Udo Voigt, neo-Nazi, questions Auschwitz toll

[Aptrgangr]

Udo Voigt, neo-Nazi, questions Auschwitz toll

The leader of a far-Right party in Germany was facing a parliamentary inquiry last night after he questioned the number of Jews who died at the hands of the Nazis.


Voigt: 'Six million cannot be right'

Udo Voigt, the head of the neo-Nazi National Democratic Party (NPD), also demanded the return of land lost after the Second World War.

"Six million cannot be right. At most, 340,000 people could have died in Auschwitz," he said in an interview with Iranian journalists.
"The Jews always say: 'Even if one Jew died that is a crime.' But of course it makes a difference whether one has to pay for six million people or for 340,000."
Conservative estimates put the number of dead at the camp at more than a million people.
The comments will fuel a debate among German politicians about the funding of extremist parties with public money.

The German constitution stipulates that all parties are to be treated equally.
Sebastian Edathy, the head of the national parliament's internal affairs commission, said he would file a complaint against Mr Voigt.
The NDP, which the federal government has tried to ban, holds seats in regional parliaments in the eastern states of Saxony and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania.

Udo Voigt, neo-Nazi, questions Auschwitz toll - Telegraph

[Menydh]

The story is wearing old. If what the German government fears is that a downwards revision of the figures might help revive nazism, and if they are so sure that the figure was as high as 6 million, why don't they open the debate and defeat the revisionist claims?

And, even if they were defeated at that, what tells that if Germans learned that it was not 6 million but nearly 400,000 killed in KZs, they would cheer Hitler anyway?

Certainly Voigt is right in that one is nothing like six million. But that doesn't mean that 340,000 is a little thing.

My main critique to Voigt here would be his comment about the territories. Is he sure that he knows what is Germany's problem today? I mean, imagine that tomorrow he gets those territories.. what would he do with them? Populate them with Turks?

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

...

My main critique to Voigt here would be his comment about the territories. Is he sure that he knows what is Germany's problem today? I mean, imagine that tomorrow he gets those territories.. what would he do with them? Populate them with Turks?

That jumped out at me as well. Reviving territorial claims is far more worrying than debating WW2 death statistics.

As for the Holocaust numbers, I would say it is far past time for Germany have an open debate.

[Kernunnos]

Originally Posted by Errigal

That jumped out at me as well. Reviving territorial claims is far more worrying than debating WW2 death statistics.

As for the Holocaust numbers, I would say it is far past time for Germany have an open debate.

there can be none in Europe.

My sources are all former italian non-cooperating prisoners so they are not exactly in the same situation as jews, at least apparently.

However many of them claimed to me that their fate wasn't different from the jews: the jews got money after the war, they were instead refused and paid a pittance from the german government for their forced labor under famine and a cruel discipline.

It must be said that former italian prisoners of the english in India or non-cooperators in the US Hereford prison were left to rot almost without assistance and food exactly in the same way.

Their tales correspond exactly to that of the ex prisoners in germany, including the extreme weight loss at the end of prisony (a man released from Hereford was down from 80 kilos to 40 something).

In soviet captivity, six out of seven died of hunger and lack of care.

[Lutiferre]

Udo Voigt, neo-Nazi, questions Auschwitz toll

The leader of a far-Right party

I'm tired of the stupid black and white way in which the media portrays anything political. What is reactionary about being a neo-Nazi? What is reactionary about questioning the Auschwitz toll? That is not reactionary, it would be if their views were predominant in society. But they arent, they are going against what most societies stand for, so they are logically leftists.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Degenuicide

I'm tired of the stupid black and white way in which the media portrays anything political. What is reactionary about being a neo-Nazi?

I agree. It is somehow retarded. But not necessarily reactionary.

[Lutiferre]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

I agree. It is somehow retarded. But not necessarily reactionary.

If we look at the original meaning of the terms, reactionary is the most adequate description of "right", and revolutionary of the left.

[bombadillo]

Germany is the powerhouse of Europe. For how long can it remain in a subaltern and servile position towards the US? For how long does it have to adopt a shame-faced demeanor for "atrocities" that either didn't happen or have been wildly exaggerated and cannot be substantiated? Any Germany nationalism will promptly be dubbed "neo-Nazi" by the US and its stooges (many of whom are in Germany).

Granted, Hitler was bad news and screwed everything up big-time, but that is the past, and Germany -- and Europe as a whole -- has to stop being a satellite of a weakening hegemon.

[Errigal]

Originally Posted by bombadillo

...

Granted, Hitler was bad news and screwed everything up big-time, but that is the past, and Germany -- and Europe as a whole -- has to stop being a satellite of a weakening hegemon.

Very true. I think the other nations of Europe can help out by encouraging their media and comedians to give all the WW2 jokes and comments a rest.

Anyway, after the last few years it is clear that the greatest threat to peace comes from the crypto-Trotskyites like Bernard Kouchner, Tony Blair's New Labour and the American Neocons, not German nationalists.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Degenuicide

If we look at the original meaning of the terms, reactionary is the most adequate description of "right", and revolutionary of the left.

Arguably.