper presented to mark the 150th anniversary of Rudolf Steiner by Ed Taylor, author of Rudolf Steiner, an illustrated biography, that following the end of 2010 appeared the same birthday, the same publisher .
As part of that presentation I was asked to put together a modest exhibition, which I gladly did. The exhibition consists of 10 posters 60 x 90 cm (slightly higher than A1 size). But now there has been this exhibition, there may be others who would like to use. And can of course.
There are two possibilities:1. There is a printed version on panels, whereby an appointment should be made on transport.2. And there is a pdf version can be downloaded, which they themselves should ensure before printing.
To get an impression can open a web version (which is also quite extensive, 18 MB). Whointerested can contact Herman Boswell.
Oho, that's me again a surprise! - Then something completely different. You know that I am not the criticism shy. In this context I would like to place a review by Ansgar Martins (the nineteen year old, now-former student Fri, whom I have often cited) of the book by Uwe Werner, Rudolf Steiner Individuum zu und Rasse. Sein und Engagement gegen Rassismus Nationalismus, on February 6 was discussed in " Candling . Martin calls his review, which he had placed on his weblog "Waldorf Blog ', with' Wichtige Hinweis - falsche Prämissen ':
'2011 geht CAL Inbar auch that Rassismusdebatte mal wieder in eine neue Runde - eröffnet von Uwe Werner, der Long das Archiv am Goetheanum has passed and to whom we owe already the standard work about anthroposophy in the era of National Socialism. The new book enriched by new material - and unfortunately, uses old clichés.
to keyword Steiner's racial theory seems to me to be the most important thing to have been resolved. From a sort of "national" objective of the anthroposophic meditations or "practice fields" can not speak, of course. But. Steiner was born in 1861 took over in his Vienna student days stereotypes about "the people's souls" of profound Germans, Slavs and innovation averse child's Jews and even wrote even briefly for a German national "weekly". After more reflective interpretations in the 1890s (See Christoph Lindenberg. "Rudolf Steiner and the spiritual task of Germany's history of hope", in: The Three , 12, 1989, 884; Helmut Zander: Rudolf Steiner, Munich 2011 115f.), he brought these ideas into a Borrowing from the theosophy esoteric doctrine of evolution. This talk of "race" as an evolutionary germ cells of the "Earth evolution" was. Indians, Africans and Asians are evolutionarily obsolete players in this history of progress, were relevant for the present, however, the "cultural history" most of the mental "white race". The current "Spiritual Soul" inspired an era of Archangel Michael Central Europe should eventually promote "internationalism" that Steiner held but not by deficient expression of the "people's souls," European neighbors.
were in the 90s, this "racial" passages in Steiner's essays and lectures for the first time the necessary critical attention than to settle the political left of "green-brown" alliance in its environment - but the justified criticism struck soon false allegations in order. AnthroposophInnen, quickly reversed in the belief that victims be "ahrimanic" red alliances, in contrast emphasized not only the central philosophy of Steiner I: Many experimental (ed) to be reinterpreted to this day, those racially influenced elements of his thought as progressive. Only in recent years, historians such as Helmut Zander , Peter Staudenmaier and Ralf Sonnenberg have interpretations presented this racism without losing their ambiguous vacillation between "universalism, Eurocentricity and Germanophilia" (Georg Otto Schmidt) from the eyes.
Materialschlacht
Uwe Werner new book is hard to understand without this intense debate. In numerous footnotes (and a separate postscript to Peter Staudenmaier's recently published dissertation), he discusses the recent racism-critical publications and jumps between their different approaches. Obviously it has occupied most of the historical-critical approach Helmut Zander. But it may be the only gain among major reservations positive assessment - even though he realized that Steiner "root races" theory "largely took over from the theosophical literature." Similarly, in Peter Staudenmaier. Has submitted in the summer of 2010 in the U.S., a dissertation in which he Anthroposophy and their actual links in the confusing occult power, ethnic and fascist organizations for the years 1900-1945 studied. (Staudenmaier: Between Occultism and Fascism: Anthroposophy and the Politics of Race and Nation in Germany and Italy, 1900-1945, Diss, Cornell University, 2010 - There are new here with non-sighted materials, especially details on the (infamous) history of Anthroposoph_innen Italian fascism). Werner can show that (and where) Staudenmaier has worked in places one-sided: While he meticulously examines points of contact of AnthroposophInnen with fascism (and vice versa), are the differences as well as biographical and conviction breaks short. Werner provides you with important information and corrections, but I think overall its questionable assumption that behind misinterpretations Staudenmaier's a hidden "motive" infected.
racial term
Werner sees quite possible that Steiner's statements about "race" "implicit in a hierarchy of groups of people ... There is talk of decadence, degeneration, development on ascending and descending. These statements are not without reason ... Critics complained. "
self but he emphasizes the clear differences to ethnic racism that he missed at Staudenmaier Sun He describes in the first half of his book, especially Steiner's critique of "racial ideals and biologistic eugenics and cited statements in which Steiner vehemently stressed the obsolescence of" racial differences "and the primacy of individual self-determination of blood and genes. Here we see Werner a "commitment against racism and nationalism", which share the later formulated the ethics of universal human rights.
