@SecureSignals's banner p

SecureSignals

Training the Aryan LLM

16 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 06 13:34:27 UTC

				

User ID: 853

SecureSignals

Training the Aryan LLM

16 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 06 13:34:27 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 853

It's certainly a bit of esoteric history, but the term "under man" was actually introduced by American author Lothrop Stoddard in his 1922 pamphlet The Revolt Against Civilization: The Menace of the Under-man. The term was adopted by the Nazis from that book's German version Der Kulturumsturz: Die Drohung des Untermenschen (1925). The leading racial propagandist Rosenberg (earlier I posted his testimony disputing the "Master Race" translation of his work and the translation/denotation of "Ausrottung"), wrote in 1930 that "this is the kind of human being that Lothrop Stoddard has called the ‘under man.'” "…den Lothrop Stoddard als ‘Untermenschen’ bezeichnete." Quoting Stoddard: “The Under-Man – the man who measures under the standards of capacity and adaptability imposed by the social order in which he lives."

The term was applied also to figures like Churchill and Roosevelt and even Germans who were Communist sympathizers.

I would say the translation is deliberately manipulative foremost because it has advanced the fiction that the Germans considered Slavs "sub-human", with the propaganda pamphlet Der Untermensch being the chief piece of German propaganda used to establish that claim. But Der Untermensch doesn't mention "slavs" a single time, "Untermensch" is used to describe, culturally and ideologically, Bolshevism and the threat it imposed on "Aryan Europe." The Russians are portrayed as victims, and the cultural connotation of the term used that way is very clear, here for example the art on the left is labeled Zwei Untermenschen and on the right Zwei Menschen. The term was used by the Nazis to characterize cultural and political struggle against what they viewed as counter-civilizational cultural and political movements.

Stoddard's interpretation of the "Under-man" and it's use in Nazi propaganda is very similar to the Rationalist musings of what they call "bio-leninism." But it was not a racial categorization and the slavs were not called "subhuman".

The translation and interpretation of the term in popular understanding as a racial classification is deliberatively manipulative meant to discredit Nazi thinking. "Slavs are subhuman? How could anybody possibly believe that?" is a lot easier for mass audiences to grapple with than engaging the propaganda as it was actually written and what it was actually saying.

It has not been established that they knew that that they were getting executed

It did not happen. I'm not claiming they knew that they were getting executed, I'm claiming it never happened. My falsifiable claim though is that central to the operation was the claim that the Jews were tricked into believing they were taking a shower. Aamadan found this hard to believe, rightfully so, so he and others are trying to provide a justification for why a large crowd of people in a confined space would behave the way they did if they knew they were densely packing themselves into gas chambers. And without fail avoiding crowd panic or the "fire in a crowded theater" effect from people seeing through the deception- which by mainstream accounts never happened at Birkenau.

The reality is Amadan and others making this argument don't understand how important the concept of "shower room deception" is to the Holocaust. It is claimed that no more than 2-4 Germans guarded the entire extermination operation at Birkenau, and that the entire operation was managed and carried out by a group of 100 unarmed Jewish prisoners.

So you have 2-4 Germans overseeing 100 Jewish prisoners orchestrating the execution of 2,000 fellow Jews on a near-daily basis. That is the mainstream claim. If the group of victims panicked then it would be an extremely difficult situation and present a huge security threat to the entire operation. The notion of deception is important because according to the mainstream historical claims the crowds of victims did not panic, they densely packed themselves inside the gas chambers on the orders of Jewish inmates overseeing the operation with no more than 2-3 armed German guards.

The story as-is is not believable, but also the story that the crowd of 2,000 people saw through the ruse but cooperated and coordinated so well as to achieve a density of > 9 people per square meter in their own execution chamber with practically no guard presence at all is also not believable. Neither story makes sense, but the historical consensus is that the cooperation of the Jews was achieved through a "shower room" deception, and the Germans were so confident in the effectiveness of the ruse that they only had a couple of Germans guarding 100 Jewish "Sonderkommandos" managing 2,000 victims. None of the possibilities make sense, because it's just a myth that never happened.

