The most famous forms of Holocaust denial and revisionism tend to focus on Jews, casting doubt, for example, on how many were exterminated in the camps. But denying the impact the Nazis had on the other groups they targeted, including queer and trans people, disabled people and Romani people, is still Holocaust denial. Maybe someone should tell J.K. Rowling.

  • Flying Squid
    link
    51 year ago

    Weird, that wasn’t an issue for freeing Holocaust victims.

    Or should the closing of Treblinka been cautious and casual?

    • Lath
      link
      fedilink
      -41 year ago

      But there were issues. The starving ones who were fed too much and too fast died, while because the train tracks and roads leading to these camps were destroyed, logistics was slow in giving them the help they needed.
      So freedom wasn’t as instant as you’d like to believe.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        51 year ago

        There is a gulf between instant and gradual. You advocated for the latter. The latter means only killing fewer Jews.

        • Lath
          link
          fedilink
          -31 year ago

          When death is unavoidable, the goal is to minimize the number of deaths. Taking into account the situation before, during and after can help create the better results.

          If we just free someone without taking into account whether they’ll be able to live afterwards is just patting ourselves on the back. Sure we can say we did the right thing, but without making certain they at least have a starting point, we might just be condemning them to desperation or crime.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            31 year ago

            Like I said- kill Jews less until they can all be freed. That’s the gradual way of ending death camps.

            • Lath
              link
              fedilink
              01 year ago

              Yes, not killing people in general is preferred.

              • Flying Squid
                link
                11 year ago

                “In general”

                “preferred”

                Still sounds like “kill fewer and fewer Jews until the killing can stop.”

                • Lath
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  Actually, by in general, I was thinking about people who live their lives in constant suffering and would like to have the option of a peaceful release.
                  Euthanasia is still taking a life, and I would prefer an alternative to that.

                  Was writing “in general” not enough to go beyond this particular instance?

                  • Flying Squid
                    link
                    11 year ago

                    When talking about gradually and cautiously ending a genocide? No, it was not.

      • @gedaliyahM
        link
        English
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No, the freedom was instant. There may have been logistical issues with medical treatment of the now free people. In all my conversations with Holocaust survivors, I have never heard one say that they were not free after the camp was liberated. That is just a nonsense take.