Debating the Holocaust, 2nd ed. by Thomas Dalton, Ph.D. / a review

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9805
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Debating the Holocaust, 2nd ed. by Thomas Dalton, Ph.D. / a review

Postby Hannover » 3 years 8 months ago (Sat Nov 28, 2015 1:59 am)

Interesting review of a book which Ezra McVie describes as being void of emotionalism, void of the assignment of motives or a resort to authoritarianism. Have a look.
excerpt:
Debating’s supreme virtue since its first publication has been in the volume’s broadly covering all major factors in such debate of the Holocaust as can be conducted in the shadow of censorship and criminalization.

Courtesy of Inconvenient History, v.7, no.2, 2015.

- Hannover

http://www.inconvenienthistory.com/arch ... nd_two.php
REVIEW
Debating, Round 2: Maintaining Balance
Debating the Holocaust 2nd edition by Thomas Dalton, Ph.D., Castle Hill Publishers, Uckfield, UK, 2015, 323 pp.
Ezra MacVie

Image
Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides 2nd Edition by Thomas Dalton

INCONVENIENT HISTORY carried a review [1] of the first edition of Thomas Dalton’s Debating the Holocaust. The second edition has now been published, and the mask is down: Dr. Dalton admits—professes, in fact—that he is, indeed, a Holocaust revisionist, much as everyone, friend and foe alike, has long presumed.

So, his purportedly “balanced” weighing of the arguments for the Big Holocaust, so to call the version of the period that reigns undisturbed today in the public perception and the law, is in the dustbin and, to no one’s surprise, in its place emerges … a balanced weighing of the arguments for the Big Holocaust, and against it. If the first edition’s but-lightly feigned agnosticism is abandoned, how, then, one might ask, can its successor aspire to any such descriptor as “balanced?”

It’s done in a way that is not only more-credible to those who concern themselves with the author’s true outlook on things, but further lends considerably greater impact to the analysis so conducted. As in the first edition, the arguments and “evidence” that support the regnant version of the story are presented, fully and fairly, or at least as much so as are the countervailing elements. Then, carefully compared at all salient points, the revisionists’ arguments are presented. But in this second edition, Dr. Dalton does not trouble himself to pretend that he may at any point have found the opposing arguments in any way comparable in his judgment. He grants up-front and beforehand that he in general has decided in favor of the revised version, and he carefully details exactly why in terms that should appeal to any devotee of the traditional perspective so long as said devotee has retained with his devotion, a comparable devotion to logic and the quality of evidence.

The presentation remains, as before, if not “balanced” in terms of the temper of the narrative, at the very least fair and equitable in terms of the presentation of the evidence and of the conclusions following therefrom. And it is in the details (details, details!) of this evidence and these conclusions that Dalton’s readers remain totally free to follow their own dictates of reason and due consideration of evidence. What Dr. Dalton does not countenance, and this he does most tellingly, is acceding to the authoritarian, moralistic, even artful blandishments in which we all are daily immersed to the point of suffocation. In a manner doing credit to all the heroic heretics of history from Herodotus to Harry Elmer Barnes, Dalton propels the reader through the standard litanies, admitting them so to be, of the opposing sides. At the end, the author declares the winner to be: revisionism!

Debating is much more a forensic assembly and analysis of data than it is a sociological study. For example, anyone expecting to find an account of the origins of the Holocaust or National Socialist policies and practices regarding Jews or race generally will be disappointed. The scope of Debating is strictly what happened, when, where and how. Motivations are not contemplated, neither of the actors nor of the historians quibbling about the whole thing in latter times. Fortunately, despite this omission of preambles (about which in any case there would seem to be rather less debate), Dalton does carry the reader into the present day with some contemplation of the “uses” to which the Holocaust tradition has been put in the time since the events first studied. Since exploitation of the Holocaust mythology in fact animates the debate that forms the subject of the book, it is indeed fitting that this connection be clearly made and documented in substantial detail. The entire section in effect addresses the question occasionally heard, “Why concern ourselves today with what did or did not happen so long ago?”

The release of the second edition marks the incorporation of Debating into the growing Holocaust Handbooks series of Castle Hill Publishers as Number 32. This incorporation brings with it the signature forest-green cover, attractive layout, punctilious editing and typography and quality printing and binding, along with the mandatory availability in e-book format. My only quibble with the transition is that industry-standard chapter labelling on the recto pages has been dispensed with, as in all recent releases of Holocaust Handbooks. This defect annoyingly hampers use of the book for reference purposes, a purpose I should think central to the purposes of the series, and is at odds with the quality attributes elsewhere in such abundance.

Debating’s supreme virtue since its first publication has been in the volume’s broadly covering all major factors in such debate of the Holocaust as can be conducted in the shadow of censorship and criminalization. This being the case, the work’s currency is of greater importance to its value than it would be, say, to a work of a more purely historical bent. It’s gratifying to report that this edition is as up-to-the-minute as any fixed body of work could be; anything and everything that changed since the first edition is updated, and corrections to the earlier work made as appropriate. Dalton even revised his best estimate of the number of Holocaust fatalities implied by the sum of the latest revisionist studies, of which there have been many. Dalton’s expressly unmagical number of aggregate deaths per revisionism rose from 516,000 to 570,000. At this rate, he’ll be back to six million by the 5,990th edition. Don’t hold your breath!