At Auschwitz it's claimed the extermination operation was managed by 100 (unarmed) Jewish prisoners and just 2-4 German guards. You can hear directly from a Jew who saw it all! So in the direct vicinity we are talking about thousands of people who ostensibly knew they were being led to an execution chamber guarded by a few Germans.

What is your claim anyway?

Let's review how we got here: I claimed it was silly to believe that ~3 million Jews were tricked into walking inside gas chambers on the pretext of taking a shower. Amadan, I believe, said that it was a straw man because obviously the Jews would know they were being led to their deaths. I have explained the necessity for the "shower room" deception as an indispensable part of Holocaust mythos, because otherwise it would make no sense for Germans to design a system that would cause a massive security threat in the event of the crowd panicking and not neatly arranging themselves inside gas chambers in the manner claimed by mainstream historians. Of course the liars that spun the gas chamber story knew that too, that's why they claim deception was employed because otherwise it's difficult to explain why the system would be designed this way, to so heavily expect the cooperation of crowds of thousands of people to behave the way they allegedly did.

My claim is very clear, that leading a crowd into a small building and crowding them into a gas chamber with this density would be a very difficult task. It would require not only cooperation but extreme discipline among the victims to get themselves all in a room like that. The question is why would a group of thousands of people achieve this level of group coordination in achieving their own execution when any sort of resistance would make this task purely impossible regardless of any guards with machine guns.

There is an explanation for why the Jews, without resistance, crammed themselves at a density of over 9 people / sq meter inside gas chambers. The mainstream explanation is that they were deceived into believing they were going to take a shower, so that's why they behaved the way they did. But people here don't find that explanation plausible, of course it isn't. Yet at the same time it's even less plausible that this crowd behavior reliably and routinely emerged, many times on a daily basis without fail, when the crowd knew they were cramming themselves inside their execution chambers. There is no room for guards inside the building to manage a panicking crowd... If any Jews were hesitant to walk inside the gas chamber any guard would be in a very confined space with 2,000 people- machine gun or not would not be able to manage a riot if the crowd rushed the exit... which apparently never happened at all despite 1 million people allegedly being killed at Auschwitz with this system... and of course the remains of those people have never been found and this operation escapes any documentary reference even among top-secret SS communication intercepted by the British coming out of Auschwitz.

For example, they could have attacked the police/gestapo with a knife upon their arrest. And the ones that provably showed up for transport voluntarily, could have gone into hiding/fled/etc instead of showing up. And they could have organized a revolt in the transit camp. And they could have panicked/revolted when brought to the railway station at the transit camp.

They did not believe they were going to gas chambers. They believed they were going to work/concentration camps (which they were). That was why they boarded the trains without much resistance. But the problem here is you are admitting that the notion of deception in convincing 2,000 Jews to cram themselves inside a small gas chamber is not plausible. So you lose your explanation for why the crowd would behave the way they did, and why they wouldn't panic or show any resistance.

Hacha voluntarily traveled to Germany and eagerly accepted Hitler's invitation. Most people do not even know what the Munich Agreement says, it's very short you can read it in two minutes. Hacha freely traveling to Berlin and making the agreement he did does not violate any part of Munich.

The notoriety of the "Master Race" is supposed to be the most extreme invocation of scientific racism. That is not to say that the Germans did not believe in scientific racism (they obviously did), but the few cases of the use of "Herrenvolk", which was not common in popular propaganda and would not have been in the minds of the general public, is more in the context of this statement here of "raising the German people up" to reach their potential. The Nazis and Hitler in particular viewed the concept of "German" as multi-ethnic in itself. Rosenberg in particular did not go along with the interpretation of "Master Race" manufactured by the Allies at Nuremberg:

ROSENBERG: I do not need a foreign dictionary in order to explain the various meanings "Ausrottung" may have in the German language. One can exterminate an idea, an economic system, a social order, and as a final consequence, also a group of human beings, certainly. Those are the many possibilities which are contained in that word. For that I do not need an English-German dictionary. Translations from German into English are so often wrong-and just as in that last document you have submitted to me, I heard again the translation of "Herrenrasse." In the document itself "Herrenrasse" is not even mentioned; however, there is the term "ein falsches Herrenmenschentum" (a false master mankind). Apparently everything is translated here in another sense.

