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

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
Popper characterized these despicable methods very well when he
wrote: 115
“I mean the fashion of not taking arguments seriously, and at
their face value, at least tentatively, but of seeing in them nothing
but a way in which deeper irrational motives and tendencies express
themselves. It is […] the attitude of looking at once for the unconscious
motives and determinants in the social habitat of the thinker,
instead of first examining the validity of the argument itself. […] But
if no attempt is made to take serious arguments seriously, then I belief
that we are justified in making the charge of irrationalism;”
Allow me to proffer four examples of this irrationalism from the
subjects treated here:
Ex. 1: First of all there are once more the authors Kogon, Langbein
and Rückerl in their oft-quoted book, 80 in which they slander their opponents
in their preliminary remarks on page two without naming them
or mentioning their works, let alone that they mention their arguments
in the book itself, which after all is meant to refute such highly slandered
opponents.
Ex. 2: I have already mentioned that in his article Prof. Markiewicz
quoted a book of mine, although not in order to discuss the arguments
contained in it, but rather in order to label it as a reprehensible example
of “Hitler’s whitewashers” who need to be refuted. The accusation that
I intend to morally whitewash anyone is obviously a political one and is
therefore illegitimate. It is furthermore an insult, as it will undoubtedly
be understood as a negative moral judgment by the overwhelming majority
of readers.
Ex. 3: Then there is Dr. Richard Green, an American chemist with
training comparable to mine. His statements on the chemical questions
in this matter can claim to be the only ones that are to be taken seriously
on the side of established version. Green has unfortunately seasoned his
contributions with about 40% political abuses and insinuations, which
undermines his respectability. When driven into the corner argumentatively,
he finally had to admit that the analytic method chosen by Markiewicz
and his colleagues is untenable, for the reasons explained
above. But then Green still kept defending the Poles’ refusal to consider
my arguments by claiming that one does not have to seriously deal with
115 Ibid., pp. 251f.
88