Auschwitz-Birkenau is probably the most well-known site of the Holocaust. Between 1942 until autumn 1944, 1.1 million people were murdered at Auschwitz-Birkenau, as part of the Nazi's 'Final Solution'. 90% of those killed were Jews, delivered from across Nazi-occupied Europe to the gas chambers. Tens of thousands of Poles, Roma and Soviet prisoners were also transported to the camp. On January 27, 1945, Auschwitz was liberated by Soviet troops, a day commemorated around the world as International Holocaust Day. In 1947, Poland founded a museum on the site of Auschwitz and roughly 30 million people have subsequently passed through the iron gates which are adorned with the infamous message, 'Arbeit macht frei' ('work makes you free'). However, age and visitors have taken there toll and many of the barracks, gas chambers and other buildings are in need of urgent repair.
German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said "Germany acknowledges its historic responsibility to keep the memory of the Holocaust alive and to pass it on to future generations." In this country the history is well-known. I was raised at a time when the Holocaust was still producing very obvious consequences. The Arab-Israeli wars, the discovery of war-criminals and Simon Wiesenthal made the Holocaust part of the news cycle of my early-life. Today, teaching the Holocaust is a compulsory subject at Key Stage 3 (age 11-14). Last year 75,000 people from the UK visited the site, many from schools. A Labour government programme has ensured that two pupils from every 6th Form in the country get funding to visit the site.
German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said "Germany acknowledges its historic responsibility to keep the memory of the Holocaust alive and to pass it on to future generations." In this country the history is well-known. I was raised at a time when the Holocaust was still producing very obvious consequences. The Arab-Israeli wars, the discovery of war-criminals and Simon Wiesenthal made the Holocaust part of the news cycle of my early-life. Today, teaching the Holocaust is a compulsory subject at Key Stage 3 (age 11-14). Last year 75,000 people from the UK visited the site, many from schools. A Labour government programme has ensured that two pupils from every 6th Form in the country get funding to visit the site.
 |
Tourists at Auschwitz |
Why is Holocaust education compulsory? There are various reasons that people regard the Holocaust as so important. Firstly, it illustrates the extremes of human nature. The Holocaust demonstrates how 'evil' the human race can be, but also, shows the resilience of victims and the bravery of those who helped. A second reason is, as Primo Levi, an Auschwitz survivor said, "It happened so it can happen again." The third reason is to not allow Holocaust deniers to erase the crime from history.
In one of the more insightful moments of Alan Bennett's dreadful 'The History Boys', Hector, the Falstaff of teaching, questions the wisdom of Holocaust field trips, "where would they eat their sandwiches?" It sounds trivial and critics have inferred that, overwhelmed by the enormity of the Holocaust it suggests he chooses to ignore it. I don't think that is the case. I think Bennett recognises the enormity of the event and is suggesting it can not be taught in a traditional manner. He asks, "How can the boys scribble down an answer, however well put, that doesn't demean the suffering involved?"
I think reducing The Holocaust to a question in an exam is demeaning. It trivialises the events. The emergence of 'grief' tourism on the scale of Auschwitz provokes similar difficulties. I can't help but be disturbed by the idea of millions of people visiting the site. Demand has become so great that the Museum authorities have had to limit admission at peak times. A quick look on the internet indicates the level of tourist infrastructure that has developed because of this interest. Can that be right? On a basic level, ask yourself what is the appropriate way to proceed through such a site? Where do you eat your sandwiches?
In a recent BBC online debate, world-renowned authority on Auschwitz, Robert Jan Van Pelt argued that, once the last survivor has died, the camp should be sealed and the buildings be allowed to decay and the grass grow over them. He explained that many Auschwitz survivors believe that 'a visit to the camp can teach little to those who were not imprisoned there.' He believes this view is 'best summarised in the text of Alain Resnais' celebrated movie Night and Fog (1955), written by the camp survivor Jean Cayrol. As the camera pans across the empty barracks, the narrator warns the viewer that these remains do not reveal the wartime reality of "endless, uninterrupted fear". The barracks offer no more than "the shell, the shadow".'
 |
Tourists at Auschwitz |
But doesn't allowing Auschwitz to disappear play into the hands of those who deny the Holocaust? It is a strong argument. In the same debate, Prof Wladyslaw Bartoszewski, former inmate and Chairman of the Auschwitz Council argues that, "it lies in the nature of man that when no tangible traces remain, events of the past fall into oblivion." He continues, Auschwitz "has grown to be a global symbol and a warning against all forms of contempt for mankind and of genocide."
One of my practical concerns would be how do you preserve the camp? It seems that the nature of the project will be to replace rather than preserve. In researching this piece I found this comment on a forum discussing the US decision to contribute to the fund,
"In the army we got to take a tour of Dachau, The one thing that sticks out in my mind was how new everything looked. I mean it looked more like freshly built than restored. The camp itself looked like it had been built yesterday. So it would be hard to tell if it really was old. I always remember asking myself that question when I left. Why did all that stuff look new?"