From this perspective, Werner expires but an old bug: trying to Steiner before its own racial thinking to make and protection. He argues, this would "only" a new, confident relationship with the "- albeit secondary -" race, national origin and determinants win. " This is true, but a result of this company is just the asserted racism. The false premise is this: People got in at all distinguishable "races" can be divided with different mental constitutions "breeds are the result, not a requirement of racial reasoning" (as cited by the Werner Wulf D. dog ).
Chinese were not always about "yellow", Indian for "red" so held, the incubation of ideas and categories in Europe went through a long social construction processes ( ibid. - Even thinkers before Steiner, the inconsistency shown the race concept - such as Johann Gottfried Herder: ideas about the philosophy of human history, VII, 2 .) that Steiner took over from the discourses of his time and esoteric overmolded. Werner also can conjure up any passage out of the hat in which typology excludes Steiner's racial sense. Only once there is the - by the way simply false - claim that Steiner's new production of reinkarnatorische Ahasuerus legend (the self-seeking "eternal Jew" Ahasuerus must wander, or: reincarnate as a member of a "people survived," until he recognizes Christ) was not anti-Jewish connotations [1].
episodes
hurry after this rocky start Werner in the second part of his study by the strange flowers that has produced the inneranthroposophische reception history of Steiner's racial theories of racism in the books by Richard Karutz, Ernst Uehlinger and Sigismund of DC - Alfred Meebold, Hitler's ambassador held a michael - 34 members of the AAG, which can be NSDAP membership account (Also because other applications were rejected by the Nazi Party) - Experiments in Dornach, the prohibition of the German section of the emphasis of Steiner's Aryan origin "to prevent - the initially enthusiastic, but partly also impressive critical anthroposophical Reviews of National Socialism ( as Albert Steffen and Ita Wegman). Detail about quoting politically interesting diary entries Steffens.
Conversely Werner overlooks the Nazi polemics against anthroposophy and simultaneous plans of Rudolf Hess, Demeter farming and Waldorf schools to core ideology and Nazi exploited. Here , Werner proves to be the astute and sophisticated historian, as he encountered in 1999. He again mentioned new material and sifts forgotten debates. However, he is including Wegmans race theory and anti-Jewish passages or Rittelmeyer Steffens naive attitude to the Italian fascism [2].
a few places referenced Werner contradictory: As it says only made the anthroposophist Erhard Bartsch, the Hess biodynamic agriculture tasty, had been absent from anthroposophic conviction of the Nazi Party. But then four pages later is told, as was a member of the same application rejected by the party. The previously little investigated position Marie Steiner or Steiner's psychology before 1900 are people left out completely. They are certainly not a deliberate omission of the author, but gaps which would need to fill yet.
Conclusion
a paradigm shift in the racism debate will not usher in Werner's book well. Perhaps, however, contribute to a fairer climate for discussion, through which many of the recently published distinguished contributions in this thread: Werner, that's plain to see it go, despite his apologetic passages not to cover-up, but to truth and fair work-up. Very reason, remains a central point: Who is a current humanistic task of Anthroposophy appeals must muster the will to distance itself clearly from the unquestionably time-related, but no less by overt racial theories.
[1] Ahasuerus:Werner (p. 52) takes away from context-sensitive analysis "that Steiner with Ahasuerus not as a representative of Judaism, rather than personality focused indivdiduelle ...". This is splitting hairs. The fact is that Steiner is a known anti-Semitic racial stereotypes in theosophical vocabulary reproduced without mention of the context, but also without distancing it. To see Ahasuerus complex at Steiner Ralf Sonnenberg: "past, which will not pass away " (p. 9f).
[2] For Rittelmeyer, Wegman and Steffen:Rittelmeyer: Germans, Stuttgart 1934, p. 103ff. out capitalism, "destructive force, barren dialectics and materialism to alleged Israeli degenerate virtues and declares:" materialism, selfishness, intellectualism live not only in Jewish heads. There you have only the most capable representatives "
Wegman. From Michael's work, in: N. Stone v. Baditz (ed.): From Michael work - a collection of legends (1929), Stuttgart 1959, p. 12-17, writes about the-thinking privileged nature of the Indo-Europeans or the inability of Judaism, to form an outer culture because it consumed all nationalist "forces" for the cultivation of the body of Jesus - an amazing view, the centuries-long tradition This course consistently existent culture must hide. Steffen said in Mussolini's own newspaper "regime Fascista" positive about the ethno-spiritual mission of Italy (so Staudenmaier: Between Occultism and Fascism, ibid, p. 423) '. Ik heb het
nog niet zo duidelijk geformuleerd gevonden Eerden, waarin het probleem eigenlijk it. The now growing number of submissions, with the inevitable Andrew Light, of course prevails, the necessary clarification. So this exercise in his first commentary criticizes the following words of Martin:
"" In the 90ern erhielten diese "Rassen' Passagen-bar resting in Steiner Vorträgen erstmal und Aufmerksamkeit critical that nutty ..." Whodu weisst , es geht eben NICHT um einzelne Passagen, einzelne Zitate, Sondern bei Steiner Rassimus Gesamtzusammenhang um den das Modell von Rudolf Steiner's bizarre "Menschheitsentwickelung".
