you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Tom_Bombadil 5 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 5 fun -  (4 children)

Ok.

Can you explain why hard copy dictionaries and encyclopedias that are older than 1960 don't reference the WW2 Holocaust?

[–]JasonCarswellVoluntaryist[S] 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

And the Holocaust wasn't mainstream in movies and television until the 1970s and 1980s.

[–]ShalomEveryoneCommunist Party 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Whoa, just like that you're not going to defend the lie of Anne Frank's diary being written in ballpoint pen? You're not going to provide your own source that says her diary was written in a ballpoint pen?

Can you explain why hard copy dictionaries and encyclopedias that are older than 1960 don't reference the WW2 Holocaust?

There's nothing to explain, that's another white supremacist lie.

Shalom

✡️

[–]Tom_Bombadil 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Can you explain why hard copy dictionaries and encyclopedias that are older than 1960 don't reference the WW2 Holocaust?

There's nothing to explain, that's another white supremacist lie.

This is easy to independently confirm.

Many consignment stores have used book sections.

It seems unlikely that every pre-60's dictionary and encyclopedia publishers overlooked significant historical events.

It wouldn't be surprising to see political biases represented in reference texts.

Failing to include any reference to the Holocaust is an entirely different matter.

Weird.