Objectivity is the understanding of a robot. Only a machine, somehow made capable of ingesting inputs of some kind, could objectively calculate a result of the inputs. We have computers that are doing just this even as I type, and likely as you read. But my typing—and your reading—these are not, and could never be, objective, nor mindless. At the same time, they could be, if we tried to make them so, open to a wide range of interpretations, conclusions, and other reactions still so cognizant as to keep the end conclusions related to those inputs—the data as it were. We—we humans at the beginnings and ends of these processes—can better reconcile our conclusions, our feelings, our worldviews, to the data that we perceive in those inputs, the better we steel our reflexes against what offends our previous conceptions and habitual loyalties.

In its most-valuable essence, Debating remains what its first edition was: an encompassing overview of the debate (so to misname a confrontation in which one side has—and uses— the prerogative of calling down the law against the other side) that fairly presents the best arguments of both sides and, admittedly with prompting, still allows each reader, if not to actually adopt final conclusions, at least enables—nay, encourages—each to embark on the long and in many cases soul-searching intellectual voyage that could ultimately avail the reader’s final, exhausted washing-up on the distant shores of an informed and reasonably confident understanding.

On those far-sought shores, one might find Dr. Dalton him- (or her-)self. Or one might find Elie Wiesel or Raul Hilberg. But above all, first and foremost, one would find oneself.

This page URL:
http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/ ... nd_two.php
Links:
[1] http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/ ... ocaust.php

Copyright © HBB Press
The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
NLH
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:28 pm
Location: England, UK

Re: Debating the Holocaust, 2nd ed. by Thomas Dalton, Ph.D. / a review

Postby NLH » 3 years 8 months ago (Sat Nov 28, 2015 2:22 am)

Funny, I only received a copy of this just yesterday (my birthday, what a gift!) after having owned the T&D Press 3rd edition since its publication in 2009.
Only just started reading it, forgetting what such a wonderful book it is, so will update soon.

Image
"Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."
- Kitty Hart-Moxon, Jewish Holocaust Survivor.

June 1998 testimony, USC Shoah Foundation, Visual History Archive.
Part 2 - YouTube - 1:21:42

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1091
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Debating the Holocaust, 2nd ed. by Thomas Dalton, Ph.D. / a review

Postby Werd » 3 years 8 months ago (Sat Nov 28, 2015 3:39 am)

I just saw on Amazon.com, Muehlenkamp is only in the index two times. I wonder if Dalton addresses anything Muehlenkamp and Mathis have said in reply to Dalton back in 2010. Maybe not directly by name, but I would hope he would take some of HC's replies into consideration when modifying the book.

User avatar
NLH
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:28 pm
Location: England, UK

Re: Debating the Holocaust, 2nd ed. by Thomas Dalton, Ph.D. / a review

Postby NLH » 3 years 8 months ago (Sat Nov 28, 2015 4:29 am)

Werd wrote:I just saw on Amazon.com, Muehlenkamp is only in the index two times. I wonder if Dalton addresses anything Muehlenkamp and Mathis have said in reply to Dalton back in 2010. Maybe not directly by name, but I would hope he would take some of HC's replies into consideration when modifying the book.


Can you give a link to Muehlenkamp and Mathis's 2010 critique where I can view the specific issues and try and cross reference with the updated book. Thanks. I can also ask him here specifically: thomasdaltonphd AT yahoo DOT com from his website, http://www.debatingtheholocaust.com
"Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."
- Kitty Hart-Moxon, Jewish Holocaust Survivor.

June 1998 testimony, USC Shoah Foundation, Visual History Archive.
Part 2 - YouTube - 1:21:42

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1091
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: Debating the Holocaust, 2nd ed. by Thomas Dalton, Ph.D. / a review

Postby Werd » 3 years 8 months ago (Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:00 am)

Dalton had a response that Muehlenkamp responded to.
http://truthjihad.blogspot.com/2010/04/ ... berto.html
In the user comments section, Muehlenkamp posted links to the whole four part series written in 2010 on the HC site.

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1634
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: Debating the Holocaust, 2nd ed. by Thomas Dalton, Ph.D. / a review

Postby Moderator » 3 years 8 months ago (Sun Nov 29, 2015 5:39 pm)

Werd:
Per our guidelines, posting an out link without commenting or highlighting important points, etc. is frowned upon. Please abide.

relevant guideline:
If you post a quote or link from or to a book, a news article, magazine story, another website, etc., you must also comment on the quote or the link content. Tell the forum what you find wrong, compelling, unique, or important about the quote or link content. Flippant, overly brief comments are not acceptable. We want commentary and discussion.
M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

Atigun
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 493
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:13 am

Re: Debating the Holocaust, 2nd ed. by Thomas Dalton, Ph.D. / a review

Postby Atigun » 3 years 8 months ago (Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:18 am)

I have to take a pot shot at Dalton over his statement that the holocaust is not a hoax. He uses the analogy of a fish tale, where the fisherman catches a trout and then claims to have caught a shark. That is, indeed, a fish tale and not a hoax. However, when the fisherman uses the trout for gain, both political and financial by numerous fraudulent sales of the trout as a shark, then the harmless fish tale becomes a deliberate and malicious hoax.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: borjastick and 39 guests