Should the history of Nazi Germany be normalised? [2]?

Should the history of Nazi Germany be normalised? [2]?
for my 4000 word essay…. the question is open to interpretation…. personally i believe the question the question is asking to justify why the nazis behaved as they did, and how normal it really is relative to biology (Social Darwinism, evolution)

normalise can be defined as:
– to become normal or return to its normal state
– to be made normal or cause to conform to a norm or standard

normalisation could be defined as the imposition of standards or regulations

Normalised…in some senses it already is in parts of the world.

By normalised I’ll assume you mean should only one perspective of the events that transpired by accepted by historians. In this sense, I believe that no it should not, to an extent.

In modern day Germany it is a crime to deny the holocaust. There was recently a conference in Iran hosted by Ahmadinijad (Pres. of Iran) about holocaust denial. The German government issued a statement saying anyone who returns to Germany from the conference will be arrested. So in that sense, Germany “normalized” that aspect of Nazi German history.

History is about perspective. You will never find two historians who agree on absolutely everything. Sure there are dry facts that are not arguable, for example you can’t argue that Pearl Harbor occured on Dec. 7, 1941… I personally believe that you can’t deny the Holocaust happened, but a few probably disagree with me. You can argue motives of the perpetrators of the Holocaust, reasons for American isolationism, reasons for Japanese agression, the effects certain events such as battles had on the war, and many more things. Historical debate and literary criticism will forever be a part of the study of any historic topic. It’s part of what makes it intellectually stimulating and fun. If only one perspective of anything is allowed, who’s to say it’s the correct one?