5 ms·

That's why you need to stop them before they came to power. World learned that in 1933.

notanzaiiswear 5y ago
Where you alive in 1933? I wasn't. So all I know about the Holocaust is just what somebody else wrote about it. I generally don't like taking things as gospel. I don't generally doubt the Holocaust (I have no reason to), but I think it should be possible to discuss even the details of the holocaust. To me it is rather the demand that certain beliefs may not be questioned that enables things like fascists rising to power. (To me it doesn't matter that much if the Holocaust was real or not - either way mass killings of people should obviously be avoided).
- watwut 5y ago
  > I think it should be possible to discuss even the details of the holocaust Details of Holocaust are allowed to be discussed and are discussed regularly. Discussing details of holocaust and holocaust denier are two different things, turns out.
  - notanzaiiswear 5y ago
    "It turns out" - how so? Maybe some people simply take an interest in the Holocaust, start asking questions, and when they hit roadblocks, they become suspicious. Censoring certain claims about the Holocaust will only push them further into "conspiracy theory" territory. Sure maybe some people have ideological reasons to deny it, but I don't think you can generalize that to everybody.
- ahiknsr 5y ago
  > To me it is rather the demand that certain beliefs may not be questioned that enables things like fascists rising to power Holocaust is not a belief, it is a historical event that has already happened.
  - notanzaiiswear 5y ago
    So what exactly is "the Holocaust"? Do you know exactly what happened? I rather think historians are still piercing it together. Also, while as I said I don't have reasons to doubt it, I do think that there is something like "winner's history". I have witnessed it with the wars that happened in my lifetime, when it was possible to glimpse some aspects beyond the portrayal in the mainstream media. So I am careful before I believe anything.
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    Pretty amazing that this is what gets downvoted in this site.
    - mhoad 5y ago
      This entire comment section is maybe the clearest example I have seen in a long time of why so many other industries outside of tech kind of look at the tech scene as a amoralistic dumpster fire. I never used to see the value of trying to include humanities as a part of a tech degree until a few years ago and now I think it can't happen fast enough. So many of the arguments presented here wouldn't pass any kind of a 101 level class.
      - notanzaiiswear 5y ago
        I strongly suspect you never had a 101 humanities class. Pretty sure "philosophy" is all about what you know and what you can and what you have to believe. Maybe you confuse it with "Bible class 101", where you get told a set of moral rules that you are supposed to follow and never question, because they are supposedly given by god. Still, I would be curious to hear your reasoning of why it is supposedly morally mandatory to believe in the Holocaust?
        user-the-name 5y ago
        You would be curious to hear my reasoning for why it is morally mandatory to believe in objective reality?
- wayoutthere 5y ago
  Paradox of tolerance; the only way to have a tolerant society is to be intolerant of intolerance. You have to make that exception or you lose the entire thing. Very much a “sorry not sorry” about “cancel culture”.
  - notanzaiiswear 5y ago
    Yeah that "paradox of tolerance" is just bullshit. You may as well admit that tolerance in general is not attainable. I understand why you people want to censor other people. But don't claim you do it in the name of tolerance. It's all just a power game.
  - naasking 5y ago
    Popper didn't say to be intolerant of all intolerance, he said only to be intolerant of intolerance that cannot be countered by reasoned argument or kept in check by popular opinion. In no sense are far-right ideas "popular", and they are easily countered by reasoned arguments. Popper's paradox of intolerance is probably the most misused and misquoted argument in online debates these past few years.
    - dariusj18 5y ago
      Except they are proving difficult to keep in check. January 6th was pivotal because 1. It's very lucky it didn't go in the other direction, 2. People watching learned a few lessons for the next time.
      - naasking 5y ago
        I disagree that they are difficult to keep in check. Jan 6th was a failure of capitol police and other law enforcement agencies. The mob that breached the capitol was around 800 people, which is easily managed by a small police force. They had ample evidence that these protests would be in the tens of thousands. I'm sure you've seen the police presence for BLM protests, so I think the response here speaks for itself. I honestly don't see how this indicates the far-right are difficult to keep in check. It really shows that law enforcement didn't even try, either because they didn't believe they would become riotous or violent, or (hopefully not) for more nefarious reasons.
- dang 5y ago
  I'm not sure what you're after here, but between your comments in this thread, the trollish username, and the fact that your account has been using HN primarily for ideological battle (or close), I've banned the account. Would you please not create accounts to break HN's rules with? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - notanzaiiswear 5y ago
    I picked the username because it was only a matter of time until somebody would accuse me of being a nazi - as is the norm these days for anybody who doesn't adhere to the mainstream leftist ideology. If you would do a better job keeping ideology off HN, people like me wouldn't feel the need to comment. I can not take your pleas for the guidelines seriously if you only censor "ideological battles" or politics you don't like. So you didn't understand the point I was trying to make, but decided to censor me anyway. Great job upholding the curiosity theme of HN. For what its worth, I am not after questioning the Holocaust. I am interested in why people think people should have to believe certain things, what they truly believe about freedom and free speech, those kind of things. What exactly triggers you about discussing the Holocaust? Would discussing the moon landing trigger you in a similar way, like would you say people should have to believe in the moon landings? Discussion of ethics in computing have been all the rage lately, but apparently we can not discuss it on HN.
    - dang 5y ago
      > I picked the username because it was only a matter of time until somebody would accuse me of being a nazi - as is the norm these days for anybody who doesn't adhere to the mainstream leftist ideology. That confirms both that the username is trollish and that your purpose is to use HN for ideological battle, which is against the site guidelines. We ban accounts that break the site guidelines. If an account uses HN primarily for political battle we're going to ban it regardless of which politics you favor or disfavor. As for the Holocaust, at at minimum you're concern trolling about it, which is obvious flamebait. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
mavhc 5y ago
And forgot it again by 2016

