Why is Holocaust Denial a crime in many countries, but not Gulag Denial?

[Sarmatian]

In other words, why do several countries actually prohibit people denying or minimising the crimes of the Nazis, but not of the Soviets? Is there any objective and rational reason behind this double standard? (Btw, I vehemently oppose Holocaust Denial laws, as they are a serious infringement on freedom of speech).

What's there to deny?

[Rugevit]

I never heard anyone denying the GULAG. Maybe some want a symmetrical legislation in case there is a denial?

[Bell Beaker]

The only thing that relates 6 million people and Adolf Hitler, is the number of Germans that leaved the situation of Unemployment after 1933.

[Odin]

[sean]

Why is Holocaust Denial a crime in many countries, but not Gulag Denial? In other words, why do several countries actually prohibit people denying or minimising the crimes of the Nazis, but not of the Soviets? Is there any objective and rational reason behind this double standard?

Well, its difficult to say because there are a number of factors - its like asking why Pokemon took off like a rocket but Digimon and Monster Rancher are relatively obscure.

In European countries, they're still reeling from the sting of WW2, so it's natural that they would enact laws like that. They exist to criminalise all nationalistic discourse and inquiry regarding the European Axis, plus to avoid another Axis arising on the continent.

Also, the only reason other genocides aren't really illegal to deny is because of shitty virtue-signalling. Not to mention Soviet propaganda to justify their illegal occupation of half of Europe and to bury their own crimes, it isn't that surprising that Holocaust would be protected by draconian laws outlying its denial in Russia today. Same with Germany in the heavy anti-Nazification done post war. Same with other interest groups who abuse it to give themselves immunity from criticism.

Ironically, Holocaust denial laws do more to damage victims than actual Holocaust denial. People instantly assume that any law made to repress speech on events is automatically made with the intention to cover up something. Little old ladies writing books get tossed in jail because of disagreeing with the narrative forced on everyone.

Soon, anyone who knows anyone who was alive during WW2 will be dead. When there is no human connection, enforcing holocaust affirmation will become as impossible as slavery reparations. There will be no one to offend, just as there's no one alive to compensate or be compensated for slavery.

[Isleño]

Well OK, but that still doesn't answer my question as to why one should be a crime but not the other.

It shouldn't be a crime in any nation as people should be free to say what they want despite if others disagree or not, meaning freedom of speech. But it is a crime in some countries in the west and in my opinion it's because of the reaching influence of jews in the western world. The only thing from keeping the US from being one of those countries is the 1st amendment law of the US constitution that guarantees freedom of speech to all US citizens.