"In the army we got to take a tour of Dachau, The one thing that sticks out in my mind was how new everything looked. I mean it looked more like freshly built than restored. The camp itself looked like it had been built yesterday. So it would be hard to tell if it really was old. I always remember asking myself that question when I left. Why did all that stuff look new?"
The site had a lot of denial mixed in with the debate. This man, however, was clearly troubled and in the context of the site it was particularly worrying that the work at Dachau had provoked such doubts. Are the wider and more important aims of Holocaust education served by people questioning the integrity of Auschwitz and the other camps? Prof Bartoszewski argues that, "If we allow Auschwitz-Birkenau to disappear from the face of the Earth, we might just be opening a way for a similar evil to return." I suppose my main point is that 'similar evil' has returned many times since the Holocaust despite the existence of the site.
The camp was the implement of death. Like a gun or a knife. It did not cause the deaths. The deaths were the logical conclusion of a process of dehumanisation. This process was described by Hannah Arendt, the German Jewish philosopher, in her work 'The Human Condition.' She argued that the modern world alienated people from one another because life had become a private experience driven by individual consumption. Viktor Frankl, an Auschwitz survivor, sums up the argument neatly, "I am absolutely convinced that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some Ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in the lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers." So what is the lesson?
 |
Tourists at Auschwitz |
In 1966, Theodor W. Adorno, one of the most important philosophers and social critics in Germany after World War II, proposed his theory of "Education after Auschwitz without Auschwitz.' Central to his theory is that the curriculum should not contain 'any detailed descriptions of the most heinous atrocities'. His research demonstrated that excessive attention to extreme cruelty made small-scale cruelty seem not that bad. He also promoted the idea that children be taught that everyone plays the role of bystander, victim and perpetrator at some point in their lives. This would teach them the mechanisms that lead to different types of behaviour. Finally, by not focusing attention on the Holocaust the curriculum allows children to develop sympathy for all victims not specifically Holocaust victims.
Adorno recognised that the lesson of the Holocaust was that humans need to feel empathy - so they can identify with other people in other situations and they also need to be confident autonomous beings - achieved by promoting the ability to: reflect, contemplate, make one’s own decisions and not automatically go along with the crowd (non-conformity).
I think that it is a mistake to focus on Auschwitz. Ultimately, the Auschwitz debate has already been won and I suspect won by groups with more personal interest in the preservation of the camp than I can hope to understand. However, I do not believe that maintaining Auschwitz beyond the death of the last survivor serves any purpose. The true lesson of the Holocaust, as subsequent genocides have shown, is that we must fight the promotion and acceptance of dehumanising philosophies. In this fight, ideas, not symbols, are our greatest enemy and our greatest ally.
I think looking in from the outside at a decaying camp would somehow enable more reflection. I agree that a "tourist attraction" just isn't fitting.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brunette Bimbo that somehow the decaying remains would seem more appropriate, but as someone who also grew up knowing the history it may be that it is so ingrained in me that I would not need a fully preserved camp to remember it by. Many children & younger adults may need something more concrete to remind them.
ReplyDeletePhysical reminders are very important and they help people visualise the unimaginable.But either way, the ones to be consulted are the Jewish people. No matter how much you know about the history, being a gentile removes (to my mind)any right to comment on the issue. The Yad Vashem does a brilliant job of keeping the memories of the Holocaust alive. The danger of putting all your eggs in one basket though is obvious, especially when Israel is under constant threat of total annihilation by certain countries.
ReplyDeleteThere are plenty of other ways to 'visualise' what went on without visiting Auschwitz. Do you think the people in the photos are 'visualising the unimagineable?' How do you respond to the Jewish survivors who want the camp sealed?
ReplyDeleteI'm also sure other groups that were killed in the camps would disagree with you on the right to comment and since the argument for it being kept open is as a global symbol I think that opens the debate to comment from everyone, even gentiles.
Having lost family in the Holocaust, and as a Holocaust researcher and published author, I believe that we must preserve every artifact of physical evidence. This includes concentration camps, death camps, crumbling gas chambers and crematoria. It should also include railroad cattle cars that transported millions of Jews to slavery and death. Most visitors to the United States Holocaust Museum are profoundly affected by viewing artifacts, including piles of thousands of shoes, eyeglasses, gold taken from teeth removed from dead Jews and thousands of pictures.
ReplyDeleteThe Holocaust remains the most egregious genocide ever committed against a religious group. The roots of the Holocaust are anti-Semitism. This form of bigotry has been taught from parents to children for more than two thousand years, from the Middle East to Europe and then beyond to the rest of the world. Education might be the only way to stop anti-Semitism, which remains endemic in many cultures. Thus, protecting the physical evidence has a place in efforts to reduce anti-Semitism.
Virtually every History PhD in the free world will stake his or her career on known Holocaust facts. Despite this, Holocaust deniers ply their mendacious poison everywhere, especially with young people on the Internet. We must tell the true story of the perpetrators of genocide, revealing the terror, humiliation and degradation resulting from such blind loathing and prejudice. We must disclose the cruelty and horror of genocide to combat the deniers’ virulent and inaccurate historical revision. By doing this, we protect vulnerable future generations from making the same mistakes.
