Deborah Lipstadt does speak of “soft-core denialism”, for instance the comparison of the Holocaust with Israeli policies. In an interview published on jcpa.org, she notes for instance: “What is not permitted is false historical analysis and the use of immoral equivalencies. One cannot compare the 2002 Jenin battle to the Shoah. Such a comparison shows either ignorance of history or misguided intentions.”

Here, I am 100% in agreement with Lipstadt, who - unsurprisingly - also says that criticism against Israel is as legitimate as against any other country. That is quite a central point: as both critics of Israel and supporters of Israel have a tendency to single out Israel.

Many on the Norwegian left, at least, have a tendency to demonise Israel and applying standards to Israel that they do not apply to any other state. As Bob Levin states in a comment above, “that is where the anti-Semitic swamp begins to lap at one’s feet”. Amongst Israel’s supporters (in Norway, at least) there is - on the other hand - a tendency to define Israel and criticism of Israel as something unique, equalising it with anti-Semitism even when it is not. I can remember an example where a Norwegian Christian weekly attacked an Israeli (and Jewish) artist for being an anti-Semite based on a work he had done criticising Israeli politics.

In the same interview, Lipstadt also notes something else:

“My own position on the uniqueness of the Holocaust has changed somewhat in recent years. I used to be a purist, considering it unique; but I now think that one errs by arguing that stand too strongly. There are other situations with some elements similar to those of the Holocaust.”

She goes on by saying that a comparison between South African apartheid and Nazi attitudes towards the Jews is doable, if one stops the comparison at 1939, saying “the true uniqueness of the Holocaust starts only after 1941, with the Nazi implementation of a systematic plan of murder”.

Furthermore, Lipstadt notes that “while there is no example of a situation that comprises all elements of the Holocaust, we can still use the Armenian genocide as a comparative tool. Likewise there are places in Bosnia where one may conduct a similar analysis, as that too included some elements of genocide.”

Once again, I am in agreement with Lipstadt, although I would be very reluctant to compare South Africa and Nazi Germany, even pre-1939.

What I have noted is that it is possible to compare anti-Semitism with anti-Islamic bigotry; while I have also repeatedly noted that to compare Nazism with today’s anti-Islamic bigotry is nonsense. I have repeated this several times in our discussion, too, but apparently you are quite uncapable of reading, so let me repeat in once more, with the words of an article I wrote in Norwegian:

Some people on the Left and amongst Liberals are eager to compare xenophobic rhetorics of today with Nazism. This makes me wonder how well these people have studied fascism pre-1945.

If you want to call my comparison of anti-Semitism amongst Norwegian non-fascists in 1814, 1914 or 1930, softcore denialism, by all means, feel free to do so. It’s stupid, and pretty much a distortion of what Lipstadt refers to.