[felipeerias]

So we should be allowing holocaust denial here and now, because otherwise people in the future might turn out holocaust deniers?

Holocaust denial has been refuted again and again. The reason why it keeps surfacing is not because of academics are still arguing about the facts. The facts don't matter: holocaust denial is one of the ways in which a very dangerous ideology searches for an entry point into the mainstream.

[tomp]

> Holocaust denial has been refuted again and again

So has been the "flat Earth" theory. Yet we don't ban it.

I think the reason it keeps resurfacing is precisely the fact it is banned - unbanning it would make it much less interesting.

Also, although you and other commenters keep repeating how "dangerous" it is, noone has been able to actually articulate as to why it's dangerous.

[felipeerias]

Holocaust denial is a form of Nazi apologism. It keeps resurfacing because there are still many neo-fascist groups trying to bring their message to the mainstream. Lifting the ban would only help them reach a wider audience.

(Do you really need an explanation as to why Nazism is incompatible with democracy?)

[tomp]

Evolution denial is a form of Church apologism. It keeps resurfacing because there are still many religious groups trying to bring their message to the mainstream. Lifting the ban would only help them reach a wider audience.

(Do you really need an explanation as to why theocracy is incompatible with democracy?)

[Latty]

Then we fight it by continually showing them to be wrong. We can't ban Nazism without opening the flood gates - any government that comes into power can claim that whatever their rival party supports is 'incompatible with democracy'.

[hussong]

The key difference is that denying the Holocaust is a couple orders of magnitude more hurtful to a lot of people than denying "flat Earth", creation, of evolution.

[tomp]

So? Imagine how hurtful denying rape is (e.g. for someone who's rapist was found guilty in court). But it's still not illegal (AFAIK).