Whenever we stand up to those who deny or minimize genocide we send a critical message to the world. As we continue to live in an age of genocide and ethnic cleansing, we must repel the broken ethics of our ancestors, or risk a dreadful repeat of past transgressions. A world that continues to allow genocide requires ethical remediation. We must show the world that religious, racial, ethnic and gender persecution is wrong; and that tolerance is our progeny's only hope. Only through such efforts can we reveal the true horror of genocide and promote the triumphant spirit of humankind.
Charles Weinblatt
Author, Jacob’s Courage
http://jacobscourage.wordpress.com/
As far as I know anti-Semitism is the only racism that has it's own name! It's origins go back thousands of years and it should be studied in it's entirety, not just the chapter that includes Nazi Germany. The other groups who suffered in the camps are just not in the same league as the Jewish people nor did they suffer in such huge numbers. If I am entiled to an opinion (as Joe thinks) then I am with Charles on this, every little bit must be preserved. I can understand the survivor view of wanting to seal it, because for them it is a raw subject, but on the whole I think most Jewish people would be for the preservation of the camps. Also, I think it is important that people in the area have a physical reminder of what happened there.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your post Charles. I agree with much of what you say but would be interested in your opinion on some of the specific issues I raised.
ReplyDeleteYou explain that anti-semitism is endemic in many cultures. Do you think having the camps open to visitors has reduced anti-semitism?
How do you preserve 'crumbling gas chambers so they preserve there integrity as historical artifacts?
I think you can tell the history and show evidence without having access to the camps. What do you think about a huge tourism industry being built around people visiting the camps? What do you think of the behaviour of the visitors in the photos? The camps could be sealed and still be physical evidence.
Clearly anti-semitism is central to the Holocaust but what made Germany take the step from anti-semitism to the industrialised program of murder that was the 'final solution?' Simply calling it anti-semitism which as you say had existed for 2000 yrs doesn't explain the leap. Also if the Holocaust has global resonance it is surely important to draw lessons about broader intolerance.
I am deeply suspicious of any academic who uses a phrase like 'the most egregious genocide ever committed against a religious group'. The most? How do you make the comparison and why?
Finally you begin by saying that you lost family in the Holocaust. Clearly that is an important piece of information for us to know. I am interested what qualities you think that that brings to your arguments?
Thank you
Thanks
Teresa. Not in the same league? The lowest estimates suggest that 5-600,000 Roma died in the camps. The highest estimates are 1.5 million, how many needed to die to get 'into the same league'?
ReplyDeleteMore Jewish people were killed, because there was a larger Jewish population, however, the intent was the same. To wipe them out.
Also, I admire your ability to speak on behalf of 'most Jewish people'. It is rare for Catholics to have that authority.
Joe's thoughtful blog acknowledges feelings of discomfort at the risk of "dumbing down" the history of the holocaust. It is impossible to discuss the subject without causing discomfort at the very least.
ReplyDeleteMost people do not derive their knowledge and information from books. The favoured source is by personal experience or word of mouth by people they know and trust, secondarily by television. We should not underestimate the personal experience of visiting the site. Neither should we overestimate the wisdom that reading books brings - deniers can be very well read.
I would preserve it, if it were my choice.
What made them take the step into the final solution was two major factors. The huge numbers of Jews in the new territories they conquered (Poland, Russia) and the technological ability to murder in numbers previously unknown. The hate was there and the intention, but they came up with the invention and method.
ReplyDeleteI don't pronounce my opinion as a Catholic but a student of Judaism. When I taught RE I had devised a syllabus for yr 9 where they studied racism through Judaism, starting with Moses and the Pharaoh who tried to wipe them out and finishing with the Holocaust and the Middle Eastern situation. I know the pictures above on face value are insulting to the memory of the victims but people engage with this sort of thing differently. You can't say their experience is worthless because they are taking photos!
ReplyDeleteAnd no Joe, not in the same league! Never was the propaganda machine given over to Gypsies as it was to Jews. They were not seen as important, just another inferior race, never the systematic vilification Jews faced. Also, as a group of people they do not have a collective memory of persecution going back millennia.
Teresa, are you suggesting that the only reason that the Germans hadn't slaughtered the Jews in their country earlier were technological reasons? I hadn't noticed that pre-1939 history was absent of mass slaughter. Something changed to turn the general anti-semitism of Central Europe into something much more horrific. Clearly, the Nazis happened, but that doesn't explain why were so many people bought into the horrific level of racism.
ReplyDeleteThe marriage of Nazi ideology and the means by which to wipe out. Those were the main drives. Of course the financial troubles in Germany and loosing the 1st meant that they were gagging for a scape goat (an ancient Jewish custom) to blame it all on. But they already hated them.
ReplyDeleteAnyway Joe, to turn the tables, how do you think that grassing the camps over would actually help anti-Semitism or any other type of genocide??? That would be another piece of evidence down the pan. That is exactly what the Nazies did when they knew that the war was lost. They actually flatened some of the camps and tried to wipe out the evidence. What say you?
