World War 2 written by Winners?

[Erzengel]

and the same might happen to WW2, only partially ofc, and it will most likely take another 30 years before respectable historians grow the balls to publish it .

Examples? I can assure you that the historiography of The Second World War in total won't change much. For sure there are academic debates about certain aspects of it (like with every other historical object), especially about structures, intentions or scope of action, but the history of events (Ereignisgeschichte) is very well explored. It has nothing to do with the "lack of balls" of respectable historians. All these conspiracy theories are just not based on reliable sources. They are only politically motivated opinions (mostly comming from people who are amateurs and not historians) which have nothing to do with academic research.

Germany was solely blamed for WW1 to happen in the first place (this is probably still being teached in school, at least here in germany) and this lead to the treaty of Versailles, imo the 3. Reich wouldn't have happend without the Versailles treaty at all. Btw Germany paid the last reparations for WW1 in 2010..

The book is basically taking the blame from Germany spreading it over all the countries involved, which did many books before ofc, but mostly unrecognised/ignored by historians and the media.

Which is hardly a new approach. Today almost no historian would solely blame Germany for the First World War.

Yep, questioning WW2 is still a career suicide for any historian. Have to wait a few more decades before we start getting objective accounts of it.

Oh another untenable conspiracy theory. Would you like to give us some examples?

if  you give me evidence or any other facts maybe in form of a video ? and what he said is true , the only thing is he might have let out some facst out of his theory. but its not completely wrong. I dont agree 100% obviously.

Here is an article about him and his book: http://fch.fiu.edu/FCH-2003/Uldricks-einstein1-2003.htm I only skimmed it, but it should disprove his thesis quite well.

Note: The link doesn't work here. Due to the forum censorship you have to replace "einstein" with "h i t l e r".

[Xant]

I would recommend applying common sense, Erzengel, if you had any. Alas...

[Erzengel]

I would recommend applying common sense, Erzengel, if you had any. Alas...

Good way to admit that you have zero arguments. 

But doesn't surprise me. I guess the only "history" books you have read about the Second World War were written by David Irving and his kind.

[Xant]

I feel no need to convince you of anything. I know how the academic world works and that's enough for me. If you're interested in examples, search for them yourself.

[Erzengel]

Please enlighten us. How does the (historical) academic world work? Have you ever studied history or any other social science at an university? Do you have an academic degree?

Or is it just another one of your cospiracy theories?

[Xant]

”If you need to invoke your academic pedigree or job title for people to believe what you say, then you need a better argument."
—Neil deGrasse Tyson

[[ptx]]

So instead you invoke your supposed knowledge of the academic world. Ok.

[Erzengel]

”If you need to invoke your academic pedigree or job title for people to believe what you say, then you need a better argument."
—Neil deGrasse Tyson

I am not talking about myself.

I am just interested why you think to know how the academic world works. You presented a (very daring) thesis but are not able to provide any evidence for it. That's not how it works.

[Xant]

So instead you invoke your supposed knowledge of the academic world. Ok.

So your hypothesis is that if a historian put forth the suggestion that the holocaust didn't take place or was greatly exaggerated, he wouldn't be committing academic suicide?

[[ptx]]

If i put forth the hypothesis that finns aren't really people, i probably would be committing academic suicide.

[Xant]

As the shuttlecock said to the battledore, 'you like a hit at your friends'.

[Erzengel]

So your hypothesis is that if a historian put forth the suggestion that the holocaust didn't take place or was greatly exaggerated, he wouldn't be committing academic suicide?

Of course he would commit academic suicide with it, but not beacuse of some moral rules (morals highly vary between different societies/countries anyways). There is a good reason why all respectable historians don't deny/relativize the holocaust: there are zero facts/sources that support such a thesis.

I am sorry to disappoint you, but the holocaust did happen. 

[Xant]

That's your opinion and as an advocate of free speech, I allow you your opinion.

[Erzengel]

Serious debates are not about personal opinions, they are only about facts and educated guesses.

As long as you only base your thesis on opinions it is nothing more than an unfounded conspiracy theory.

[Osiris]

so what your trying to say xant (apart from trolling) is that if a historian publishes a paper with very very few sources or evidence and there being lots of sources and evidence to the contrary that they are committing academic suicide not because their theory may be heavily flawed but because of the way the academic world works? Was the scale of the holocaust exaggerated in an attempt to gain more sympathy for an Israeli state? Possibly, if the guy provides some kind of evidence and rational reasoning then it wont be academic suicide. if he comes along and screams jews run the world they lie cheat and made it all up then he will be loled at
 
i cant tell if your trying to troll of if your one of these guys who say media history govt tv radio everything is a lie your all stupid im smart i see the truth kinda guys