Ansgar Martin's response could be a lot clearer:
Twee reacties later governors hij nog aan toe here:'The sentence is not misleading, but very deliberate way: Steiner has not been delivered 360 volumes race theory, but formulated a theory of evolution with racial components (which is summarized above quite intentionally so), and in a good two dozen lectures separately speculation "racial character" etcetc delivered. That there's two - well connected and blended - Layers are added, but also highlighted Jana Husmann-Kastein:
"In the immediate discussion of Steiner's racial understanding it is important first to distinguish two levels: first, Steiner sees 'race' as a parent category of humanity today, "race" appears here as a term for different ages and 'humanity stages'. This is what the so-called 'root-race system', which Steiner takes over largely by the occultist and Theosophist Helena P. Blavatsky. In this (neognostischen) model of evolution, man developed by Steiner in the first place to its present physical and mental shape. It is a process of the spirit body to physically present solid body, the so-called 'bone body' in the distant future, it will come to a renewed spirituality.(...)Besides, today's humanity overall evolutionary model of 'root races' Steiner sees 'race' second, but also as a structural category of contemporary humanity. Here, he developed three to five-unit models, as I will outline later.The first differentiation of modern 'races' is carried out according to Steiner in the 'Lemurian time', ie during the third root race. ... "
She did something like that yes in their taken from you to read book. I think that's one of the points in which we are largely in agreement ... '
'The theory of evolution is racist at the points where it becomes a racial theory, which deals with the etiology of supposed "races". What Steiner describes as the emergence of animals, plants, minerals, functions, following the same logic structure, in which he and the "races" is sorted, but it is not a race theory.
The basic idea is that haeckelianische, according to the phylogeny and ontogeny of the creatures before the earth was, by way of millions of embryos in vapor and liquid states existed (age Saturn, Old Sun, Age Moon), first in the "Third Root Race" crystallized this whole complex to matter, and then there is for Steiner the "races" through which the image actually more than 1000 words said, and I have said, also described above. "Races" are for Steiner a sideshow of evolution, unlike the hard esoteric racists Guido List and Lanz von love rock or Theosophists as Hartmann and Vollrath, and as such is not the evolution theory racist, but racial theory evolutionary - both structurally but mutually related. "
Now I am working on it, I can still improve on this. Last week I wrote about Tuesday, February 22 Jos Verhulst and are closely related deniers and Holocaust deniers written ideas (first ' Translation "and the next day in" Tendentious "), which prompt a response came from Lieven Debrouwere with whom I have an extensive discussion on this topic conducted. The magazine "The Bridge" and the creators are discussed were, proved responsible for the Belgian site 'Free Spirit Life "and linked to ' Direct Democracy '. Especially the last contained material that referring to Holocaust deniers and deniers, but also the first had a direct link to the website 'Historical Revisionism by Free Historical Research ". The core of the defense Lieven Debrouwere was:
"All anthroposophy simply can not exist without freedom of speech. There are enough people who find it a shame that such a pernicious sect's ideology can spread easily. That is the reason why Verhulst & co free speech so vigorously defend in the name of science, including the humanities. They advocate le choc des idées and against the imposition of a official truth, scientific or humanities. The task of science to seek the truth, not to impose them on others. The deniers and revisionists also claim to seek the truth, but their findings do not reflect the current state of affairs in science. So what? Is that a reason for people to harass, brutalize and trap? That way, they are martyrs to their cause and bring it right into the limelight. Without demonizing today I would probably never have heard of those people. But due to demonize me today, I do seriously question the scientific nature of modern science. I do not believe in a science that can tolerate no criticism. I do not believe in a science that resort to intimidation, exclusion and violence. Albeit in the name of humanity and tolerance. "
Okay, I can follow. That is what I pursue. But I do not think it is unfavorable for no reason at this point deniers and deniers. There are a lot more to defend people who defend the freedom of their opinion, why just one? There must be some affinity with it, otherwise you do not have, or are you against the substance of their ideas. And that does not happen, rather the contrary, to be embraced. I take a closer look at the website of "Historical Revisionism by Free Historical Research" look, quickly and found a text that is clearly spelled to be desired, the pamphlet "The Holocaust controversy. Ein Fall für Freiheit speech. Eine Introduction ', which I think many things back in' The Bridge 'and less explicit Jos Verhulst also occur. But before I text here to illustrate (and to assess) the place, but the first scientific approach to Gie van den Berghe, I have often mentioned. He takes the bull by its horns in an essay that appeared in Georgi Verbeeck (eds.), 'The lost gas chambers "(Acco, Leuven 1997, p. 15-47) entitled " A war that, because he never happen if, persists - Revisionism and denial reviewed. I quote three paragraphs that it will correct this:
"Holocaust Denial is not revisionism
Stories about the past can and should be approached critically. Revision is not objectionable, but inevitable and desirable. But no criticism for the sake of criticism, from pure filibustering. Scientific criticism is thorough, is argued and justified, is accompanied by evidence.
