History buffs?

Given both the forum rules and federal law, I’m curious about how certain threads and comments are being allowed under the guise of "historical discussion." We see stuff like "the brilliance of National Socialism," "Jews fared well in Canada," or "the Jewish question required a solution," yet whenever someone tries to critically call out those remarks, their posts get wiped for being off-topic or trolling.

For example:

Thanks

Where exactly are you seeing those fantasies of yours?
It's just great that we aren't allowed to write about actual history anymore, right? Instead, we're supposed to churn out propaganda leaflets claiming Germans were the only ones responsible for all the destruction while everyone else was basically an angel.
The fact that it bugs you that others besides Germans were involved in the whole Wall issue... I guess that's not something you fix with criminal laws. Maybe just try reading some actual books instead.

Look, Germans weren't saints, far from it. They committed horrific crimes. But no matter what they pulled during those few years with their cruelty and genocidal methods and all that evil, they're still way below some of those so-called "liberators." The problem with history is that you can't even mention that in mainstream literature, because at the end of the day, it’s easier to just have Hitler as the personification of all evil from 1647 to now. Then, the second a German company tries to put a "Made in Germany" sticker on a product, five different activist groups pop up to joke, "Here they go again, trying to tear down walls."

Luckily, it feels like those days are over.

silvercobra11 said:Given both the forum rules and US law, I’m wondering how comments like "the brilliance of National Socialism," "Jews fared well in Canada," or "the Jewish question required a solution" are tolerated in historical threads, while any critical response to them gets deleted as off-topic or trolling.

for example:

Thanks

Regarding that first topic you mentioned, I don't see anything inherently problematic about it. It might feel a bit intense, but it isn't a manifesto; the author just provided a summary of Nazi Germany's platform at the time. From a historical standpoint, providing that kind of overview isn't forbidden. If it were, we couldn't write or print tons of books analyzing Germany during that era.

As for the thread about the suffering of Jews, I don't see a single deleted post there. Not the off-topic ones, nor the critical ones. The admins can verify this, so could you please point out specifically which critical posts were removed? I also don't see a comment stating "the Jewish question required a solution" in that thread. And the post "Jews fared well in Canada" really needs to be read in context with the rest of the discussion. They are comparing the percentages of Jews who survived in Canada versus neighboring countries where they practically vanished or were reduced to a tiny fraction of their former population. You have to read these things, and the whole thread, carefully to understand what's actually being discussed.

I'm a little confused by this complaint. Could you give me some specific examples that actually support your point?

Anyone who can read American can see exactly how people in this thread, and others like it, try to excuse Nazis by shifting the blame for the Holocaust onto the Jews themselves or onto some vague Western authorities.

I’m not going to sit here and analyze every single sentence for you—it's too much work—so I'll just give you one quote that sums up the attitude of many here.

"It's vital to reiterate, as you noted, that the Jewish question was known to everyone; it was an active issue seeking a resolution, yet the leaders chose to turn a blind eye, letting the Nazis take the fall before they essentially 'decapitated' them with clean hands."

It’s obvious that, just like in other posts, they don't deny the killing of Jews—probably because they think simply 'not denying' it is enough—but instead, they accuse the Jews of causing the Holocaust themselves (claiming there was a "question" that required a final solution). They shift responsibility away from the Nazis and onto anonymous officials who supposedly manipulated and sacrificed the Nazis to suit their own ends. This is textbook hate speech and falls squarely under the legal definition of Holocaust denial.

I posted this yesterday before it was deleted. In that post, I asked the OP to be crystal clear: Are the Nazis responsible for the Holocaust? And what exactly did they mean by saying the "Jewish question" demanded a solution?

To be honest, I’m not sure if you're pulling my leg or what. Looking through your profile and your history, I don't see any evidence that you wrote a post that was subsequently deleted. From what I can tell, the only thing you posted yesterday was in that thread about "juvenile delinquency—is there a solution?" That's it. And none of your posts were critical enough to get taken down. I really don't see where you're claiming the author demanded an explanation, nor do I see anyone censoring you.

As for the topic itself, I don't see any Holocaust denial here. I know what it means to downplay the Holocaust. The OP just put forward a thesis for debate based on some minor indicators. It isn't about shifting responsibility away from Germany; it's questioning whether others could have done more to prevent it. Whether those indicators are actually true doesn't matter to me—I'll leave that for the rest of the users to hash out. My only real issue is that the thread was sloppily and amateurishly set up. But that's about it.

The post you reported is just the opening post of the thread. I don't see anything controversial in it. I'll let the admins decide (or maybe even Bajic and the DA if you want to get technical since you mentioned criminal law in your report), because personally, I don't see this as minimizing the Holocaust.

What indications? What discussion? Throughout this entire thread, the OP hasn't produced a single document or credible source to justify any kind of debate. It all just boils down to the half-baked, extremist views of the creator and some of the worst pro-Nazi apology and propaganda I've seen.

If shifting the blame onto Jews—suggesting there was some "Jewish problem" requiring a solution or some phantom conspiracy that forced the Nazis into committing genocide—doesn't count as "significantly diminishing, approving, or justifying" the tragedy, then what exactly does?

That kind of legislation is standard in civilized countries, where these views are strictly classified as Holocaust denial and are prosecuted heavily. I’m asking you to look at this objectively, setting aside any personal feelings, and reconsider the situation. Close this thread and ban the OP for hate speech per the forum rules before things go any further.