This is also seen in the fact that "untermensch" is translated as "subhuman", which is not a good translation in comparison to "underman"- the inverse of the Nietzschean Overman. So that concept of "untermensch" is misrepresented, mostly through manipulative translation, to make the concept about racial supremacism when it was about a deeper political and ideological struggle.

Right, "volk" is not the German word for "race". There are sparse references to "Herrenvolk" although it was very uncommon, and no references to "master race."

It doesn't seem that absurd to me. The guards outnumber each individual person 150-to-1.

Of course even if there were 1 billion prisoners and 150 guards the guards would outnumber each individual person 150-to-1.

There's no statements to the effect that 100% of the security force or garrison was involved in managing the prisoners- quite the opposite, with the vast majority of the work was said to have been done and orchestrated by the unarmed Jewish "Sonderkommando" with little guard presence.

In my experience, people manage to exit and enter subway cars and airplanes with bare minimum of cooperation

Do you have any experience with large crowds of thousands of people walking orderly towards confined imminent danger and death? Obviously people coordinate disembarking an airplane because they want to travel. At Auschwitz it's claimed that 2,000+ Jews at a time were crammed in a 7m x 30m room, over 9 people per square meter. LLM estimates the density of people is 1-1.5 people per square meter in a full airplane. You are unwilling or unable to grasp the scale of what you are claiming happened. Marching people into such a confined space in which they knew they were going to be killed would be an extremely difficult task, if not outright impossible. You physically cannot fit enough guards in the structure to force the crowd to do anything, the process would entirely rely on the cooperation of the victims to achieve this process we are told was virtually seamless and routine.

Yad Vashem estimates that Treblinka received typically a single trainload of 60 cars with 7,000 prisoners, with max 20 cars brought into camp at single time, with some fraction dead during transport, yielding 2,000 prisoners herded through enclosed route to their deaths.

The "Sonderkommando" were not armed and there would have been a danger of them joining in on the riot. The idea that <150 guards (assuming every single guard and SS officer was at every single transport, which is not attested to) would be sufficient for the task of forcing 2,000 people to walk to their deaths without resistance is absurd. At Treblinka it's claimed the perimeter was secured merely with a barbed wire fence interwoven with tree branches. US prisons keep prisoners in very secure conditions, the ratio of guards to prisoners assumes most prisoners are secured in a cell. More importantly, US prisoners do not exterminate crowds of prisoners, and if they did they would not rely on a 4:1 ratio.

When it comes to the execution of a single prisoner, there is a huge number of personnel and security to manage the execution of a single prisoner. Comparing security in general population to security in the execution of 2,000 people is apples and oranges.

The mainstream position includes several factors: the prisoners were starved and dehydrated after days in unsanitary train cars

Does starvation and dehydration explain a crowd of people so diligently cooperating in their own mass execution? Of course it doesn't. Look at the picture of the claimed density of the gas chambers at Auschwitz. It is absurd to believe that those people put so much effort to allow the Germans to kill them instead of panicking and ruining the entire operation.

Hacha voluntarily signed over independence. Hacha was the one who sought an audience with Hitler in Berlin, Hacha's concern was that the Benes faction were going to take over in Czechia, and they were going to start a war with Germany. It was not forced through German aggression. Nothing about the Munich Agreement stated that Hacha could not cede territory voluntarily to Hitler.

I'm not sure where you get the claim from that there was some extremely high density in the gas chambers anyway.

It is claimed that up to/at least 2,000 people were gassed at a time in gas chambers that were by all accounts and according to construction documents (although they were documented to be Morgues) 7m x 30m. That means it is claimed there were stacked 9.5 victims per square meter. Here's an image to scale showing what that would look like. So you are saying the Jews stacked themselves like that even though they knew they were going to be murdered? You realize a person at the door pushing people inside would do nothing in the face of panic towards the door from a crowd like that.

