Germar Rudolf, Resistance Is Obligatory (2012; PDF-Datei

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
no trouble to teach himself autodidactically the formal criteria essential
for the exploration of contemporary history. 2
For the chemist Rudolf the term “scientific” means: “A result must
be exact, logical, supported by evidence and free of contradictions”
(Vorlesungen, p. 52). Rudolf applies these criteria to his own historiographic
works as well, as far as this is possible. Statements which cannot
be backed up unequivocally he marks as such and keeps a distance
to them, even if they were capable of supporting his line of reasoning
(Vorlesungen, p. 54 (Zündel); p. 104, note 168 (Walendy); p. 118 with
reference to the entire revisionism). He does not stray from this maxim
to support factual allegations with verifiable or comprehensible evidence.
Assumptions and probabilities are always marked as such; missing
source and the like render an argument incapable of proving anything
in his eyes.
Rudolf’s works are labeled as “revisionist” by official historiography
and federal German politics. Interpreted non-pejoratively but instead as
a hallmark for an orientation in historical science which wants to revise
established positions with new or differently interpreted facts, the defendant
considers himself to be a “revisionist”; as such he first has to
describe and assess the viewpoint of the “opposite side,” before he tries
to refute it with arguments. Rudolf always complies with this minimal
requirement of controversial historical research. In this context counterarguments
are presented without abbreviations distorting their meaning,
they are discussed, and in every case verified by me properly referenced
bibliographically, so that the reader can check whether arguments have
been misrepresented or taken out of context (see Vorlesungen, pp. 32-
49). In his book Grundlagen Rudolf even went so far as to not only
quote (or let be quoted) his historical “opponents,” but he sent a preliminary
typescript of this work prior to its printing to a number of German
historians (the then president of the Institute for Contemporary History
[Munich] Prof. Dr. Hellmuth Auerbach, Prof. Dr. Michael Wolffsohn
and others), politicians (German Chancellor Dr. Kohl, the President of
the Central Council of Jews Ignaz Bubis) and jurists (General Attorney
Kai v. Nehm) with the request to review and assess it, and, where applicable,
to submit objections and a legal evaluation (Grundlagen, pp.
407–410). Even the feedback can be read there.
Both the book Grundlagen and the book Vorlesungen are structured
systematically and logically. This is true both for the table of contents
258