TIK wraps his head around the intentionalist/functionalist debate

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Pia Kahn
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 461
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:57 am

TIK wraps his head around the intentionalist/functionalist debate

Postby Pia Kahn » 8 months 1 day ago (Tue Feb 18, 2020 3:26 am)

Popular youtube historian is puzzled by the intentionalis/functionalist debate. When and how was the decision made to kill all the jews?

It is hilarious to see him struggle with the problem. He finally dismisses the functionalist view and settles on the old story that Hitler announced in mein Kampf to kill all the jews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8LNFjFyGU8
If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2690
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: TIK wraps his head around the intentionalist/functionalist debate

Postby borjastick » 8 months 1 day ago (Tue Feb 18, 2020 5:08 am)

Pia Kahn wrote:Popular youtube historian is puzzled by the intentionalis/functionalist debate. When and how was the decision made to kill all the jews?

It is hilarious to see him struggle with the problem. He finally dismisses the functionalist view and settles on the old story that Hitler announced in mein Kampf to kill all the jews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8LNFjFyGU8


Yeah because these buffoons just can't accept that there is zero evidence to back up the story.

It goes to the basic that to believe in the mass murder of six million jews, who didn't exist, in gas chambers, that cannot be shown, you have to either want it to be so or want to believe the fable.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

User avatar
Zulu
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 9:44 am

Re: TIK wraps his head around the intentionalist/functionalist debate

Postby Zulu » 7 months 4 weeks ago (Thu Feb 20, 2020 3:11 pm)

Pia Kahn wrote:Popular youtube historian is puzzled by the intentionalis/functionalist debate. When and how was the decision made to kill all the jews?

It is hilarious to see him struggle with the problem. He finally dismisses the functionalist view and settles on the old story that Hitler announced in mein Kampf to kill all the jews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8LNFjFyGU8

...the old story that Hitler announced in mein Kampf to kill all the jews.
So, we have to believe that Hitler made public his intention to exterminate the Jews and then to believe that the extermination was carried out so SECRETLY that any document or material traces subsist nowadays?
It is surprising to observe how much those so called "historians" lack of LOGIC in their statements.

User avatar
HMSendeavour
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 435
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 3:12 pm
Contact:

Re: TIK wraps his head around the intentionalist/functionalist debate

Postby HMSendeavour » 7 months 4 weeks ago (Fri Feb 21, 2020 1:45 pm)

Pia Kahn wrote:Popular youtube historian is puzzled by the intentionalis/functionalist debate. When and how was the decision made to kill all the jews?

It is hilarious to see him struggle with the problem. He finally dismisses the functionalist view and settles on the old story that Hitler announced in mein Kampf to kill all the jews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8LNFjFyGU8


That is an extremely radical view NOT EVEN the mainstream hold. Nobody could ever substantiate this view in light of all we know about the very real and documented resettlement plans of the early 1940s. Not even the Program for the NSDAP talks about the killing of Jews like they so claimed in the Phoney Posen Speech. See points 4, 7 and 8 of the party program:

4. None but members of the nation may be citizens of the State. None but those of German blood, whatever their creed, may be members of the nation. No Jew, therefore, may be a member of the nation.

7. We demand that the State shall make it its first duty to promote the industry and livelihood of citizens of the State. If it not possible to nourish the entire population of the State, foreign nationals (non-citizens of the State) must be excluded from the Reich.

8. All non-German immigration must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans, who entered Germany subsequent to August 2nd, 1914, shall be required to forthwith to depart from the Reich.

Source: Gottfried Feder, The Programme of the NSDAP and its General Conceptions, Dugdale Trans. (B.P. Publications, 1980), Pp. 18 (https://archive.org/details/GottfriedFe ... 7/mode/2up)


Tik should be invited onto the forum to debate. He'd lose like all the rest, and then we could hang his spectacular loss over his pseudo-historian Youtube career forever. He'd never make another Holocaust video again. But he knows this and would never do it. TIK TOK!
Now what does it mean for the independent expert witness Van Pelt? In his eyes he had two possibilities. Either to confirm the Holocaust story, or to go insane. - Germar Rudolf, 13th IHR Conference

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 10146
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: TIK wraps his head around the intentionalist/functionalist debate

Postby Hannover » 7 months 4 weeks ago (Fri Feb 21, 2020 2:53 pm)

The Intentionalist / Functionalist debate is laughably fraudulent and irrelevant since there was no extermination to begin with.

They start with a false assumption and then try figure out a way to support what never happened in the first place.

Another example of absurd 'Holocaust Pretzel Logic'.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Archie, Bing [Bot] and 9 guests