You can watch this Revisionist film if you want to see a very well-sourced breakdown of the extermination process as claimed by mainstream historians. But yes the mainstream claims relies on the notion that Jews cooperated in arranging themselves with that much, or greater, density inside these structures. Through a single small entrance. Talk another look at that picture and tell me that this is a rational design for an extermination operation... it's just made up.

What part of this requires military discipline?

The people in the train want to reach their destination in a timely manner, they all have a strong incentive to accept being herded in that manner and if they didn't need to be there they would just go somewhere else. You are saying that the Jews would have exhibited the same level of cooperation as those Japanese train passengers but, instead of an attempt to take a train to get to work or whatever, to cram themselves inside their own execution chambers. I am saying they would not have cooperated like that. What exactly could the guy at the entrance do if the crowd inside the train panicked and all tried to leave the train at the same time?

For comparison, you can look at various tragedies at festivals, stadiums and such, where crowds got packed tight by people pushing from behind, which can easily cause extreme density at the far end.

Yes, crowd control is the most dangerous part of those events and when panic is caused for any reason it creates an incredibly dangerous situation for everyone involved. But you are saying the Jews would not have panicked, even though they knew they were being killed, and not only that but the Germans knew the Jews wouldn't panic so they didn't foresee an issue with a very light security detail simply telling thousands of Jews to arrange themselves inside the gas chambers.

The evidence of the Holocaust is overwhelming,

No, it is not overwhelming. The lack of contemporary documentary evidence for the operation is one of the biggest problems, with probably the biggest problem of all being the lack of physical evidence.

Germany did not violate the Munich Agreement. The Munich Agreement is not very long you can read it for yourself if you want.

O don't understand your logic here. You seem to claim that when people are forced to dig their own grave, then any resistance is going to be individual and can be dealt with easily due to that. But when people are merely asked to walk into a room, then that would somehow set off a coordinated riot. Why? How?

Have you ever been part of a large crowd entering a very small building through a single entrance? It takes a long time and requires everyone's cooperation. A couple of people panicking could stall or derail the entire operation. Getting a huge crowd of people to walk through a tiny corridor and stack densely inside "shower rooms" is a difficult task, more so for a crowd that knows they are about to be murdered.

And then if they do riot at the entrance, they would have been required to shoot thousands of people panicking and running and hiding and trying to fight... creating a huge mess that would require full cleanup before the operation could start again. It does not make sense the German extermination plan would fundamentally require the cooperation of a large crowd of people walking to their own deaths. By all accounts the security was light. A single transport of Jews would vastly outnumber the entire security force garrisoned at Treblinka for example. Treblinka was supposed to by run by something like a couple dozen Germans...

You have failed to explain why the Nazis would be particularly afraid of a riot by starved Jews who had been forced to stand for an average of 4 days, where many of those Jews would be women, children and the elderly, and where those Jews would have no particular reason to revolt then as they would not know the procedure at the camp

I have explained why the Germans would not design an execution system that so heavily relied on the perfect cooperation of large crowds of people. The mainstream explanation for this is that the Germans employed deception to trick the Jews into believing they were taking a shower. But many users here do not find that explanation believable because the Jews would have been able to see through the ruse. So the mainstream explanation is they employed deception to get the crowd to cooperate, others here are proposing deception was not necessary and the crowd would cooperate with the operation because they were tired and hungry. Neither holds any water.

Did the judge that ruled the migrants can stay in the Epping hotel need a direct order, or an act of law being passed?

Obviously a court ruling is an example of a bureaucracy implementing a policy. There's an official paper trail there.

On the flip side, the camps weren't operating without budgets, plans, and orders either.

Of course they weren't, and there is a huge amount of documentary evidence for budgeting, planning, and orders pertaining to the camp system itself. But there isn't any reference to some top-secret extermination operation or the planning or construction of homicidal gas chambers disguised as shower rooms. The problem is not that there is a lack of documentation pertaining to the camp system, there's an ENORMOUS body of documentation pertaining to the most minute details and planning of the camp systems, with the very stark omission being any reference whatsoever to a top-secret extermination program

but conversely could get into trouble for requeating more resources to be diverted from the war effort, then mass murder is starting to look like a perfectly rational conclusion.