Historical revisionists reject an established historical explanation, and propose an alternative interpretation to bear them good reasons. Holocaust deniers do not. They revise or reinterpret not, they reject the relevant history. They have not relied on new facts, sources, methods or perspectives, but only to better match the truth. Characteristic and essential for all forms of revisionism is that interpretations of a future or past phenomenon are contested and revised, not the phenomenon itself. The reality is alternatively stated, not denied. Deniers deny the events themselves. They explain sources and other facts, they deny their ground, the events to which they refer. Deniers who call themselves revisionists claimed as a scientific quality they seek in any way.
Holocaust denial is political or historical revisionism. Holocaust deniers seek no review after a political doctrine, National Socialism, for example, or interpretations of the past, the consequences of that ideology for example, they want to erase history, delete from history. It is not a revision, but denial, not revisionism but negationism (derived from "negative"). A neologism is preferable for several reasons, not least because it is not laden with other meanings. But the association is happy with negativity, since it concerns a negative, rejecting, denying attitude.
By history
deniers are not concerned with events, facts and sources, but with a story that they try to disprove it into reverse to turn around. The denial is all merely mirror, completely distracted and totally dependent on the story that is denied. It is a counter-story, nothing more and nothing but the negative reflection of the story about the Jewish extermination. Holocaust denial is not history but by history. The facts are reversed, the history is turned inside out. Jews, reads it, they were persecuted because Hitler had declared war and the story of their extinction is just a figment to Nazi Germany at issue and money off. Victims are perpetrators, perpetrators are victims. The ultimate step in the conspiracy thinking. The denial is the continuation of the Judeocide by intellectual means, the memory of the destruction of millions of Jews should be exterminated.
Science is not free, merely negative activity. Claims must be supported, hypotheses commit to something, they exclude certain matters and others out. The assertion that something exists, liquid and black, that does not exist at the same time, firm and white. One considers the denial of the murder of Jews just as a scientific hypothesis, it appears that a number of historical, logical and moral consequences about. It is not just a myth detract. Resources and facts from the uncontested narrative otherwise stated, are interpreted and framed. For example, should be explained that in areas which the Nazis have conquered millions of Jews and hundreds of thousands of Roma and Sinti, Gypsies called, have evaporated. The preserved, tangible resources are to be interpreted, such as the deportation lists from Belgium, France and the Netherlands with all the names and birth dates of the deportees. Be explained that the trail of countless disappears into thin air in places like Chelmno, Belzec, Treblinka, Sobibor, Auschwitz and Birkenau.
deniers also have evidence as to the explanation they give for creation and existence of the story of the Jewish extermination. If, as they claim, there was no genocide has taken place, it must be explained about the story. The deniers treat it as a malicious fabrication, speak about the Holocaust Myth. Their statement is nothing more than a counter-story, a conspiracy theory: the Jews have devised Judeocide pressure for the establishment of a Jewish state and reparations from Germany to enforce. Extremely interesting is that this conspiracy theory from a scientific standpoint is the core of the denialist discourse. Unlike the rest of their story, it is an allegation that adds something to reality instead of denial by subtracting anything. Such expansion reality can and should be solidified by means of indubitable sources. But the deniers are putting no difficulty to the supposed conspiracy, yet another variant of the humiliating centuries-old anti-Semitic myth of a Jewish conspiracy to prove. Given the magnitude of the alleged plot would however be a sinecure. There must be millions of people were involved are: survivors and SS men who have testified about it, judges, historians, journalists, politicians ... But the deniers deny and therefor nothing but delusions instead. And that they undermine themselves by showing that eyewitnesses sometimes improbabilities tell, historians sometimes disagree on what a conspiracy of this size at least unlikely. Conspiracy thinking is ignorant knowledge, the knowledge of ignorance.
