|

Mark Weber Met Michael Shermer

By Bradley R. Smith ∙ August 1, 1995

Last updated on

MARK WEBER, director of the Institute of Historical Review, met Michael Shermer of Occidental College and Skeptic magazine, to debate “Who’s Really Pushing 'Pseudo-History’” at the Countryside Inn in Costa Mesa on Saturday afternoon, 22 July. Greg Raven emceed the affair and I said a few words. Raven handled business very well, but I feel impelled to say that my own performance was weak and disorganized. Don’t know why it was, but there you are.

It wasn’t a formal debate between Weber and Shermer, but an “exchange.” Weber spoke for 30 minutes, Shermer for 30, Weber for 20, Shermer for 20, and that was followed by a Q & A session. Weber gave an introductory overview of revisionism, then Shermer told us why he believes the genocide story, which is: that in spite of a number of holes in the story, many of which revisionists emphasize, it can be shown that too many high-ranking Germans talked about getting rid of the Jews, too many Jewish communities and populations disappeared, and too many Jews are known to have been murdered to not believe that genocide took place. Shermer quoted from Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels, Frank and others to make his point about a “consilience of evidence” proving the genocide. It disturbed me yet again listening to how top Nazis talked about Jews, the coarseness and brutality of their language and thinking. It was damning.

In his response Weber noted that there is a consilience of evidence demonstrating that thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of Jews were “gassed” at Dachau yet everyone agrees it didn’t happen. With that one example he blew Shermer’s 30 minute spiel out of the water. Weber then continued strongly about how neither Shermer nor his establishment associates will actually criticize revisionist theory directly.

Shermer, for his part, didn’t appear to be well prepared for his 20 minutes session, where he appeared weak. Weber dominated the Q & A as once again Shermer didn’t really appear to be prepared.

Shermer mentioned several times that during a recent tour of the camps he had gotten video tape that contradicted much of what David Cole uses in his own work, videotape that would suggest that homicidal gas chambers did exist at Auschwitz and other camps. Yet, when it was time to do so, he changed his mind, saying he was not yet ready to show his footage publicly.

I don’t know what Shermer hoped to accomplish by his appearance before an audience of revisionists. Compared to Weber, he appeared weak. That being so, his professional colleagues will not be happy with him helping to “legitimize” the IHR while losing a debate at the same time.

He’s already on the outs with Deborah Lipstadt and her gang.

I find Shermer to be an appealing and decent fellow. I fear the worst for him professionally and as a publisher. I think he gives the appearance of being in over his head because he does not have his intellectual priorities laid out. He has found a subject about which, for reasons I don’t understand though I am not without a theory, he is unable to maintain what he believes is his natural propensity for skepticism.

  • Bradley R. Smith

    Bradley R. Smith was born in Los Angeles on February 18, 1930. At 18 he joined the army and in 1951 served with the infantry in Korea where he was twice wounded. After three decades of a variety of professional activities, it suddenly hit him: In 1979 he read a leaflet by Professor Robert Faurisson, "The Problem of the Gas Chambers." Then, Arthur Butz’s The Hoax of the Twentieth Century did it for him. He understood from the beginning that he would address the censorship, the suppression of independent thought, the taboo against publishing and debating revisionist arguments—not the arguments themselves. That has remained his position. In 1989, Smith founded Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH) dedicated to defending free speech and free inquiry into the Holocaust question. He handed over CODOH's helm in late 2014. He passed away on his 86th birthday, February 18, 2016. Read a series of obituaries here.

Bibliographic information about this document: Smith's Report, no. 25, August 1995, pp. 5f.
Other contributors to this document: n/a
Editor’s comments: n/a

Similar Posts

  • Me and my Memory

    I seldom make an effort to try to remember what I read. I allow memory to take care of itself. My experience is that with me memory is pretty good at recalling certain kinds of daily events, but it doesn’t have all that much interest in remembering what others write. As it is, without my…

  • Poetic Justice (Bernard Lewis)

    Bernard Lewis, Professor of Oriental studies at Princeton University, has been nailed by a French court for denying the “genocide” of—the Armenians. Last May when Professor Arthur Butz, author of The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, was to give a “fireside” talk to Northwestern University students, Lewis happened to be on campus to speak on…

  • Business

    Because of substantial contributions over the last six weeks by three supporters, to each of whom I here reiterate my appreciation, all my personal accounts are current. Additionally, my business and credit card debts, which had soared to $15,800, now stand at $12,900. Interest on the card debt alone is about $330 a month. The…

  • There’s Glory for You!

    Recently John Sack and Michael Shermer have addressed the topic of Holocaust revisionism in mainstream publications, Sack in Esquire magazine and Shermer in his book, Denying History. Publicly, both Shermer and Sack are critical of revisionism. This is rather typical for those who want to be able to publish their works through major publishing houses….

  • The Adelaide Institute

    This Australian institute publishes a revisionist newsletter that recently has printed a number of items by and about Robert Faurisson. To get a sample issue write: PO Box 3300, Norwood, 5067, Australia. Bradley R. Smith Bradley R. Smith was born in Los Angeles on February 18, 1930. At 18 he joined the army and in…