Do you know how difficult it is to cremate i.e. 800,000 bodies in the matter of ~120 days? It was something like 6,000 people allegedly cremated on makeshift open-air pyres in Treblinka every single day without fail, rain or shine. That is an impossible operation, one that could not possibly have evaded planning and budgeting for the immense resources required for the task. The mainstream historians simply nave no explanation for where the camps, for example, procured the immense amount of fuel which would have been required for the cremation operation. Of course there's no documentary trace for any planning or budgeting for the bare necessities required to run the operation. It's just left without explanation- an operation of this magnitude could not have escaped substantial amounts of planning.

Regarding the logistical issues, it would be interesting to see the orders, plans, and budgets, that they did have.

The British intercepted and decoded all communication between Auschwitz and SS command during the height of the "Holocuast". The communications contain not an iota of reference or mere allusion to any extermination operation. They do contain explicit orders from command to reduce the high death toll caused by epidemic typhus "at any cost" in order to maintain a productive workforce which was important for the war effort. The sheer lack of reference to the operation in documents, planning, and communication is a big problem for the mainstream theory and not something that can be hand-waved with "it was planned through an incredible meeting of minds." Incredible indeed.

You could say the same thing about the Pyramids, and yet, there they are.

Obviously the Pyramids are there, you can look at them. Not so for the "gas chambers" or alleged burial sites for millions of people. The remains have never been found. Imagine if the Pyramids were never found and they were never mentioned in any documentation contemporary to their existence.

Are you telling me, that of all people, Germans are not organized?

No in fact the opposite, they were incredibly organized and the level of detail that went into drafting orders, budgeting, planning- the sheer amount of bureaucracy was actually astonishing. The notion that the most sensitive and secretive operation in the entire history of the Third Reich escaped all trace of written orders, planning, budgeting, and procedure that was standard operating procedure among the regime, and was instead coordinated with "mind-reading" among the bureaucracy, is incredibly unlike the German mode of organization.

There are plans, budgets, orders for all of those things... But ultimately the claimed Extermination Camps are a monumental logistical challenge. Murdering and disappearing the bodies of that many people in that time frame is an extremely difficult and dangerous task. It's not a task that a mid-level officer would just put on his own shoulders because of "mind-reading." It's a task that would absolutely require careful planning, budgeting for resources and building suitable structures, provisioning the operation, etc.

We have an extremely large body of documents pertaining to written orders, construction orders, blueprints, plans, budgets when it comes to the concentration and labor camps. But it's the "extermination camps" that have none of those things.

The notion that this operation emerged without orders, without plans, without budgets is highly unlikely and the claim it did so is necessitated by the fact the existence of the operation not corroborated by those things.

The reality is that it just takes one person to flip out to cause a chain reaction and ruin the entire operation which was allegedly run in extreme secrecy and on a tight schedule. A riot in which hundreds of people are running, hiding, fighting is not an easy situation to deal with and would cause substantial delays in the entire "production" process. The notion that the Germans would design a system so finely tuned to a specific crowd reaction to that scenario beggars belief, it is well suited for the "evil genius" archetype but it's a totally nonsensical way to organize an operation like that.

There are innumerable instances of crowds reacting to danger and imminent death with panic, I cannot think of any example of crowds reacting in the way you seem to think is sensible. Being tired or hungry would not mute that response in your brain which would make you panic at the idea of marching your child down a narrow hallway to a gas chamber...

Yes there were. They engaged in anti-partisan activity and reprisals, etc. But evidence shows they weren't on some mission to "kill all the Jews" and there was no such policy.

The Commissar Order is an example of an actual "extermination" order, and there's nothing like that for Jews.

As I said to Arjin, my understanding is that large numbers of Jews were herded into gas chambers, but the majority of them were probably not marching in believing they were just showers.