That's not the first part of the deniers creed, the shocking denial that all the attention, the essence but the second part, the conspiracy theory to explain the existence of the story about the Jews killing is of great importance for the refutation of Holocaust denial. This insight allows us to get the ball in a logical and scientific manner rebounding, the burden back where it belongs: to the story, the conspiracy must be proved.
deniers are not into history, do not bother to provide an alternative explanation for the traceless disappearance of millions of European Jews, but also deliver critical part to sow doubt about the historical explanation for this fact: genocide. They try to destroy a historical narrative. They do not rewrite history, they distort them. They are not constructive but destructive process. Their action is not aimed at acquiring knowledge, but knowledge degradation.
not only blind to deny the light of the sun
about the planned and systematic genocide of Jews and other groups is an abundance of evidence. Yet the Jews denied murder, some are apparently sincerely believe that they never planned or conducted. Anyway, most deniers moved by political motives suspect. They deny the darkest chapters in Nazi history to the Nazi ideology launder and many are rabid anti-Semites. Incidentally implies denial of the Jews destroyed by neo-Nazis that they are either convinced of the unacceptability of this atrocity, or that they recognize that the majority of the population has no message for the Nazi conception of man and world improvement.
all deniers usually portrayed as racists and neo-Nazis. However understandable this immune response may be, it is an improper generalization, prompted by indignation or political-ideological motives. One may regret, but there are leftist and even Jewish deniers. They are used by all kinds of designs in all kinds of hybrids moved: anti-Zionism, dislike of the Middle East policy of some Israeli government, doctrinaire Marxism (the Jewish extermination absorbs attention and energy that should go to the class struggle and the overthrow of capitalism), anti- communism (Rassinier), jew religious hostility and philanthropy (Abbe Pierre, Garaudy), or simply dwarsdrijverij sympathy for discriminated and persecuted deniers. This colorful mix of motives Many, if not everything to do with political interpretations and historical meanings in the course of time the Judeocide were given. "
Then here is the full text of the pamphlet "The Holocaust controversy - Ein Fall für Freiheit speech. Eine Introduction '. (the German version, but I've taken, there is also an English one.) I do not quote selectively. It is long, but it shows that the problem is comprehensive:
'Gegenwärtige AspekteKann es ein Verbrechen signal, Fragen zu ask? Wenn Ihnen in Bezug auf den Zweifel aufkommen Holocaust - können diese Zweifel durch Fragen ausgeräumt were different when?
rain Warum manche Leute sich über die Gruppierungen und auf Skeptiker who zum Holocaust critical questions? Why are these people who refer to themselves as revisionists, as a "Holocaust denier" defamed?
It is obvious that we discussed historical issues, but the Holocaust is not allowed - an influential lobby has an exception enforced. And yet everyone should be encouraged to investigate the Holocaust story as critical, as input for other historical events is commonplace.
This is not extreme or radical position. The critical analysis in the West has a thousand year old tradition, by Greek philosophers like Socrates was founded and during the investigation of a few centuries renewed.
Historical aspects
The revisionists are consistent with the established historians agree the extent that the Jews were excluded from the National Socialist government and a special and cruel treatment has been applied. The Nazis fought the Jews not only because of traditional anti-Jewish views, but because the Jews as an influential force behind international communism and the so-called international "financial capital" saw that they, among other things for the world economic crisis responsible and the impoverishment of the German workers' power. During the Second World War the Jews were also seen as enemies of the Reich and as a potential danger of his war efforts were accurately classified as German, Italian and Japanese in the USA. As a result, the Jews were disenfranchised, they had to live in ghettos, they were obligated to forced labor, deprived of their property, deported, and otherwise mistreated. Many were killed in a tragic way.
represented as opposed to the government-paid historian Represented the revisionists considers that the German government not the extermination of the Jewish People (or any other) to the target had not killing people in gas chambers, nor by work or lack of care.
revisionists also claim that the number of six million Jewish deaths is an irresponsible exaggeration, and that there was no stock in all of Europe under German control of execution gas chambers. In order to prevent diseases in prisoners of war, labor and concentration camps, and at the front, there was both stationary and mobile gas chambers for delousing of clothing and underwear. Most likely, the myth of the extermination gas chambers originated in this life-saving procedure.
The revisionists are generally of the view that the Allied governments, in particular, the Soviets decided to continue their originating from the wartime "black propaganda" about German atrocities in the war. And for three reasons: first
The Allies were forced to continue to justify the great sacrifices of the fighting of two world wars.second The Allies wanted to divert attention from their own, extremely brutal crimes against humanity and justify it. Just the Soviet atrocities in the death of millions of civilians immeasurably in the Soviet Union and in all Countries of Central and Eastern Europe required.The American and British aerial bombardment of German and Japanese cities had caused the deaths of over a million civilians who were burned alive or buried were.third The Allies needed a justification for their post-war approach, namely the complete dismantling of German industry, a policy of starvation, which resulted in the death of many millions of German civilians result in the theft of German patents worth a trillion dollars, and the theft of large parts of Germany which were annexed by Poland and the USSR. These areas were not disputed border area, but accounted for 20% of the entire German territory from. The twelve million German who lived in these areas were deprived of their property and brutally expelled. That was the most gruesome ethnic cleansing in world history. Over two million German were killed.
Even in war and in the post-war Zionist organizations were heavily involved in the process of fabricating stories of Holocaust and to spread. They had to mobilize the goal of the compassion of the world to support Jewish concerns, especially for the creation of Israel. Today play the Holocaust story, which is regarded as a crime a right-wing regime, an important role with leftist internationalist groups, Zionist organizations and in parts of the Jewish communities. In particular, the leaders of these political organizations and their propaganda machine continued to work in the preservation of orthodox Holocaust legend and myth of German atrocities during World War II.
