"It is deeply shocking and incomprehensible to me that despite volumes of documentation and living witnesses who can attest to the horrors of the Holocaust, there are still those who would deny it"
About this Quote
Disbelief is doing double duty here: it conveys moral outrage while quietly policing the boundaries of acceptable public discourse. Mark Udall’s “deeply shocking and incomprehensible” isn’t just a personal reaction; it’s a civic stance, the kind politicians reach for when they want to frame an issue as settled fact rather than debatable controversy. By stressing “volumes of documentation and living witnesses,” he stacks two different kinds of authority: the archive (paper, institutions, permanence) and the human body (memory, vulnerability, immediacy). The pairing anticipates the denialist playbook: if you attack documents as propaganda, witnesses remain; if you smear witnesses as unreliable, the record still stands.
The subtext is also about time. “Living witnesses” signals a dwindling window in which testimony can confront fabrication in real time. That urgency turns Holocaust denial into more than historical illiteracy; it becomes an assault on memory itself, a politics that bets on generational distance and the internet’s frictionless spread of bad faith.
Udall’s intent is less to persuade committed deniers than to isolate them. “Those who would deny it” casts denial as willful choice, not confusion - a moral failing, not an intellectual mistake. In a contemporary American context, especially amid rising antisemitism and conspiracy cultures, the line functions as a warning: if a crime documented this thoroughly can be rebranded as “controversial,” then any shared reality is up for auction. The sentence is blunt because the stakes are.
The subtext is also about time. “Living witnesses” signals a dwindling window in which testimony can confront fabrication in real time. That urgency turns Holocaust denial into more than historical illiteracy; it becomes an assault on memory itself, a politics that bets on generational distance and the internet’s frictionless spread of bad faith.
Udall’s intent is less to persuade committed deniers than to isolate them. “Those who would deny it” casts denial as willful choice, not confusion - a moral failing, not an intellectual mistake. In a contemporary American context, especially amid rising antisemitism and conspiracy cultures, the line functions as a warning: if a crime documented this thoroughly can be rebranded as “controversial,” then any shared reality is up for auction. The sentence is blunt because the stakes are.
Quote Details
| Topic | Human Rights |
|---|
More Quotes by Mark
Add to List
