Holocaust Denier Irving Freed

[Cliff Clavin 10]

He was prosecuted, convicted and jailed in a country that has a whole suite of laws designed to ensure that the fascism does not come to dominate as it once did.

 

As Austria bred one Adolf Hitler and was later annexed by a nation that he governed I think that they have a right to be a little sensitive.

 

An eye for eye will only leave the whole world blind though, except for one person. There actions against fascism, is nothing short of fascism.

[Martin Dust 10]

An eye for eye will only leave the whole world blind though, except for one person. There actions against fascism, is nothing short of fascism.

 

But Irving knew it was against the law and was actually banned from the country at the time he arrested, he decided to go back to yet another of his right-wing rallys and was nicked and charged in the process. I'm all for free speech but Irving knew what he was doing and it appears to me that he was pretty stupid to go back but he has a history of doing stupid things.

[angle20 10]

Do you regard him as a pukka historian, or just a fraud?

My own pennyworth: I think Irving is an interesting figure. Amongst other things, he is a German speaker - not something with which Britain is over-endowed - having spent some time working at a steelworks in the Ruhr in his younger days. It might be fair to say that Irving's enthusiasm for his subject has run ahead of the provision of balanced evidence. On the other hand, his expertise on military (as opposed to political) matters is more universally acknowledged.

 

I think there should always be a role for controversial historians. AJP Taylor, who had a more conventional academic background (as an Oxford don), also attracted some opprobrium following the publication of his classic, The Origins of the Second World War. Challenging Anglo-American ideological orthodoxy with regard to events surrounding world war two will remain contentious for some time to come.

[miniminch 10]

I watched schindlers List last night - can't understand what all the fuss is about?

[miniminch 10]

I mean it was in black and white

[Martin Dust 10]

My own pennyworth: I think Irving is an interesting figure. Amongst other things, he is a German speaker - not something with which Britain is over-endowed - having spent some time working at a steelworks in the Ruhr in his younger days.

 

You like him because he can speak German, jeessh...

[angle20 10]

You like him because he can speak German, jeessh...

A slight misrepresentation of the point I was making. Irving may have been able to read some original sources which a more linguistically challenged British historian would not have had access to.

[TeaFan 10]

I think there should always be a role for controversial historians.

 

My point is that he deliberately lied and distorted so as to present his point of view as at least plausible, and can he therefore be viewed as a historian at all, contoversial or otherwise? Anyway, I'm mainly interested in what LordChaverley thinks.

[Martin Dust 10]

A slight misrepresentation of the point I was making. Irving may have been able to read some original sources which a more linguistically challenged British historian would not have had access to.

 

It's not really a very good point tho is it? Are you saying that a whole nation are incapable of documenting their own history and it would take Irving to point out the errors - surely not.

[angle20 10]

It's not really a very good point tho is it? Are you saying that a whole nation are incapable of documenting their own history and it would take Irving to point out the errors - surely not.

You are implying that there has been complete academic freedom in post-war Germany?

 

The logic of your comment is that all historians (including, perhaps, Sir Ian Kershaw at Sheffield University, cited by TeaFan) studying foreign countries should be regarded as surplus to requirements because all we need to do is look at a country's 'documentation of its own history'.

[Martin Dust 10]

You are implying that there has been complete academic freedom in post-war Germany? .

 

And your source to suggest otherwise?

 

The logic of your comment is that all historians (including, perhaps, Sir Ian Kershaw at Sheffield University, cited by TeaFan) studying foreign countries should be regarded as surplus to requirements because all we need to do is look at a country's 'documentation of its own history'.

 

Not at all, but I do love the way you twist things. My logic is this, Irving has nothing to offer on the subject.

[angle20 10]

And your source to suggest otherwise?

Here's a flavour (and they have a law restricting free speech on the subject):

 

Deutsche Welle article

a broad consensus in German society sees the World War II extermination of six million Jews as a historical fact that cannot be denied, according to historian Wolfgang Benz, who heads the Center for Anti-Semitism Research in Berlin.

It's not clear how the loss of 3 million from the Auschwitz death total (as I've outlined earlier in the thread) impacts on six million "as a historical fact".