ReplyDeleteI couldn't much read past Bartoszewski's views, because he, and Charles above, are spot on and Jan Van Pelt (who is too close to it all) is wrong. Worries about where to eat the sandwiches and whether Auschwitz looks new, or museum like or "replacement" are irrelevant bullshit afforded by years of the sort of democratic freedom none of the victims latterly enjoyed. The point about keeping Auschwitz, in almost any form, is that it keeps people remembering, talking, thinking and that is the value of its continued existence, however changed or hackneyed its appearance. It is imperative that the lessons of history are not lost. It bears warning and is invaluable for that alone and its preventative value makes the costs involved look like peanuts. Long live Auschwitz!
ReplyDeleteWell said Tara!
ReplyDeleteTara,
ReplyDeleteBartoszewski and Charles both have peronal experience, Jan Van Pelt does not. Not sure why he is too close to it all? However, he does cite the experience of 'survivors' who disagree with the first two witnesses. So I'm really not sure how you can reach a conclusion about that.
Remembering the Holocaust is, of course, important and no point do I suggest we shouldn't but as the American soldier demonstrates camps that look 'new' bring the history into doubt, is that 'irrelevant bullshit?'
Also the site is essentially a mass grave - do you think the visitors in the photos are showing respect?
I'm intrigued what you think the lessons of history are? To simply believe it is that people were exterminated in the gas chambers is to over-simplify what the Holocaust believed. Both Jewish and German liberal academics working to build a democracy after the war recognised this fact. This was not a debate that took place in the context of years of democratic freedom. The lessons, however, have been forgotten.
If you preserve the machinery of the outcome of dehumanising people without addressing how that process took place then the millions of visitors to the camps have no context, it becomes a tasteless and morbid form of tourism.
The Holocaust is an emotive subject but its education needs a debate that is not driven by simplistic and emotional responses.
I've never visited Auschwitz, so I "googled" it and took a look and urge readers to do likewise. The images on google maps are a collection of tourist shots which I feel paint a worrying picture of sorts. In hardly any of the images could I find memorials to those who died in the camp, the odd wreath but nothing to note. My worry is that mankind in general seems to be obsessed with the macabre. People are keenly interested in serial killers, murderers etc... Is there a danger that we end up catering to this by keeping Auschwitz open? The camp is both a mass grave and the tool by which millions died. How would the family's of Shipman's / Bundy's victims feel if local authorities decided to convert various their respective former residencies into museums complete with the tools with which their victims were killed? I'm not attempting to compare the crimes of the Nazi's with Shipman or Bundy before people leap in response. My immediate thoughts were of course we should keep the camp open as a memorial but now I find myself siding with Van Pelt. Yes shut the gates and let the camp decay BUT all around the camp can we have graves for those who died. If you have ever visited the Normandy Cemeteries you will know the impact that you get when viewing the graves of the soldiers. I am still drawn to tears by the memory today. You cannot visit the site and not be hit by the massive loss of life. This is exactly what I felt was missing in the "tourist photos" of Auschwitz. By all means keep a central museum next to the closed camp that tells the horrific story and shows the full atrocities suffered in the camp, but make visitors to this museum walk past row upon row upon row of the millions of graves lest they forget the sheer volume of said atrocity.
ReplyDeleteAvocado,
ReplyDeletefor once I agree with you. I found the images very worrying. I had come to similar conclusions as you.
The legislation governing the compulsory teaching of the Holocaust for KS3, recognises that it is important for the contribution that it can make to the understanding of essential aspects of our own society and the protection of that democracy: It describes the broader aims as being:
ReplyDelete'to understand the rights and responsibilities underpinning a democratic society, with particular reference to the European Convention on Human Rights, be aware of the rights concerning freedom of speech and freedom from arbitary arres and also undertsand the meaning of terms such as prejudice, xenophobia, discrimination and pluralism.'
If the site was left to it's own devices it would be dust in a hand full of generations. So the buildings will have to have money spent on them to survive. We spend so much money in this country preserving every little bit of history, Tudor houses, factories, train stations...stuff which I often find interresting but intrnationally irrelevant! As for graves, it would be hard because the numbers are often a calculation rather than a list of names. So many communities were so thouroughly wiped out that no one survived to witness who the rest were.
ReplyDeleteI've never been and I am not sure if I can! But I want it to be there, available.
You are still not addressing how this work can be done. As the US soldier demonstrates the work can actually add fuel to the deniers case, that is the last thing we want isn't it?
ReplyDeleteThe Globe in London is a remarkablely accurate reproduction of a Tudor theatre but it is not a Tudor theatre. At what point would Auschwitz become a reproduction on the site?
ps the Globe is on the site of the original theatre.
ReplyDeleteI know what you mean and it is hard to strike a balance. Everyone goes on about features in their houses but I don't know of anyone who has gone back to having an outside toilet and they love sash windows but everyone has running hot and cold water. But if people are soooo stupid as to think the Globe was built yesterday and even dumber to make the leap that Shakespear never existed since the theatre looks so new.....well then there is little we can do for them! It is one piece of evidence, not the whole picture. People can't deny the existence of the Holocaust because of an unsymathetic refurbishment!
