When the Canadian truckers were involved in their minor mischief, an article appeared on a Canadian NGO website that informed me that the truckers had raised “over $6M in funding” online. The figure 6M was significant, as was the typical journalistic qualifier “over”. After all, $7.5M is over 6M and so is $12M—why not give the exact figure? You know where I am going with this, and your mind may already have squeaked, “Eeeew, no. Not that. Don’t go there,” except I am going to go there. The reason why it was “over $6M” was to build an association in your mind between the Canadian truckers and the holocaust—to build the narrative that they are “Nazis”. Now, if we suggested this to the journalist-activist who produced the article they would swear night and day that we were “paranoid”, “mentally ill”, and “schizo”. Yet this is the reality and we all know it is the reality really.
The Canadian truckers received this treatment because they were a masculine populist movement with some support in Western traditions, such as evangelical Christianity. While the subjective beliefs of the truckers are almost certainly not Hitlerite—obviously, we can never know every specific belief the truckers have—it is true that a masculine populist Western traditionalist political group is functionally similar to Hitlerism; and yet anything more than conservative liberalism is labelled “Nazi” by our regime.
If you flip back to ancient histories, it is common to see the assertion that the participant numbers for ancient battles are completely unrealistic. Historians at the time had a different notion as regards “historical fact” than we do—some cultures even had different number systems, so that any number over 3,000 became “a multitude”. Anyone who has followed the recent war in the Ukraine will appreciate how all sides in wars fabricate. The other day it was claimed the Russians deliberately blew up a theatre with many civilians inside. I doubt this was so, said so—and if Russia loses and certain laws are passed, perhaps I have committed premature “war crimes denial”. Although I think Russia’s cause is just, I feel no strong emotional attachment to her; and I would say if I thought otherwise about the theatre, and I can do so because I can still engage in free enquiry in this regard—“history” etymologically derives from “enquiry”. The theatre is not yet sacred nor protected by law.
Yet these historical caveats are not really the point. Everyone knows about the vicissitudes of history. The number “6M” is not about the facts of the matter; it is about the way the facts are used to support a narrative. Tell me, how many did Stalin kill? You do not know, not off the top of your head. But you know “6M” and you know it because it serves a religio-political purpose; it can be used as an anchor to deniably imply that Canadian truckers are Hitlerites because it is sacred, whereas Stalin’s victims are not.
As a sacred number “6M” must be set apart. I can get up and say that Stalin only killed 200,000 people and most of them died from typhoid because Hitler disrupted the Soviet medical system—people might be condemn me, but I would not be fired or hounded for that view. The Hitler apologist who expresses the same view—they never outright deny the holocaust, since that would stretch credibility—would be a pariah.
However, since you cannot question the number—by law in several countries—we must treat all scholarship as regards the holocaust as tainted, the second-order effect from the attempts to suppress Hitlerite apologists is that legitimate scholars distort their work; secondarily, due to the compensation schemes for the holocaust and the media-entertainment complex around it, there is a strong incentive to lie about the details. “Round numbers are always false,” said Dr. Johnson; and 6M is a conveniently round number—more than that, more than the facts, it is a sacred number.