Cirnotarian

Let me explain what Hoppe is actually saying in simpler terms: "It's hypocrisy that Nuremberg trials in 1945 had a lot shittier evidence that wasn't available until 1990s (and later), and Germany has strict laws around talking about and the Holocaust since 1960 (before that 1990s evidence) and despite that unavailable evidence, the Holocaust was treated as a terrible, undeniable crime, while all Gaza evidence IS available- yet it's considered self-defense. Make it make sense!". What Hoppe is NOT claiming: "the Holocaust did not happen". Hoppe is NOT saying revisionists were correct - he's saying EVEN the revisionists aren't denying that the Holocaust was a crime. Hoppe's main point is about state control of narratives, which should be very obvious here. That, states have no problem organizing kangaroo courts 45 years before evidence is fully available, or creating censorship 30 years before evidence appears, when evidence of an atrocity are fully available right now, states claim it's just self-defense.