Right. So if the truth would change a time-honored charge against the Nazi regime, well you just can't accept that. Don't bother you with the facts or the truth. Just keep the animus going against your enemies. Sounds to me exactly what the "Allies" have done and continue to do.
You talk about the "truth" as if our whole lives are meant to be dedicated to it. In the words of Camus:
"Galileo, who held a scientific truth of great importance, abjured it with the greatest ease as soon as it endangered his life. In a certain sense, he did right. That truth was not worth the stake. Whether the earth or the sun revolves around the other is a matter of
profound indifference. To tell the truth, it is a futile question."
In the same sense, whether Hitler attacked Stalin in self-defense or not, makes absolutely no difference to my life. It does not change my opinion of either of them. It does not changed the fact that Hitler expressed a genocidal intent towards the Slavic people.
Now the pursuit of that truth for someone else might mean something. But I and everyone else have no responsibility to engage with it or desire to find the "truth". If the truth was the sole aim of my life, and I had to seek it out bar all other considerations for every moment I lived, I would sacrifice my freedom and my life in the pursuit of things that don't matter to me. Could I spend the rest of my life visiting prisons and trying to understand serial killers? Sure. Could I spend the rest of my time trying to understand and empathize with the ideology of neo-nazism? Sure. But why would I want to? And why do I have to have some sort of responsibility to do it?
If Tomeck, from experience, has found that this line of historical questioning usually breaks down into Nazi whitewashing, why should he be forced to continue to engage with the topic, again and again? Why can't he find the continued inexhaustible desire by apologists to revise the understanding of Hitler tiresome? Why can't he be wary of anyone that presents this belief? Why can't he require a higher level of proof, and stronger consensus among historians before taking it in as truth? Why does it matter to him or you or anyone anyway? If you want to seek out the "truth" in this matter go for it, but don't make it out to be some sort of righteous crusade, that everyone has to respect. And accept the context of this question, which is that it is often one used to whitewash Nazi history.
< Message edited by ledo -- 5/20/2018 2:08:02 AM >