Whether one's Holocaust denial or revisionism is anti-semitic depends on if anti-Jewish considerations are the motivation for the person espousing these beliefs. It is difficult for me to imagine a proponent of the former not being an anti-semite, but that is not to say that anyone objecting to the 6 million figure, or to the central significance of the Holocaust as the prime example of evil in mankind is necessarily an anti-semite. But I'd expect many if not most of them to fall into this category.

I do think that it is important to distinguish antisemitism from racism proper. Certainly the two can cohabit, but explicitly racist antisemitism is a comparatively modern phenomenon, having not been seen until the 1870's. Richard J. Evans has written fairly authoritatively on the subject, though I would expect Holocaust deniers to howl in protest at the sound of his name.

I can understand the desire to put the Holocaust into a historical perspective, and assert that its victims were no more deserving of a voice than those of the
Bolshieviks. But, as I've said, there are reasons that the Holocaust has been so emphasized in our historical consciousness, and they have little to do with some all-powerful hidden Jewish cabal. Because of where and how the Holocaust happened: with widespread Western eyewitnesses (as opposed to the Stalinist gulag), and the methods it used, it caused some major artistic and intellectual responses in the West that proliferated cultural disorientation and self-doubt. Since Jews were the Holocaust's most numerous and emphasized victims, it is only natural that many of these responses were indeed from Jews themselves.

One can make the case that we have overreacted to the Holocaust, in misapplying its lessons: a good example would be the taboo of the concept of Eugenics. I'm all for critical thinking being applied mercilessly to any issue. But the notion of vast consipracies that fundamentally direct peoples' worldview is in itself antithetical to critical thinking.

The Holocaust deniers, or 'revisionists', are hijacking this thread, so you are probably wasting your time in arguing with them. It's funny how they allege a vast Zionist conspiracy that muzzles free speech, and yet they 'reputation bomb' people here who disagree with them. Neither you, nor mesocyclone, amongst others, are saying anything illogical nor outside of the mainstream, yet because of the popularity contest that is 'reputation' here, you are treated as if you were trolls. Clearly the 'reputation' score is only as good as the community that bestows it.

Only when asserting a doctrine 'ex cathedra' on a Church teaching as having divine inspiration as its direct source. And this is a modern doctrine, dating from the 1st Vatican council.

Reasonable people can discuss just what the body count was for the holocaust, but they cannot contend that it never happened. It is also reasonable to pose the question of why the holocaust alone stands as the ultimate symbol of man's inhumanity to man. It is certainly explainable without resorting to conspiracy theories, which are the last refuge of the historically illiterate. What I would say is that the holocaust was so shocking and disorienting because of a combination of factors: the sheer scale, the rationalization for choosing victims, the fact that it occurred under the auspices of a modernized Western state, and the application of industrial techniques and scale to the slaughter. I can think of no other instance of attempted genocide where all of these factors came into play. The Armenian genocide might approach it in scale and in the method of choosing victims, but it was fairly remote from Western consciousness, and certainly not an industrialized slaughter. The many victims of Communism, over a longer time period, might eclipse the holocaust in scale, but its victims were even more diverse, and there was not the utter defeat of the communists to expose their misdeeds to the light of day all at once. So there are rational reasons for the holocaust to be uniquely emphasized.

Maybe you should go crawl back under the rock whence you came.

That's always a good question: why the Jews in particular? I put it down to tradition, to the Jews' claim to be a chosen people, their relative success and clannishness, and their urbanist globalism. In short, their success and distinctiveness.