Whoever claims that this view is anti-Jewish, reading something into it, which is not easy to contain. Revisionists do not claim that Jewish leaders or organizations in the war or anything made post-war period, what did not the Allied governments.
For those who believe that The Nuremberg tribunals have uncovered the truth about German war crimes is shocking to discover that the former most senior judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, Harlan Fiske Stone, the Nuremberg Tribunal as directed against German "Lynch part of the first order" referred to. (Alpheus T. Mason, Harlan Fiske Stone : Pillar of the Law, New York: Viking, 1956, p. 716).
Photos
We've all seen "the photos". Endless. took pictures from allied news programs, the Anglo-American photographers at the capture of the German camp, especially the horrible scenes of Dachau, Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen. Look for example at the photo up here on this leaflet. These images are usually presented such that the depicted scenes are targeted as the result of German policy - if this is not even noted explicitly. The photos are real, but their interpretation is wrong.
Even the established historians admit that there was in neither camp, a German policy to kill the prisoners. During the last months of the war when the Soviet army marched into Germany, British and American bombers destroyed by carpet bombing virtually all German Cities. The transport system, the food supply, medical and sanitary facilities - everything collapsed. That was the purpose of these air attacks, which represented a barbarity of war, as it had not been seen since the invasion of the Mongols.
million refugees who fled the Soviet army poured, across Central and West Germany. As a result of continued war, famine, and epidemics killed millions of civilians in Germany. The camps were no exception in this tragedy. The still under German command of the camp were crowded with prisoners who were evacuated from the East were. In early 1945, the inmates suffered from malnutrition and epidemics such as typhus and cholera, and many came to this. came
As the [international] press coverage along with the British and American soldiers in the camp, they saw the result thereof. They make the "Photos".
in camps such as Buchenwald, Dachau and Bergen-Belsen, but thousands of relatively healthy internees were liberated. They were in the camps when "The Photographs" were taken. In news reports, you can see how these prisoners walking, laughing and talking through the camp streets. Other photos show how internees their caps take joy in the air and cheering their liberators. One must naturally ask, why did not they just get to see movies and photos, while the others have seen dozens of times.
documents
It is often said that "tons" of German documents were seized that prove the genocide of the Jews. If you ask for more detail, then we will refer only to a handful of documents whose authenticity or interpretation is highly questionable. If one requires reliable evidence, it is claimed that the Germans had destroyed all documents relating to their evil deeds to hide, or there is the absurd claim that the Germans had used a code language, whispered verbal orders or commands transmitted through mind reading.
show course, all available documents and physical evidence that there was no order for a mass murder of Jews, no plan, no funding, no murder weapon - that no gas chambers - and not a victim - it is because no single body, was found at the autopsy a death by gassing.
testimony
In the medieval witch trials Witnesses reported many similar about riding on broomsticks witches and the devil. Since most of the statements were made independently and without pressure, this was taken as evidence that the stories must be true. Tangible evidence was never presented. "Common knowledge", a term that were then in their infancy, and societal expectations, the basis for these reports, not the truth.
today confronts us in the same obviousness, which was created by 60 years of one-sided propaganda of the mass media and by massive social pressure, sometimes by legal sanctions, certain views not to be questioned.
In support of their theories, the anti-revisionists are almost entirely by "eyewitness accounts" depending on which arose in this poisoned atmosphere.
The war crimes tribunals testified many "eyewitnesses" that the Germans had made soap from human fat and lampshades from human skin. Allied prosecutors even submitted evidence to substantiate these accusations. For decades, concurred highly respected scientists from prestigious universities in the world in these stories, and made us believe that such allegations "Undisputed facts" were. But over time many such stories have been untenable. 1990, Yehuda Bauer, director of Holocaust studies at Hebrew University in Tel Aviv: "The Nazis never made soap from Jews ..." (Jerusalem Post, Int Ed, May 5, 1990, p. 6. ).
Bruno Baum, a former communist prisoner of Auschwitz, could boast the summer of 1945 in a Soviet newspaper: "All the propaganda that was circulated abroad about Auschwitz, was one of us [the Communist inmates] with Polish comrades have been set in motion. " (German People's Daily, Soviet newspaper in occupied central Germany, Jul 31, 1945).
It is not surprising when one learns that in the course of several trials in Germany turned out that the testimony of witnesses from Eastern Europe had been orchestrated by communist authorities.
in a proceeding in Jerusalem against an alleged former camp guard even had to admit the Israeli court that all witnesses were not credible, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The only two witnesses who have ever been cross-examined, had to admit in 1985 that their reports were not true: Arnold Friedman admitted that he had never experienced what he had expressed, and Rudolf Vrba admitted that he had made poetic bonds to "embellish" his statements. Vrba is one of the most famous Auschwitz witnesses. As it was, however, wondered whether all the allegations were true, he had made in the famous film "Shoah," Vrba said: "I do not know. I was just an actor reciting his lines. "He said this with a mocking smile on his Jewish friend George Klein (G. Klein, Pietà, Stockholm, p. 141).
