Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What are the main organizations promoting Holocaust denial today?
Executive Summary
The provided analyses identify a small network of organizations and publishers as the primary promoters of Holocaust denial today, with the Institute for Historical Review (IHR) repeatedly named as the single most prominent actor and a cluster of related groups and imprints—CODOH, the Barnes Review, Noontide Press, Castle Hill Publishers, and online platforms such as RevisionistHistory.org—reported as amplifiers of denialist material [1] [2] [3] [4]. Contemporary watchdog sources dated in 2025 emphasize both the continuity of these actors from earlier decades and their adaptation to online distribution, while older material [5] lists additional small local chapters and presses that historically helped disseminate denialist content [6] [7].
1. Who’s named as the nucleus of modern denial and why it matters
Across the analyses, the Institute for Historical Review (IHR) is repeatedly identified as the central organization still promoting Holocaust denial, described as a pseudo‑academic “revisionist” group founded in 1978 that continues to distribute denialist publications and host events, albeit with diminished visibility since the mid‑2000s [6] [1]. The reporting stresses that the IHR functions less as an isolated curiosity than as a hub linking white‑supremacist networks, publishing operations, and public-facing events; watchdogs document its origins with Willis Carto and the later editorial leadership that sought to cloak antisemitic ideology in scholarly language [6] [1]. The emphasis on the IHR across multiple 2025‑dated analyses underscores its symbolic importance: even if its conferences and print journal have waned, the IHR remains a named reference point that other actors and sites cite or emulate [2] [1].
2. The supporting cast: publishers, campaigns and online platforms keeping denial alive
Beyond the IHR, the analyses catalog a loose constellation of publishers and organizations—Noontide Press, Castle Hill Publishers, Irving Books, the Barnes Review, Campaign for Radical Truth in History, and the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH)—that have functioned as distribution channels for denialist texts and propaganda [7] [3] [1]. These entities operate at different scales: some are small presses selling reprints, others are advocacy fronts that frame denial as free‑speech “debate,” and some have been integrated into far‑right media ecosystems such as American Free Press or broader conspiratorial outlets. Watchdog reports note that while the tactical emphasis varies—print books, pamphlets, conferences, and web stores—the common purpose is to normalize revisionist claims and provide a bibliographic infrastructure for denialist arguments [7] [3].
3. CODOH and the rhetoric of “open debate” as a recruitment tactic
The Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH) is singled out for its strategic use of free‑speech framing to mainstream denialist claims, using tactics such as selective quotation, appeals to “intellectual freedom,” and online campaigns to seed misinformation [3]. Watchdog analysis from 2025 documents CODOH’s historical ties to known deniers and its digital presence, noting its designation as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and its role in amplifying other denialist publications. The reporting highlights that CODOH’s appeal is rhetorical: by presenting denial as a matter of debate rather than a documented falsehood, it aims to attract a broader audience and shield itself from straightforward censure, even as researchers identify the antisemitic motives embedded in its materials [3].
4. Diverging assessments: how watchdogs differ on current scale and influence
The sources show some divergence about the scale and potency of contemporary denial networks: recent 2025 profiles (SPLC, ADL, Center on Extremism) portray the IHR and affiliated outlets as still active but diminished compared with their peak influence, with journal publication halted and conferences smaller—yet websites and small events continue to circulate material [1] [6] [2]. An older 2015 list documents local chapters and presses that once amplified denial across U.S. cities, suggesting a more decentralized footprint at that time [7]. This divergence reflects two compatible facts: the movement’s public profile has contracted, while its online and print distribution channels persist, meaning influence is harder to measure but the underlying networks remain identifiable [1] [7].
5. What the available evidence leaves uncertain and why readers should care
The assembled analyses make clear which names recur, but they also reveal limits in public visibility and monitoring: many actors operate under multiple imprints, shift platforms, or migrate online, and older directories of chapters may no longer reflect active local presence [7] [1]. Watchdog accounts expose ideological agendas—white supremacy, antisemitism, and conspiracism—disguised as scholarship or debate, which is why identifying both the organizations and their rhetorical strategies matters for countering misinformation [3] [2]. The most robust, consistent finding across these sources is that a small set of organizations and publishers continues to serve as the backbone of contemporary Holocaust denial, with the IHR at the center and a network of allied presses and platforms amplifying the message [6] [1] [4].