ReplyDeleteWhat this debate shows is that there are opposing views from people who have experience of Auschwitz first hand, people who's parents suffered these atrocities, jews, non-jews - but the one thing all agree on is that it must not be allowed to happen again. Unfortunately I do not think any sort of memorial will stop these things happening to a larger or smaller degree. We have had similar in the Balkans, Rwanda and many other conflicts around the world based on either religion, race, ethnicity etc. In Rwanda it is estimated that 800,000 died in 100 days - many simply hacked to death. If the camp could be used as a symbol of suffering and the evil that exists in humanity and to inspire others to oppose such atrocities then it will be worth the money. If it is just a tourist attraction then I believe the money could be spent in better ways, although I don't know how.
ReplyDeleteThere is far too much self-righteousness thinly veiled as "academia" above for my liking. Reading the response to my outburst is very entertaining. This is the trouble with "academics", they can't see the woods for their sanctimony. I can't be bothered to argue back, sorry. It seems like some minds are firmly made up and I wonder why therefore they bothered asking for other views in the first place when they don't really question their own at all.
ReplyDeleteA good thing on this blog would be a link so that we are email alerted when responses are received to comments, as in Facebook. I am sure this exists on this blog but I don't take part as much as I would sometimes like because to do so I have to come back in to check the latest. Please someone tell me an easy way to receive updates? What do I click on below?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf I sound self-righteous then I am sorry. I suppose the nature of publishing anything is to sound self-righteous to those who disagree with you.
ReplyDeleteI am looking at a very important subject and trying to engage in a discussion. Unfortunately you are not on the mailing list but I kept this discussion open because I think it is very complex and in my email I said I don't know what the answer is. I have some problems with the current solution and would like to hear other views. I have explained my problems and would like to have someone explain why I should not be concerned with the current situation. I don't think anyone has realy addressed those points but I really am willing to be persuaded.
As you can see from other comments there are a range of views.
As for 'thinly veiled as academia'- all I can say is that my own comments are as 'academic' as I can sustain given my background and I am willing to have them shot down. That is why I proposed questions during the piece. Also that is the nature of my blog
I deliberately used Arendt and Adorno because they are two of the foremost thinkers of the 20th Century. It is a short piece and so can't fully explain their arguments but if you look at the quote in the comments about KS3 then you can see that Adorno's influence is still evident and vital to the debate.
Academics can see the 'wood for their sanctimony' and their influence extends through to the present day whether you like it or not. These people were working in post-war Germany for goodness sake, can you imagine how much scrutiny their work came under?
I am willing to engage in a debate, you 'can't be bothered.' What you are saying is that I should submit to your assertions without debate.
Tara, you're right about the update thing. It is not obviously available as far as I can see amongst the blogspot tools but, co-incidently, I was discussing this issue with someone tonight. I hope a solution can be found.
ReplyDeleteTeresa, I think that, unfortunately, some people and groups can deny the Holocaust because of an 'unsympathetic refurbishment'
ReplyDeleteJust wanted to say that the deleted comment was a rather error strewn version of the reply to Tara above. Christmas party night I'm afraid.
ReplyDeleteI'd rather an unsympathetic refurbishment than for the site to slowly vanish. Realy, since none of us have been, it is hard to even comment in an informed way. I can imagine that the sheer scale of the place must be a lesson in itself. Although I am not blaming the current population, I feel it is important that a physical reminder of events remains in the locality. My "perfect" scenario would be for everything (all the evidence) that exists in the Yad Vashem to be replicated in Poland in order to make safer, so if Iran's threats of blowing up Israel ever materialise, then the evidence will be safe. What we need is a field trip and to be honest this blog has inspired me to go and see for myself. So for that, I thank you. Because academic debate on it's own is pointless!
ReplyDeleteAnd Joe, 03:54?????? Good God man! Go to bed!
How do you 'replicate the evidence' without destroying its veracity? Not sure I understand your argument.
ReplyDeleteThe point I have been trying to make is that visiting the site does not help to explain why it happened and that, surely, is the vital lesson to be drawn from this event.
The point of Adorno's work is not a 'pointless' academic debate, its purpose was extremely pratical and not the banal 'it must not happen again' Holocaust education that seems to be common.
Another lesson from the Nazi's must be the importance of debate. The Nazi's understood the importance of academic debate. They justified their ideology through the work of historians and philosophers and knew they had to stamp out any academic discussion that questioned them. That is why so many university lecturers also ended up in camps. Books were burnt remember.
Teresa,
ReplyDeleteI just came across your comment about gypsies. Frankly, I am astonished that you can suggest that they don't have 'collective memory of persecution'. I think the phrases you use, 'not in the same league' and 'just another inferior race' are rather sinister.