You said that it's a straw-man to characterize the operation as them walking to their deaths like sheep through an assembly line. But that is not a straw-man. that is the actual claim made by mainstream historians with cases of resistance being the rare exception and not the rule. The alleged operation fundamentally relied on the cooperation of the victims. Whether or not they actually believed they were taking a shower is immaterial to the fact that they cooperated in the way you implied was silly to believe... and yes it is silly to believe they would do that- they wouldn't and they didn't.

If you proved to me that the Germans only gassed 100,000 Jews

The Germans did not gas any Jews. The "gas chambers disguised as shower rooms" is a total myth, it did not happen. Many Jews died of various causes throughout the war, none died in that way because there were no extermination camps, there were concentration, labor, and transit camps.

Again, this is ridiculous, no one is saying the camps were not planned or budgeted or there were no written orders about disposition of Jews. There may have been no written orders saying precisely "Kill all the Jews in your camp" or "Kill at least 1000 Jews per day." That doesn't mean it "emerged organically from Hitler's rhetoric."

There are no plans... no budgets.... no orders.... there's nothing to establish some policy to kill all the Jews.

You might say that I am strawmanning mainstream historians when I characterize their position that the extermination camps "emerged organically from Hitler's rhetoric." But consider the words of renowned Holocaust Historian Raul Hilberg:

But what began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures. They were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus - mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy.

So there you have it- no plans, no budget, no orders; instead it was "mind-reading" by lower-level officers. This is the mainstream position which has emerged due to the inabilitiy of mainstream historians to find any documents substantiating their characterization of German policy in this respect.

Of course if someone doesn't cooperate digging, you shoot him and it's a little inconvenient. A full-blown riot of a thousand people is a massive security threat to what is supposed to be a top-secret operation. The operation's reliance on the cooperation of the victims to function at all is so conspicuous. That's why the shower room cover story is so important. Such a sensitive task would not have, by design, fundamentally relied on the cooperation of the victims. That's where the shower room story comes into play, it's not just a small detail.

Nazi apologist refuses to admit that a majority of Jews could ever be spineless cowards

Well that's the thing, the claim is that they murdered 800,000+ of their co-ethnics and then they got the courage to revolt when the deed was done. If they were so certain death awaited the end of their operation why not revolt sooner? Or try to save some innocent people, or revolt when there's actually a transport of thousands of people to assist a riot? Of course none of it makes sense, it's just bad fiction.

No. I am asking you why you believe the Nazis would have bothered.

Shouldn't you be asking that question? If their plan was to kill them all, why did they bother bringing them to all of these camps, feed them, give them shelter, etc.? Why didn't they just kill them? Jewish labor was crucial for the German war effort. If they were so intent on killing all the Jews, why didn't they pursue that before the war? Why did they enter diplomatic arrangements with Zionists and why did they go through the trouble of planning to transfer the Jews in Madagascar? It's up to you to explain why they planned to do that initially, but then changed their minds and decided to gas them all. But I'm struggling to understand why you're asking "why do you believe the Nazis would have bothered" when by all accounts that was the policy they were pursuing before the war and before 1942. I'm only saying they didn't radically shift their policy position in favor of some secret gas chamber conspiracy. If you are saying they changed their minds and drastically changed their policy you should be able to provide some evidence for that.

I would much sooner believe that was the plan, than believe that Nazi Germany was ever prepared to allot significant resources to Jewish resettlement in the event of German victory.

So you think the Havaara Agreement and Madagascar Plan were just fake or something? Or they were just cover stories? Why don't you believe they would have pursued a policy they were obviously pursing before and during the early part of the war?

Those millions of Jews did, in fact, die... I would much sooner believe that was the plan

The death toll in the concentration camps is not in the millions, I can't remember off the top of my head but it's overall <100k IIRC. That's why the gas chamber story is so important. You think it was Germany's plan to lose the war and have their infrastructure get completely destroyed from both fronts? That was their plan to kill all the Jews? The collapse of Germany was unplanned, and yes that created catastrophic conditions in the camps. It says more about your biases that you are more willing to believe the Germans planned the collapse of their infrastructure in order to kill the Jews than to believe that they would have pursued the policy they were pursing before the war and through 1941...

