I think the "Hitler did nothing wrong" side needs to clean up their arguments and talking points to make them more digestible for those redpilled individuals that are amenable to breaking away from the normie WW2 founding myth consensus.
The narratives just aren't reductionist enough.
There's lots of innuendo about questioning the "six gorillion" number, but there isn't a conclusive narrative whether the number is simply inflated, that there wasn't genocide on an industial scale at all, whether gas chambers weren't real at all, etc. There's lots of mocking and intriguing questions, but no simple counterfacts (besides that Red Cross document that gets posted a lot downsizing the Auschwitz numbers down to 273k or whatever).
There's lots of Patton-style "we fought on the wrong side" memes, but no clear counterarguments about what should've been done instead (not intervene at all? negotiate peace after Dunkirk? abandon Poland altogether? join to fight the Soviets. etc)
I saw a clip of Tucker Carlson today arguing with Piers Morgan that Churchill wasn't necessarily a complete force for good in joining WW2 on Stalin's side. But when Morgan asked what alternative plan Carlson would suggest, he had no answers besides "I wouldn't join the war on the side of a Communist genocider".
There's lots of mocking about how new Holocaust survivors get dragged out every year despite the chronology starting to get pretty incredulous.
Even as a noticer myself, I find a lot of the people making skeptic arguments mostly rely on memes or schizoposting. Or normie-unfriendly suggestions like watching series like Europa: The Last Battle that involves dozens of hours of commitment.
I think the "Hitler did nothing wrong" side needs to clean up their arguments and talking points to make them more digestible for those redpilled individuals that are amenable to breaking away from the normie WW2 founding myth consensus.
The narratives just aren't reductionist enough.
There's lots of innuendo about questioning the "six gorillion" number, but there isn't a conclusive narrative whether the number is simply inflated, that there wasn't genocide on an industial scale at all, whether gas chambers weren't real at all, etc. There's lots of mocking and intriguing questions, but no simple counterfacts (besides that Red Cross document that gets posted a lot downsizing the Auschwitz numbers down to 273k or whatever).
There's lots of Patton-style "we fought on the wrong side" memes, but no clear counterarguments about what should've been done instead (not intervene at all? negotiate peace after Dunkirk? abandon Poland altogether? join to fight the Soviets. etc)
I saw a clip of Tucker Carlson today arguing with Piers Morgan that Churchill wasn't necessarily a complete force for good in joining WW2 on Stalin's side. But when Morgan asked what alternative plan Carlson would suggest, he had no answers besides "I wouldn't join the war on the side of a Communist genocider".
There's lots of mocking about how new Holocaust survivors get dragged out every year despite the chronology starting to get pretty incredulous.
Even as a noticer myself, I find a lot of the people making skeptic arguments mostly rely on memes or schizposting. Or normie-unfriendly suggestions like watching series like Europa: The Last Battle that involves dozens of hours of commitment.