Don't you realise that the Holocaust was a result of the Nazi's not valuing all lives equally, phrases like that suggest that the Jewish deaths carry a greater weight than other deaths. The difference in Nazi approaches to different groups was logistical, the outcomes are equally tragic. It's not simply a numbers game.
Yes that facility would be a great enhancement and allow many to reply without having to check in randomly, something I don't find enough time to do.
ReplyDeleteAnd I wasn't referring to any of the quoted (and relevant) academics Joe but I think I'd better leave it there! Hot topic indeed!
Joe, "sinister" and "Teresa" appearing in the same sentence is clearly an oxymoron!
ReplyDeleteYou are nit picking at my comments because I am not agreeing with you, me thinks.
Of course Gypsies have a collective memory of persecution, it just does not go back 5 thousand years ( the Jewish calendar is currently at the year 5771, I think). Also, being nomadic in nature, their History of persecution is not as well recorded as the Jewish story. When I say "just another inferior race" I mean in the eyes of the Nazis, NOT mine! Nazi beliefs were far more detailed against Jews, because they were a lot more influential in German society. So, they were blamed for far more than the Gypsies could ever have been accused of.
I hope someone would come to my defence! Or does everybody now think I'm racist against Gypsies?????
"To bait fish withal It will feed nothing else,
ReplyDeleteit will feed my revenge. He hath disgraced me, and hindered
me half a million, laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains,
scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends,
heated mine enemies. And what's his reason? I am a
Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands,
organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed
with the same food, hurt with the same weapons,
subject to the same diseases, healed by the same
means, warmed and cooled by the same winter
and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we
not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you
poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall
we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we
will resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong
a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If
a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance
be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you
teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard
but I will better the instruction."
The Merchant of Venice, William Shakespeare
Act 3, Scene 1, lines 55-76
Teresa,
ReplyDeletethanks for clarifying your comment. I wasn't suggesting you were a rascist but I really object to your repeated suggestion that the Jewish victims are somehow more deserving than other groups.
Nit-picking because you don't agree with me? I am really am not that petty but I think your comments are ambiguous and flawed. Comments should come under the same scrutiny as the original post. I think that is a sign I take your argument seriously. However, I don't find it persuasive.
Thanks for commenting and engaging in the debate on this and other subjects.
Moomoo,
ReplyDeleteIn the context of the debate, that quote could be interpreted in a number of ways. Please clarify.
Sorry if I am being a bit slow.
Joe
It is meant to be ambiguous. 1. I like it 2. It is a beautifully put comment on any racism 3. It is telling that 500 yrs ago Shakespeare would use a Jew to deliver his message against racism. 4. It is foretelling, because it speaks of the revenge of the Jews, which in more recent years has been unleashed upon the Palestinian people. 5. It also tells us that "actions have concequences" 6. I'm not clever enough to make my own point so here is one I found earlier 7. Did I mention that I like it?
ReplyDeletemore deserving individually, no, since as you point out we are all worth the same. More deserving because of the sheer number of victims, yes. Also, although many groups have faced prejudice, I am not aware of another group who have genocide so many times in their history.
ReplyDeleteMoomoo, thought it wasworth checking.
ReplyDeleteTeresa, I just don't buy the idea that it makes them more deserving than the other groups. The ultimate aim of the Nazis was the same, whatever the numbers. It is the same crime.
ReplyDeleteI apologise for returning to the point. The Nazis had complicated ideology in place against the Jews. Maybe they had posters, books and documentaries for the Gypsies too, but I've never seen any. My understanding of their view is that non Arian races were inferior but Jews were also evil, controling, usurers who wanted to take over the world and who were destroying Germany from within. I don't know, for the life of me what is worse... being stamped on as a worthless ant or being hated and hunted as evil vermin. Take your pick. On a slightly lighter note, two old Jewish men are sitting on a bench in Central Park, one is reading the New York times, the other an anti-Semitic leaflet. The first says "why are you reading that rubbish?" The second responds "the Times is full of bad news, according to this leaflet, we own everything, we control everything..."
ReplyDeleteIronically, initially Gypsies were regarded as Aryan by the Nazis but that did not save them from a similar process of vilification and dehumanisation. Himmler did suggest 'saving' two tribes of Gypsies but proposed that most of those saved should be sterilised. Himmler didn't get his way on that issue. Gypsies were stripped of citizenship and rights through the Nuremburg Laws at the same time as Jews in 1935. A special camp was set up at Auschwitz where they suffered the same fate as the Jews.
ReplyDeleteThe main differences seem to be that Jews were extremely numerous and in many cases rich and powerful people with a position in society. The propaganda had to be more profound because of their position in mainstream society. 'Evil' is an off-shoot of this propaganda. The gypsies were already marginalised and poor, and thus an easier target.
Why make a decision about what is worse? It is a futile argument.
Thank you for the above. Indeed it is futile, on that we can agree. This has clearly been the best posting so far and it proves one thing, we have not forgotten..... yet!
ReplyDeleteMaybe it is time to stop thinking of the Jewish Holocaust as special and anti-Semitism as special.
ReplyDeleteAtrocities are atrocities and racism and xenophobia are racism and xenophobia.
