Context: Before the US joined the war, IBM had a business deal with the Nazi regime to supply their machines. Their tabulation machines were used for everything from census and logistics to concentration camp administration. IBMs punch card systems along with numbers tattooed on prisoners were used to track their relocations, labour schedules and executions.
IBM claims that they lost control of their German division after the US entered the war but some historians claim that they still continued to profit from their partnership knowingly and despite the fact.
True but that is simply an outcome of something they enabled. Perhaps without IBMs influence, the holocaust wouldn’t be so streamlined and wouldn’t be as atrocious as it turned out to be.
The real question would be which is worse:
A holocaust where IBM enabled Nazi atrocities but with an incriminating paper trail
A holocaust without IBMs involvement, less efficient and with lesser evidence
Both scenarios are so bad that its akin to asking whether killing someone with a gun is better than killing them with a knife. You could argue that one is better than the other but the subject matter itself is so bad that it doesn’t even matter whether one is better than the other.
I’d prefer to be murdered with a gun that’s easy.