As Wandering already pointed out, no one seriously thinks millions of Jews were herded like sheep through an assembly line into gas chambers. Gas chambers disguised as shower rooms were a small part of the entire multi-year process and obviously it's a horrific image that looms large today, but you can complain all you want that the number of Jews killed in gas chambers was small, or even literally zero, and you still won't "debunk" that Jews were deliberately killed in an attempted genocide.

You are wrong Amadan, the mainstream historical claim is exactly that they were herded like sheep through an assembly line and fully cooperated the vast majority of the time. And saying it was a "small part" is also not true: it is claimed about half of the "six million" were murdered inside these shower rooms. And if you take lower estimates of the overall death-toll form mainstream historians like Hilberg, then the claim is that the overall majority of the Jews who died in WWII were killed in this way. It's not a "small part" and yes the mainstream claim is actually that they just willingly walked in like herded sheep through an assembly-line. That's not me strawmanning, that's the actual claim. The alleged cases of resistance are very few and far between compared to the multimillion death-toll alleged.

According to Yankel Wiernik, childrens' feet froze to the ground while they awaited their turn to be gassed. Although Wiernik does report on a case of heroic resistance:

On one occasion a girl fell out of line. Nude as she was, she leaped over a barbed wire fence three meters high, and tried to escape in our direction. The Ukrainians noticed this and started to pursue her. One of them almost reached her but he was too close to her to shoot, and she wrenched the rifle from his hands. It wasn't easy to open fire since there were guards all around and there was the danger that one of the guards might be hit. But as the girl held the gun, it went off and killed one of the Ukrainians. The Ukrainians were furious. In her fury, the girl struggled with his comrades. She managed to fire another shot, which hit another Ukrainian, whose arm subsequently had to be amputated. At last they seized her. She paid dearly for her courage. She was beaten, bruised, spat upon, kicked and finally killed. She was our nameless heroine.

At Treblinka it's claimed that the Jewish workers who ran the extermination operation revolted only after the murder operation of 800,000+ Jews because the workers "knew they would be next." At some point the lack of chivalry is just hard to believe.

I don't know how many countries that have committed genocide that wrote down "We intend to exterminate all these people as a state policy."

What you are claiming the Germans did with their "extermination camps" is totally unprecedented in human history. That is not to say "genocide has never happened", it's to say that the establishment of secret camps with assembly-line/factory modes of extermination hundreds of thousand to 1 million+ using industrial means is not precedented in human history. The notion that this all happened without written orders, planning, or budgeting, it just somehow emerged organically from Hitler's rhetoric, doesn't hold water in comparison to the more likely explanation that the network of concentration and labor camps during WWII is perfectly consistent with German policy with respect to the Jews without the absurd stories of assembly-line death factories.

To do so would have been heroism, not the expected human response. I would expect as much even if the gas chambers had had big neon signage saying 'DEATH CHAMBERS, ABANDON ALL HOPE YE WHO ENTER HERE'.

Your confidence just seems completely divorced from all human experience. We have innumerable examples of crowds panicking, often for no reason at all. The pure physical force exerted by hundreds of people in fear and the difficulty of controlling them is very well known. But you are confident that the Germans designed a murder operation that fundamentally required the cooperation of crowds of thousands of people walking inside their own execution chambers with hardly any security, and with them all knowing they were going to get gassed to boot. It's just absurd. It's not "weakness" it's just a tall tale about something that never happened.

call it a coordination problem

Getting that many people into these narrow entrances to stand with extremely high density in these small rooms requires military-discipline level of coordination by the victims. That's the impetus for the whole "they were tricked into taking a shower" story in the first place, to provide an explanation for why ~3 million people coordinated so neatly in walking inside the gas chambers without resistance. But in your mind, they mostly knew they were going to die but just cooperated anyway.

Having shipped all those hundreds of thousands of Jews to eastern work camps, do you believe that his earnest intention was to win the war, then graciously release all those people and pay for their resettlement to the Middle-East? Why?