To me it is becoming increasingly clear that the idea that there is a special category of hatred aimed towards Jews which is somehow inherent to the gentile psyche is just a smokescreen used to justify the creation of the state of Israel and obscure criticism of Israeli atrocities and racism.
Is Auschwitz going to be saved for the benefit of educating humanity? It doesn't seem to be working.
In fact young Israelis going on a pre-conscription indoctrination holiday to Poland don't seem too reluctant to become perpetrators of racist violence shortly after their planes touch down at Ben Gurion.
I would vote to let the place decay.
Clearly, you have chosen to "side" with the Palestinias. I left playground politics when I left the playground! I am not going to be forced to side with anyone. Anti-Semitism is special and Jewish history can prove this. Only a person ignorant of Jewish history could possibly say that what they have faced over the centuries is not "special". I don't aprove of what is happening to Palestinian people but when an Israeli commits violence towards a Palestinan it is a matter of survival not racism. Blame the Israelis if you must but where was the Muslim world when the Palestinians needed them? Only the Egyptians went to war and in the end they had to make peace with Israel. The Saoudis have the money and influence and yet they stand by watching the tragety unfold while they sell out to the USA. What the hell is their excuse? Racism? NO just bloody greed and an undeserved sense of superiority!
ReplyDeleteSo what are you saying Opressed Nation? The camp should deteriorate because Israelis have been bad? So you want the Holocaust to be forgotten? Well Joe was looking for sinister earlier on..... I think we've now found it.
ReplyDeleteMuch as I shouldn't speak for others it appears that Oppressed Nation is making the point that if it doesn't have a sobering effect on Israeli's then how can it have any effect on non jews - if that were the case then yes let it fade with dignity.
ReplyDeleteMillions are spent every year on preserving, restoring and rebuilding every little Tudor crap house and every little Georgian shed and who gives a poop in the end. And you are telling me that Auschwitz should be left to rot? I've tried to argue rationally but I've run out of patience. Sod the lessons in racism and xenophobia. This is part of European history and very recent European history. My dad fought in that war and my mum suffered malnutrition because of it. I'm not ready to let go and I don't think Poland or Germany should let go yet either. Maybe in a thousand years other, maybe worse things might happen and the Holocaust will be a vague, distant memory. But not now and not yet. The only argument I am willing to take seriously so far is Joe's point of sympathetic refurbishment, but I'd rather unsymathetic than not at all. The fact that the middle eastern problem has reared it's ugly head, shows how important the events which unfolded in Auschwitz still are!!! This is a place of relevance, here and now. If people can't draw wider lessons from the Holocaust, then at least let them learn where and how European Jews and others were murdered only 65 yrs ago.
ReplyDeleteTeresa,
ReplyDeletePlease don't misunderstand me, I have not made any point about sympathetic refrubishment! I don't think any refurbishment would be appropriate. This is not any ordinary site and should not be treated like the historical tourist sites around the UK and just to repeat myself again the point about not refurbishing is so that we don't throw doubt on the integrity of the site.
Also, unlike 'Nation of' - if I understand him correctly - I do not agree that the site should be allowed to decay because of Israel's behaviour, they are different arguments in my book.
However, I do agree that there is a strong political quality to the historical debate and in no way can you say Jewish history has 'proved' anti-semitism is a special case. Having worked with a lot of historians, I have never met any historian worth his salt who said that they have 'proved' anything. Historians make arguments. Any historiography on a subject demonstrates how interpretation evolves. Yet, ignoring outright deniers who are clearly wrong, it is incredibly difficult to criticise the orthodox interpretation of the Holocaust as a purely 'Jewish' event'.
In my opinion the focus on the Jewish experience of the Holocaust and the refusal of most Jewish historians to accept that other groups had the same experience under the Nazis is extremely political and underpins the debate in the Middle East and very importantly the extremely powerful Jewish lobby in the USA.
Despite your protestation, you may not have been 'forced' to side with anyone but you have shown yourself to be very much on one side on this debate.
OK then, please tell me of another people who have suffered the persecution Jews have faced for the length of time they have faced it. If you can even offer another candidate who comes close, I will gladly shut up. If deniers are so totally wrong as you say, why give them the time of day? Why decide the future of the site based on a bunch of misinformed antisemites? The only thing this debate has convinced me of is that I must visit for myself. I am currently looking at hotels.
ReplyDeleteAnd please don't tell what I believe on the Palestinian issue! Do a post on that and you will find out!
The debate is on restoring the camp, not the Palestinian issue. Do a post on it and you will find out what I believe, but please don't tell me what my own opinions are.
ReplyDeleteAnti-Semitism is unique in it's length and ferocity. Suggest please another nation who have suffered more.
Sorry to repeat myself, I thought my penultimate comment had not appeared. Doh!
ReplyDeleteTeresa,
ReplyDeleteAll groups who have suffered persecution have unique histories. Should we take the history of the African slave trade, Native Americans, Australian Aborigines less seriously than Jewish suffering. It's not a pissing competition of suffering!