Where you alive in 1933? I wasn't. So all I know about the Holocaust is just what somebody else wrote about it. I generally don't like taking things as gospel. I don't generally doubt the Holocaust (I have no reason to), but I think it should be possible to discuss even the details of the holocaust. To me it is rather the demand that certain beliefs may not be questioned that enables things like fascists rising to power. (To me it doesn't matter that much if the Holocaust was real or not - either way mass killings of people should obviously be avoided).

watwut 5y ago
> I think it should be possible to discuss even the details of the holocaust Details of Holocaust are allowed to be discussed and are discussed regularly. Discussing details of holocaust and holocaust denier are two different things, turns out.
- notanzaiiswear 5y ago
  "It turns out" - how so? Maybe some people simply take an interest in the Holocaust, start asking questions, and when they hit roadblocks, they become suspicious. Censoring certain claims about the Holocaust will only push them further into "conspiracy theory" territory. Sure maybe some people have ideological reasons to deny it, but I don't think you can generalize that to everybody.
ahiknsr 5y ago
> To me it is rather the demand that certain beliefs may not be questioned that enables things like fascists rising to power Holocaust is not a belief, it is a historical event that has already happened.
- notanzaiiswear 5y ago
  So what exactly is "the Holocaust"? Do you know exactly what happened? I rather think historians are still piercing it together. Also, while as I said I don't have reasons to doubt it, I do think that there is something like "winner's history". I have witnessed it with the wars that happened in my lifetime, when it was possible to glimpse some aspects beyond the portrayal in the mainstream media. So I am careful before I believe anything.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  Pretty amazing that this is what gets downvoted in this site.
  - mhoad 5y ago
    This entire comment section is maybe the clearest example I have seen in a long time of why so many other industries outside of tech kind of look at the tech scene as a amoralistic dumpster fire. I never used to see the value of trying to include humanities as a part of a tech degree until a few years ago and now I think it can't happen fast enough. So many of the arguments presented here wouldn't pass any kind of a 101 level class.
    - notanzaiiswear 5y ago
      I strongly suspect you never had a 101 humanities class. Pretty sure "philosophy" is all about what you know and what you can and what you have to believe. Maybe you confuse it with "Bible class 101", where you get told a set of moral rules that you are supposed to follow and never question, because they are supposedly given by god. Still, I would be curious to hear your reasoning of why it is supposedly morally mandatory to believe in the Holocaust?
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        You would be curious to hear my reasoning for why it is morally mandatory to believe in objective reality?
wayoutthere 5y ago
Paradox of tolerance; the only way to have a tolerant society is to be intolerant of intolerance. You have to make that exception or you lose the entire thing. Very much a “sorry not sorry” about “cancel culture”.
- notanzaiiswear 5y ago
  Yeah that "paradox of tolerance" is just bullshit. You may as well admit that tolerance in general is not attainable. I understand why you people want to censor other people. But don't claim you do it in the name of tolerance. It's all just a power game.
- naasking 5y ago
  Popper didn't say to be intolerant of all intolerance, he said only to be intolerant of intolerance that cannot be countered by reasoned argument or kept in check by popular opinion. In no sense are far-right ideas "popular", and they are easily countered by reasoned arguments. Popper's paradox of intolerance is probably the most misused and misquoted argument in online debates these past few years.
  - dariusj18 5y ago
    Except they are proving difficult to keep in check. January 6th was pivotal because 1. It's very lucky it didn't go in the other direction, 2. People watching learned a few lessons for the next time.
    - naasking 5y ago
      I disagree that they are difficult to keep in check. Jan 6th was a failure of capitol police and other law enforcement agencies. The mob that breached the capitol was around 800 people, which is easily managed by a small police force. They had ample evidence that these protests would be in the tens of thousands. I'm sure you've seen the police presence for BLM protests, so I think the response here speaks for itself. I honestly don't see how this indicates the far-right are difficult to keep in check. It really shows that law enforcement didn't even try, either because they didn't believe they would become riotous or violent, or (hopefully not) for more nefarious reasons.
dang 5y ago
I'm not sure what you're after here, but between your comments in this thread, the trollish username, and the fact that your account has been using HN primarily for ideological battle (or close), I've banned the account. Would you please not create accounts to break HN's rules with? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- notanzaiiswear 5y ago
  I picked the username because it was only a matter of time until somebody would accuse me of being a nazi - as is the norm these days for anybody who doesn't adhere to the mainstream leftist ideology. If you would do a better job keeping ideology off HN, people like me wouldn't feel the need to comment. I can not take your pleas for the guidelines seriously if you only censor "ideological battles" or politics you don't like. So you didn't understand the point I was trying to make, but decided to censor me anyway. Great job upholding the curiosity theme of HN. For what its worth, I am not after questioning the Holocaust. I am interested in why people think people should have to believe certain things, what they truly believe about freedom and free speech, those kind of things. What exactly triggers you about discussing the Holocaust? Would discussing the moon landing trigger you in a similar way, like would you say people should have to believe in the moon landings? Discussion of ethics in computing have been all the rage lately, but apparently we can not discuss it on HN.
  - dang 5y ago
    > I picked the username because it was only a matter of time until somebody would accuse me of being a nazi - as is the norm these days for anybody who doesn't adhere to the mainstream leftist ideology. That confirms both that the username is trollish and that your purpose is to use HN for ideological battle, which is against the site guidelines. We ban accounts that break the site guidelines. If an account uses HN primarily for political battle we're going to ban it regardless of which politics you favor or disfavor. As for the Holocaust, at at minimum you're concern trolling about it, which is obvious flamebait. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

mavhc 5y ago

And forgot it again by 2016