Resistance

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORYThere is an interesting parallel to this in revisionism, because in hisbook Why people believe weird things the U.S. historian and adversaryof revisionism Michael Shermer had written in a contribution on revisionismthat Prof. Faurisson is a gadfly, since he is extremely annoyingwith his uncomfortable questions and obtrusive demand for evidence. 276Yes, for most people we revisionists are a thorn in their flesh. Weare pesky. We are a nuisance. We upset. We do not permit that societyremains undisturbed in its complacency and illusion of infallibility. Andthis is a good thing.As the last topic of my defense statements I may now make an interestingcomparison between the biographic data of a certain personalityof the intellectual history of mankind on the one hand, and my humbleself on the other.This personality was born in ’64, as was I. He could not finish hisuniversity studies, nor could I. This personality had three children,namely two daughters and one son – exactly as I. He was a scientist andan author, as I am. The main work of this scientist – or at least his mostfamous work – had more than 500 pages, just as my book for which Iam here on trial. This famous scientific book of this personality is writtenin dialogue style as a dispute between different views – exactly asmy book is written in dialogue style.This is, by the way, the second example of a famous book in dialoguestyle which made history and to which I had referred earlier. Itwas banned by the authorities, confiscated and burned, which will alsohappen to my book, if the prosecution’s will prevails. This famous bookwas banned because it refuted one of the main dogmas of its era andthus undermined the claim to infallibility of powerful groups, exactly asmy book refutes the main dogma of its era and consequently underminedthe claim to infallibility of today’s powerful groups.This famous personality was put on trial for his book, just like I amon trial for my book. Due to this book, this famous personality wasfound guilty of denying the then prevailing dogma, just as the prosecutionis striving to do in my case. The personality of yore was punishedwith loss of freedom, exactly as the prosecution will probably request inmy case.Who could that personality be?276 Michael Shermer, Why People Believe Weird Things, W.H. Freeman & Co., New York 1997, p.190.215