JFYI
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2010/01/mises-daily-columnist-is-holocaust.html
So what?
Good reply. Let’s see others.
I didn’t have time to check all the sources but if it is true it is pretty bad.
Anyone who respects holocaust denial enough to write in a paper supporting it is not worthy to be read and I don’t want articles from them in my mailbox at least…
I agree with Merlin. Who cares if this person is a holocaust denier?
That has no effect on his other views. Rather than being drones and overly hysterical, like most people, we should judge his other views on their own merits.
Ditto for 9/11 conspiracy theorists.
You picked the wrong forum to get a sensationalist response. Most people here tend to be intelligent.
Yes, most stuff that comes out of there mouths are worthless also.
They could say something genius by accident but in general it is pretty obvious my time will be more effectively used if I ignore people with stupid ideas like this…
Sukrit, do you find his views re:Holocaust survivors (and their relatives) and the fate that awaits them to be rational, in good taste and not antisemitic? Thank you [:D]
That word is being thrown around far too much and far too carelessly. And we all know what happens to the value of money if it is being oversupplied.
Thank you, Merlin, I’ll take that as “no”. [Y]
Sergey, do you wish to put Mises community users in a bad light by connecting them with anti-semitism or “tacit support” of holocaust relativism?
No.
But then, I’m not even in a position to do so. They can only do it to themselves if they so wish [H]
You know, the holocaust never having happened would make way more sense to me than if it did happen: instead of otherwise normal human beings brutalizing and murdering millions of other innocent human beings, it’s actually just a bunch of statists who exploited a very statist time in human history by putting forth statist propaganda that, lo and behold, led to the expansion of more statism.
Nice userpic, demosthenes, and an interesting reply.
I read through the allegations, and apparently, it’s a scandal that Potts thinks that the Nazis murdered 2 millions jewish people instead of 4.
All that sounds like a desperate attempt to discredit the mises.org community.
Mr. Nowak, if you’re worried about the discrediting of the Mises community, I think you should be worried more about the publication of the Holocaust denier Potts by Mises Daily, than about the attempts to bring his activities to light. Let’s not shoot the messenger, thank you [I]
You know, we should start an Accusation Denier’s club. Anytime there are accusations of someone being a (holocaust, global warming, second hand smoke, etc) denier, we will speak out on their behalf, mostly to the fact that they are not denying anything.
This is reminiscent of once being told that Ron Paul is racist because he didn’t support the Civil Rights Act. I should have replied, “that would be true only if my intellect was clouded by statism.”
Smearing people with hysterics and disinformation is such a statist tactic. I like our tactics better, we use true information to smear entire institutions and paradigms in human life.
The bottom line is that nobody likes a tattle tale.
I am an avid reader of the blog holocaustcontroversies and do find the site very interesting and important. I very much like the courageous way in which Andrew Mathis, Roberto Muehlenkamp and Sergey Romanov etc. take opposite view than Deborah Lipstad etc. (who refuse to debate with people affiliated with IHR, CODOH) and directly dissect the arguments of the “negationist”.
But unfortunately the site is not solely interested in smashing the arguments of the “negationists”, but it is politically part of the “politically correct” mainstream. For instance, in the “favorite blogs”- list, there is link to some blog that is titled “Anti-neoconfederate”.
A couple of years ago When people of Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith had opinion that there was no “Armenian Genocide”, would Mr. Romanoiv have written article titled “ADL daily columnist is an Armenian Holocaust Denier”.? (To be fair, I know that some people of holocaustcontroversies took issue of Abe Foxman’s weird attitude)
…And I aware that there have been other people affiliated with the Holocaust revisionist within the Austrian economics community, such as Samuel Konkin. And I find it strange that Murray Rothbard was very fond of late Harry Elmer Barnes especially in Barnes’ latest years when Barnes apparently made some “negationist” remarks. I have been curious to know whether Mises Institute got it copy of Michael Collins Piper’s book Final Judgment (which accuses Israel of murdering JFK) from personal library of Rothbard, who was interested in JFK especially after Oliver Stone’s movie was released.
Another scandal: you’re not agreeing that it was 6.
I find it strange that people are so interested in debating whether the Shoah really happened or not.
On one hand, the Jewish community always uses it to “justify” the existence of . Now, we all despise states in here, but given that we have them, the more states are there around, the better. So should by all means exists, as long as people think that states should exist. Whether the Nazis murdered 6 million or just 6 Jews it truly is unimportant for . Or at least it should be. So, Ahmadinejad should shut up.
On the other, if the Jewish community continuously uses it to silence everyone who disagrees with their ideas, branding them as “anti-Semitic”, well it indeed is a grave fault that all of us care so much. WW2 was terrible, and showed the true face of the State. Whether 6 million dead where of this or that religious community, it really should make no difference (except to Jews themselves, of course).
Finally, I wonder how many Sephardim where murdered by the Nazis. As far as I know every casualty was of Ashkenazim origin, thus technically speaking “non-semitic”. Does this count as holocaust denial?
It seems that people who question the events of what happened during WWII are “Holocaust deniers”. I think the people making the accusations just don’t want to hear another view. I read stuff that’s considered “Holocaust denial”, but more correctly “Holocaust revisionism”. Regardless of what one believes what really happened in Germany, if you’re going to make an accusation at least be able to refute the evidence you bring forward that makes them a “denier” (which they did not refute anything in that article). Pulling forward someone’s views or research them labeling them in a negative way doesn’t change anything. Doing so makes you look foolish.