During and after the war there were "eyewitnesses" for mass gassings at Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau and other camps in Germany. Today, virtually all reputable experts admit that this testimony must be rejected as false.
The established historians still argue that mass gassings were in several camps in Poland. In fact, the evidence in this matter not a bit better than the false testimony and evidence for the alleged mass gassings in the camps in Germany.
What the confessions by Germans at the war crimes trials are concerned, is now well documented that many by coercion, intimidation or even torture were acquired - just like the medieval witch trials.
Auschwitz
corrected 1990 the Auschwitz museum, the old propaganda claim four million murdered people down. It put the number at one million down - not based on facts but on the basis of estimates! In 1994, a French scientist, this number is further reduced to less than 700,000, and in 2002 established another Holocaust researchers, the number of Auschwitz-loss reduced to 500,000 - again not based on facts, but of "estimates".
The Auschwitz museum has heaps of hair, boots, glasses and so on, but there is no evidence for the origin of these objects, nor for the fate of their former owners. Such exhibits shall indeed represent an effective propaganda, but they are worthless as historical evidence.
In a recorded video interview, the authorities of the Auschwitz museum, that the gas chamber, which the tourists will be shown a "reconstruction" is, again not based on facts, but to unconfirmed allegations by eyewitnesses. The guide of the museum, however, told the visitors that all they see is, really ...
Although established some say scientists, the "absolute center" in the "geography of horrors" would be the crematoria of Auschwitz, the morgues were allegedly as a gas chamber, say other scientists established that the mass murder is not in these crematoria, but took place elsewhere.
revisionists but want certainty, not speculation or estimates.
Jewish population losses in the Second World War
far, only two monographs have been written about the question of how many Jews lost during World War II life. The first is a revisionist book that comes to the conclusion that killed about 300,000. The second was written by several renowned historians who claim that died about six million. While the revisionist book takes into account demographic changes in the Jewish population in all countries, the incumbent book comes to its number, simply by the number of Jews who lived some years after the war in Europe, by subtracting the number of those who some years ago the war, lived there. It ignores, that has increased during this period the Jewish population in America, Israel, and other non-European countries as a result of the new exodus of almost six million. It is so easy all the Jews who have left Europe, were declared to Holocaust victims.
The hidden genocide
Supporters of the Holocaust story complain that is "the whole world" was indifferent to the genocide that allegedly took place in German-occupied Europe. They claim to blame was a great moral inadequacy in the nature of Western man, or that people do not recognize the enormity of what happened. It is true that the world responded with indifference. But perhaps the reason was that one of the thing just would not believe.
is certain, if there had been in Poland "killing factories", the millions of civilians killed were, then the Red Cross, the Pope, humanitarian agencies, the Allied governments, neutral governments, and prominent figures such as Roosevelt, Truman, Churchill , Eisenhower and many of them know - and they would have often and unambiguously mentioned and condemned. But that was not the case. Advocates of the Holocaust to admit that only a very small group of people believed the story at that time - many of whom were of Jewish or communist propaganda offices here. The success of the Holocaust story is like most likely the result of an advertising campaign.
Winston Churchill wrote his six-volume work "The Second World War" without mentioning a program of mass murder and genocide. Eisenhower also neglected to mention in his book Crusade in Europe gas chambers. Was the instrument should be killed by the millions of Jews, not a passing reference worth? Was the next President of the United States unfeeling toward the Jews?
propaganda examples
During and after the First World War, between 1916 and the end of the twenties of last century sustained predominantly Jewish organizations in America that six million Jews (!) In the poverty-stricken Europe suffered terribly. In this context, it was claimed that the Jews of Eastern Europe stood in front of a holocaust if they did not massively supported with funds. This propaganda has been in the United States collected millions of dollars, mainly used to were to finance the Bolshevik revolution in Russia.
On 22 March 1916, so with the First World War, published by the British newspaper Daily Telegraph an article that falsely claimed that the Germans had murdered 700,000 Serbs in gas chambers. On 25 May 1942, therefore, in World War II, reported the same newspaper that the Germans had killed 700,000 Jews in Poland in gas chambers.
How can we say that the second story is true, if we know that the first was a lie? In 1944 the British Government asked the media and churches in the UK to support in spreading anti-German propaganda of her was already a long time been circulated to distract from the horrors that were expected once the Soviets invaded Germany. The British government complained in their circular that was needed to unmask the lies, propaganda from the First World War, greater efforts at this time to reach the goal.
Political correctness and revisionism
Many people are confused when they first hear arguments of the Holocaust revisionists. The arguments appear to make sense - but "How is that possible," The whole world believes the Holocaust story. It's hard to believe that such a large conspiracy could have worked to suppress the truth more than half a century.