You are asking why I believe this? Of course I believe this because there is an enormous body of evidence to believe that these were real policies, unlike the claim that the German plan was to murder all the Jews inside shower rooms. That is to say, I believe those things because there is a lot of evidence for them, and I don't believe the gas chamber story because it is an a priori outlandish claim that lacks evidence. The motive you mention is also explained by these policies, and if your claim is that the Germans departed from these long-standing policies and decided to kill them all inside shower rooms then that is a claim that requires more than appealing to motive.

And here we go again. Please stop talking about the shower rooms.

The reason the gas chamber story is so important is because, if you say, "the Germans killed 6 million Jews" the natural follow-up from any thoughtful person is: when? where? how? why? The fact is, there is no "alternative hypothesis" other than the story of millions of Jews being gassed inside shower rooms. So if it turns out that claim is false (which it is) then mainstream historians are categorically unable to answer those other questions with respect to the Holy 6 million. The entire narrative rests heavily and solely on the truth of the claim that millions of Jews were gassed inside shower rooms. You can't hand-wave it away without being faced with those other questions that historians have no answer for whatsoever.

It's amusing how often you bring up these false equivalencies. Sure, we did indeed intern people of German and Japanese ancestry, and it's regarded today as a historical injustice.

Amadan, it's not about whether it's justice or injustice it's about whether there's historical precedent for the practice. The concentration of the Jews is easily explainable without a grand conspiracy to exterminate them all inside gas chambers disguised as shower rooms. The alleged "extermination camps" have no historical precedent, whereas the concentration and labor camps alleged by Revisionists have ample historical precedent. The purpose of the comparison is to show which explanation is a priori more likely.

Nor did we use them as slave labor or starve them to death.

The Japanese performed labor in American concentration camps. Certainly the Russians had work camps. But what you are alleging, that some of these German camps were secretly death factories where hundreds of thousands to 1 million + people were exterminated using diabolical trickery to murder people who thought they were taking a shower... obviously that is the claim that stands far and wide from any other camp system in history.

What exactly is the colorable argument for Jews? Why exactly would German Jews work for the Allied gentiles against the Axis gentiles?

The concern was primarily support for Communism among Jews. This was a concern shared by American intelligence as well who considered the mass of Jewish arrivals to be a security threat for the very same reason. The association of Jews with the Bolshevik Revolution was widespread and even accepted as conventional wisdom by Winston Churchill himself:

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek – all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses. The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.

You are free to argue that this pattern is overstated by Churchill and the Germans. But we still have a more plausible explanation, and one that is stated by the Germans themselves, for the concentration of the Jews compared to "they had a secret, unwritten conspiracy to exterminate them all in death showers."

So Hitler talked for years and made it a major part of his entire political movement that the Jews were rotten and must be gotten rid of, we have everything that happened after, but since there is no paper saying "Kill all the Jews. Signed: Adolf Hitler," we should conclude that Hitler planned to peacefully deport them to Madagascar after the war?

There's no need to understate that gravity of a mass deportation/expulsion from Europe. That is a huge, violent deal. It's not peaceful and I would never make that claim. But if you are trying to claim that the Germans were pursuing some policy, i.e. to exterminate all the Jews, it would make sense that there should be orders establishing this policy... how could this policy exist if it didn't exist in written orders? The actual, written plans make more sense from a logical and historical perspective. If the Germans wanted to kill all the Jews, why didn't they? Why bring them to camps with housing, food, medical services, etc.? Why not just kill them where they were found? But yes, if you are saying Hitler wanted to kill all the Jews it would be very helpful to show that he ordered such a thing, but those written orders have never been found because they do not exist...

What would this prove? What should we conclude?

I would actually volley this question back to you. Let's say Revisionists are correct: there were no homicidal gas chambers disguised as shower rooms. And that all the stories, propaganda, and pop culture which emerged from that mythos were false. What would you conclude? Would you just think "oh we all happened to get that historical fact wrong" or would you ponder greater Culture War ramifications from that revelation?