Holocaust denial discourse: A conspiracy/theory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite claims of rising Holocaust denial, empirical evidence suggests that Holocaust denial has been in decline and remains a fringe belief. Drawing on 14 months of fieldwork at Holocaust memorial museums in the United States and Canada, and a literature review of scholarly, archival, and popular sources, this study examines Holocaust denial discourse through the anthropological lens of “conspiracy theory.” Anthropological literature frames conspiracy theories as both propaganda tactics and meaning-making idioms. Drawing on these insights, I argue that Holocaust denial discourse functions as a political tool—serving both neoliberal and Zionist ends—and is also motivated by banal and affective phenomena. These findings suggest that understanding the socio-political structures Holocaust denial discourse sustains requires attention to its psycho-social dynamics, rather than dismissing it as “paranoid” or exclusively “Zionist.”
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it