I understand Harry Elmer Barnes translated some of Paul Rassinier's work, who denied the holocoust ever happened.
I wonder why Rothbard would have Harry Elmer Barnes in such high esteem. I still like Rothbard a lot, but this somewhat disappointing.
Some people just believe completely bat-shit things, despite otherwise being highly intelligent. I myself have various friends who believe every conspiracy theory you can imagine.
Besides, it's not as if it reflects (to a logical thinking person) on all libertarians.
so Rothbard spoke well of someone as a historian of US affairs, and he shouldn't have because this fellah translated work by someone unscholarly?
here's another damning connection:
Walter Block citing Einstein as a provider of positive value: If we appreciate what Einstein and Mozart have given us, if we are "free riders" on them, again well and good.
If we appreciate what Einstein and Mozart have given us, if we are "free riders" on them, again well and good.
Einstein was a commie!
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
From what I understand, it's only recently that Barnes has become pretty discredited due to his Holocaust denialism. Before, he use to be a pretty prominent and respected historian.
to what degree of holocaust denial? for instance, some historians question the mainstream figures as to how many jew were exterminated at Auschwitz, and in the total operation, but don't deny that the Nazi's made a concerted effort at genocied.
do we get free cheezeburger in socielism?
He still considers the nazis a group of murderers, but I am not sure the argument to justify 1.6 million in that they are not in actuallity 6 million murdered Jews is very classy, to say the least. Also, I would expect a serious historian arguing about the details of the genocide by gunshot versus the gas chamber would be more objective and Paul Rassinger was certainly not as he himself admitted.
So, my question is what Rothbard says here about Harry Elmer Barnes, not just as a historian:
http://mises.org/story/2784
I really like reading about history, but it is often difficult finding a perspective I'm comfortable with. So, please correct me if I'm wrong.
LUCHAC:but I am not sure the argument to justify 1.6 million in that they are not in actuallity 6 million murdered Jews is very classy, to say the least. Also, I would expect a serious historian arguing about the details of the genocide by gunshot versus the gas chamber would be more objective and Paul Rassinger was certainly not as he himself admitted.
"Not very classy." Yeah bro. What a devastating indictment.
As to the latter issue, your objection seems limited to Paul Rassinger and his lack of objectivity rather than the actual merits of the debate. I'm calling Homeland Security on your Nazi ass.
fezwhatley:to what degree of holocaust denial? for instance, some historians question the mainstream figures as to how many jew were exterminated at Auschwitz, and in the total operation, but don't deny that the Nazi's made a concerted effort at genocied.
I hear they're still finding human ash in Auschwitz.
If I hear not allowed much oftener; said Sam, I'm going to get angry.
J.R.R.Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap