Apples and Oranges

Holocaust revisionism is not the same as fake moon landing conspiracies or flat earth claims.

We all know the idiom that you can’t compare apples and oranges. That is the logical fallacy of false equivalence. Yet when I discuss Holocaust revisionism with random people online these comparisons keep popping up. Why would an otherwise reasonable adult fall for such an obvious blunder?

Consider the following quote from American historian, Professor Deborah Lipstadt. Lipstadt had been appointed as a special envoy to combat and monitor anti-Semitism by Congress in April, 2022. She is an important person in a position of power. This quote is from a paper presented at the International Conference of Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial in Dublin Ireland on November of 2010:

“Ultimately and with this I conclude, our objective should be to create a society where the denial of the genocide [Holocaust] is seen as so outrageous, and so despicable that anyone who engages in it would be rendered a pariah.”

From my experience Lipstadt’s objective has been well met.  When the average person is presented with a statement that the official Holocaust narrative is not historically correct these are the most common reactions:

1. You’re a horrible person.
2. You must be stupid. The Holocaust is a proven fact.

Interestingly enough, reaction #1 is the same kind of reaction a person has to blasphemy. Why someone would treat a historical event like religious dogma is worthy of at least an essay, but that is not the point of this particular exposition.

Reaction #2 is the reaction of a science truster and expert respecter. For them the validity of the Holocaust is right up there with evolution and quantum physics. What I find amusing is that these types actually are exhibiting faith in the Holocaust story as most of them accept the claims while only knowing the barest of details. This, in fact, is the case for most people. 

Flat earthers are some of the most ridiculed people on the globe. If one wanted to discredit something one could associate it with belief in a flat earth. Thing is, the Holocaust is an alleged event that happened in the past. The shape of the earth is an observable phenomena. For example, actively watching ships drop below the horizon as they sail away is definitive evidence of the earth being round. A tour guide taking you into a creepy dank basement and telling you it was a gas chamber, old pictures of piles of dead bodies, and even witness testimony are not definitive evidence of wide scale genocide. 

The moon landing has the benefit of also being a past historical event, but that is where the similarities end. To be clear I do believe in the moon landing and consider attempts to claim it as fake to be an attack on White achievement. That said, we need to first compare the political relevance of the moon landing to that of the Holocaust. If the moon landing had indeed been faked the authorities responsible would be guilty of fabricating an achievement. The Holocaust being a fabricated story means that multiple governments are guilty of falsely accusing Germany of a horrendous crime. A crime in which people were found guilty of and executed for. A crime that has loomed over the German people for decades.  False accusations of a crime is a serious offense. Especially for what we are told was the biggest, cruelest and most evil crime in all of history. 

In no country is it illegal to question or deny the moon landing. Never has anyone been made to pay large fines or go to prison for ‘moon landing denial’. The moon landing is not invoked during congressional debates when lobbying for a foreign country (see image below). The moon landing has not been used to extort billions of dollars from a country defeated by war. The moon landing is not wielded as a bludgeon to create a collective White guilt that dissuades White people from organizing and advocating for themselves.

If an open and honest discussion of the Holocaust is to occur it is important to point out these false equivalences for what they are so that they may be disregarded to allow a constructive conversation to ensue.