Anonymous
9/2/2025, 10:56:36 PM
No.17969968
>>17969935
There are a few techniques and terms for this sort of thing, but there's a bunch of different angles conventional historians approach it from.
One term that comes up a lot is "source criticism," and its application here: arguing that the Allies have a reason to fabricate the Holocaust and so that needs addressing. "Hermeneutics of Suspicion" comes to mind, which is presupposing that hidden interests, distortions, etc; its application here: it's basically just the OP. This exact topic is addressed in something termed the "Memory Law Critique" (the Holocaust isn't the only thing like this), and in "Propaganda Analysis" skepticism toward atrocity claims is assumed.
Do you want me to come up with the names of the historians who used these terms? This topic of atrocity propaganda/claims being regarded with a sideways glance really, legitimately is a common theme in historiography.
There are a few techniques and terms for this sort of thing, but there's a bunch of different angles conventional historians approach it from.
One term that comes up a lot is "source criticism," and its application here: arguing that the Allies have a reason to fabricate the Holocaust and so that needs addressing. "Hermeneutics of Suspicion" comes to mind, which is presupposing that hidden interests, distortions, etc; its application here: it's basically just the OP. This exact topic is addressed in something termed the "Memory Law Critique" (the Holocaust isn't the only thing like this), and in "Propaganda Analysis" skepticism toward atrocity claims is assumed.
Do you want me to come up with the names of the historians who used these terms? This topic of atrocity propaganda/claims being regarded with a sideways glance really, legitimately is a common theme in historiography.