>public cannot be trusted to handle it appropriately. > It should remain the purview of scholars who have proven their fealty to the rational interpretation I

>public cannot be trusted to handle it appropriately. > It should remain the purview of scholars who have proven their fealty to the rational interpretation Ironically similar to what unsavory regimes in the past believed. The elitism behind this forgets the key role of academics and scholars in regimes like the nazis https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-role-of-academics-and-teachers https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-role-o... I don't share your your dim view of Joe Public. I think objective information on the nazis should be widely available and can be a useful tool in preventing the rise of oppressive regimes in the future. People are not going to be equipped to oppose totalitarianism if they are expecting some crazed screaming genocidal madman like the Hitler of the movies. They would be much better equipped of they saw a real picture of how such men rise to power. Nazi ideals like blood and soil, ideas of state efficiency, their attempt to impose Darwinism ideas on human societies. There's lots of aspects of their ideas that are rearing its head today. And people don't know what to watch for. I think the ignorance makes young people an easy target for bad actors online who can say - look what they told you about Hitler wasn't completely accurate. I agree that some censorship is okay in some circumstances but I think this idea of misrepresenting history or painting a one sided view is not wise. Propoganda is not a good long term strategy in the information age.