Try it for yourself
149Recognising antisemitism

Denying the Holocaust is antisemitic.

The historical reality of the Nazi genocide is established. Denial is not an ordinary disagreement about government policy.

About 4 min readReviewed: 20 October 2026
AI-generated single lit white candle in a plain glass holder on a stone surface.
IHRA working definitionAntisemitism
Symbolic remembrance image, not a historical scene or a particular memorial.
The short answer

Denying the Holocaust.

The Holocaust was the persecution and murder of six million European Jews by the Nazi regime and its allies and collaborators. Denying this crime is an example of antisemitic behaviour.

Try it for yourselfExam question · No. 149
What is an example of antisemitic behavior?

Choose one answer. Your result stays on this page only.

Historical facts and human dignity belong together.

Antisemitism is directed against Jews. Holocaust denial rejects a documented genocide and attacks remembrance of its victims. The test asks learners to recognise that behaviour among four different examples.

The IHRA expressly includes Holocaust denial in its working definition and explains it in a separate definition of denial and distortion. These texts provide guidance rather than being criminal statutes in their own right. Criminal consequences in Germany depend on the statutory offences.

Three fictional adults with long copper braids, very short grey hair and short black waves study in a library.
AI-generated present-day learning scene; appearance does not establish religion or a historical role.

The other three answers

Assess the described behaviour rather than an assumed identity.

attending a Jewish celebration

Attending a Jewish celebration is not in itself antisemitic. The option describes participation or encounter rather than hatred of Jewish people.

criticizing the Israeli government

The Israeli government can be criticised politically like other governments. That is not automatically antisemitic. Criticism can become antisemitic, for example by collectively blaming Jews or spreading antisemitic ideas.

playing soccer against Jews

Competing against Jewish people in sport is not in itself antisemitic. Discriminatory behaviour would matter, rather than the opposing team’s Jewish identity.

Identifying antisemitism and determining criminal liability are distinct assessments.

Section 130(3) of the Criminal Code covers, among other conduct, denial of Nazi genocide in public or an assembly when it is capable of disturbing public peace. The specific statutory conditions must not be omitted.

Jewish life includes religion, culture, family life, sport and many individual ways of living. The question permits no inference about an individual Jewish person’s views on a government and no blanket equation of Jewish people with the State of Israel.

Antisemitism · IHRA working definition ↗
Your memory cue

Recognise Holocaust denial; avoid collective assumptions about Jewish people.

Remember the answer together with the distinction: ordinary encounters, sport and substantive government criticism are not antisemitic merely because they involve Jewish people or Israel.

Three words for this question

der Antisemitismusantisemitism
Hostility towards and disparagement of Jewish people.
der Holocaustthe Holocaust
The Nazi persecution and murder of six million European Jews.
leugnendeny
To reject an established fact or documented event.
International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance · Working definition of antisemitism ↗
Put understanding into practice

One question understood. Ready for the next?

Practise all 310 questions for your state in our four free modes. No account needed. No advertising.

Optional: Plus for history, statistics and targeted revision. €4.99/month including VAT, renewing monthly.

Sources & context

An independently written study guide, not an official BAMF publication or advice for an individual case. The sources below were reviewed on 20 October 2026 for the claims explained here; the test question comes from the existing question bank.

The two editorial pictures are AI-generated illustrations. They do not document real events or official proceedings.