To understand how this could well be the case, one has only the spiritual and political beliefs of the medieval European mind, or in Nazi Germany or the countries of the communist Eastern Bloc. In all these countries had to collect the vast majority of scientists on the particular political system. They felt the prevailing ideology and interpretation of reality requires. This academics and intellectuals saw it as their right, indeed a duty to protect each one aspect of this ideology. They did this by "evil" dissidents oppressed, the "offensive" or "dangerous" ideas down on paper. In all of these companies were the academics for the "thought police."
There are people in our society who are trying on purpose in the debate about political correctness, to flatten the issues. They claim that there is no problem for us with the freedom of speech and political correctness would be only a few rules for the protection of minorities, so no one hurt their feelings. But the problem runs much deeper. There do not allow a wide range of topics and views that open discussion of our mass media. Even obvious facts and relationships are denied or suppressed, if they are not desirable from a political perspective.
You can learn a lot about the psychology and methods of the Thought Police if you observe how they respond when just out of one of their taboos and violated as the Holocaust revisionism a public forum is offered.
First "outrage" directed that the public expression such "offensive" and "dangerous" ideas is allowed. It will avoid or respond to these ideas to discuss them. It is claimed that if they did so, it would give the revisionists a forum and legitimacy. Then be nasty personal attacks against the revisionist heretics, they are concerned with political epithets such as "haters", "deniers", "anti-Semites," "racists," "terrorists" or "neo-Nazis" and it just does it assumed were potential mass murderers . The thought police publicly accused the revisionists, to lie, but you can the heretics do not know exactly what you accuse them. The revisionists have not the opportunity to face their accusers in order to counter the slander can.
Revisionists are often accused, hateful human being, which create an Haßlehre. But revisionism is an academic approach, not a doctrine or ideology. If the Holocaust proponents really want to expose hatred, they should take a look at their own dogmas, and a good look in the mirror.
Anyone who invites a Revisionist to speak publicly, is attacked as uncaring. If revisionists actually speak again in public, they are usually shouted down and threatened. Libraries and bookstores are intimidated when they are considering to design materials about the Holocaust revisionism.
All this happens while the majority of the libraries, media, universities and university administrations, watching in silence and admits that determine political activists, what the media said and what can be read in the libraries.
Next, to make the thought police out to ruin the Tabuverletzer professionally and economically, it takes to his job before or it is concocted a criminal case against him. It is sometimes claimed to mislead that the revisionist findings have proven to be false in a process, although the judiciary can not decide a scientific debate - it can only impose dogmas.
Finally, the thought police will necessarily erase the academia or the media that has commanded the revisionists to start a forum.
Some academics believe that the university administration should intervene to clean the campus of ideas that could generate problems in the universities could. But this is a blatant invitation to tyranny. Because that means that each has a militant group, the troops at the ready, which can clean the campus of ideas that you dislike, and then impose their own doctrine. Cowardly governments could consider it much more convenient and safer to clean the campus of controversial ideas, as a group to refer militant loudmouths in their place. It is the duty of the university administration to ensure that the universities remain a free marketplace of ideas. If ideas cause unrest, then the troublemakers be fought, not the ideas.
demonization
The influence of Holocaust Revisionism is growing more and more - both in this country and abroad. [In the U.S., you can start the beginning of revisionism in 1977 as Arthur R. Butz his book "The Twentieth Century" published. Professor Butz teaches electrical engineering and computer science at the University in Evanston, Illinois.]
The representatives of revisionism take a broad spectrum of political and philosophical positions. They are certainly not the scoundrels, liars and demons, represented as their opponents. The fact is that there are no demons in the real world.view
When people first start their opponents as the embodiment of evil and demonize them, they have no inhibitions, their opponents to inflict damage. According to their logic may be done with such a fiendish villain everything. We should not allow such an attitude is rampant.
If you want to know about Holocaust revisionism, we recommend you our free brochure with answers to frequently asked questions and links to articles and books on the subject.
Who the accuracy of the statements made above überprüfen compromise, kann unsere große Internet unter Date Base www.vho.org Besuch oder viele wissenschaftliche Article herunterladen und Bücher, zu einschliesslich zahlreicher Literaturangaben Primärquellen, forensic vielem Untersuchungen und mehr. "
It's so incredibly grotesque that I was only with great difficulty in imagining that people here believe it. Gie van den Berghe fray apart so that might come. But not for thinking people, would say. A scientific attitude requires quite another, much more than this is put forward. This can be difficult as value-free, there are all ideas and assumptions behind. The very idea that freedom of thought necessary to anthroposophical understanding of the same character as the freedom of thought which is called here. Freedom can not exist without responsibility, and I have the view displayed here is really spread as irresponsible label, unscientific and unhistorical. I throw that far from me, to put it pathetic to say. Anyone who associates with such views is either a fool or a villain. Although he wants to wear inside.
.
0 comments:
Post a Comment