Try reading Norman Finkelstein's book 'reflections on Jewish suffering' about the Holocaust industry. He is a well-respected historian and you might not change your view but he offers a very different perspective on the subject.
Also, the misinformed anti-semites are the ones you do have to worry about, not the rest of us. Do the Nazis ring a bell?
It is a competition, I am trying to say there is something unique about Jewish suffering. And judging by the examples you give, clearly I am right!
ReplyDeleteUnlike the rather numerous Nazis, how many of these doubters are there? I just think your argument is feeble, "let an important piece of evidence and an important place of pilgrimage and reflection turn to dust because a hand full of people (who have already made their mind up about something)might read it the wrong way! And what about reminders of the events in the area?
Pseudointellectual arguments won't cover up the fact that neglecting the site will eventually play into the hands of the anti-Semites and doubters and will take away from the rest of us an important place to visit.
Hi Teresa,
ReplyDeleteThe Jewish people have suffered throughout history in many different contexts. It is your choice whether or not to see a single narrative thread to this since the time of Egypt.
You could see that minorities, whomever they are, sadly tend to be persecuted. Jews have always been a minority group, and they have suffered various levels of persecution but it is no different to other minorities and their persecution.
Don't forget that, at times, Jews have also enjoyed being favoured minorities and had the benefit of cosying up to the rulers of their countries.
I didn't mean to hijack the discussion but I feel that the world's willingness to support the restoration is related to Zionist's interests. I think there is a non-trivial relationship between thinking that Jewish suffering is unique and thinking that Palestinian suffering is tolerable. For me, this is part of a single narrative whereas the persecution of Israelites by Babylonians or Jews by the Spanish or Kossacks is not.
As I said, it clearly hasn't made any difference to Israelis (watch the brilliant documentary "Defamation" for some insight - young Israelis on their way to Auschwitz don't have a problem with when to have their sandwiches, it's on the bus whilst watching the same Holocaust footage they have been force-fed since early childhood) to be confronted with so much Holocaust information. Maybe it has even desensitised them to the suffering of others. The idea of Jewish suffering's uniqueness helps to blind people to Jewish-Israeli barbarism.
It occurs to me that the Americans and British don't seem to have hesitated in killing millions of people since WW2 either (can you think of an example of anyone who has refrained from violence due to hearing about the atrocities of WW2?). Has giving the Jewish Holocaust a premium place in history has benefited humankind?
By the by, I remember when I visited Dachau I felt rather sorry for the residents of the town who were stuck with such a reminder of the sins of their forebears. Maybe it's enough to leave a wild meadow and a plaque rather than promoting macabre tourism.
And yet the residents of Dachau are pretty Jew free? And many of them will be making a tidy living from the tourism? Yes... I'm sure they are gutted!
ReplyDeleteI am not "blinded" to Israeli barbarism but maybe you are blinded to what a complete mess the surrounding Arab nations have made of every effort towards a peace process. And blinded to who is truly behind Israeli dominance in the region. Or do you think they can afford their modern army by selling Jaffa oranges?
The Israeli people are puppets in a much larger play. The fact that Jews were even taken back to the Middle East is proof of anti-Semitism. They were not wanted in Europe! And they came in really handy for USA and Britain, to cause instability in a region which otherwise might have united against foreign interrests.
As for me reading events as one narrative. Tell me if YOU were Jewish, how would you read them? What kind of person would sit there thinking "well the Egyptians had a go, but that was ages ago, of course the Babylonians really knocked us for six but it all turned out well in the end, and of course the Romans very nearly wiped us out but we made it, and those Christians gave us what for but only for a couple of thousand years and it was only on and off, mind you there was that Catholic bloke from Austria with the stupid moustache, but he had nothing to do with all the others"
PLEASE! Clearly Jews have become a little paranoid and I for one, am sharing their paranoia, everyone does seem to be out to get them. The only reason they are getting away with atrocities against the Palestinians (although they think they are winning) is because they are serving a purpose for US interrests.
@Teresa
ReplyDelete> "Tell me if YOU were Jewish, how would you read them?"
I am.
I think the idea that racism and xenophobia against Jews is somehow different is absurd. The idea that there is a common phenomenon linking Egyptian racism (of 2500 years ago) to Spanish racism of the Inquisition and German racism of the early 20th century, beyond the unfortunate human tendency for racism against anyone different is absurd.
Beyond that, I would only be repeating myself.
I don't know how I would read them, I am not Jewish. But I was brought up in a country where the teaching of history was used to forge an national identity and I remember listening to the Greek national anthem in primary school and getting goose bumps, I am much better now thank you! I no longer feel proud when I look at the Acropolis, I see no continuity between it's makers and myself. But I have lived in a country where random events, spread over thousands of years have been used to create one consiousness and one communal identity and a clearly undeserved sense of achievement. I say that because so many of my compatriots have been sooooo busy bragging about the achievements of ancient anscestors they have failed to notice how they have raped the shit out of modern Greece and turned it into a place I am as likely to go and live in as Mars.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that racism against Jews is different, and I take that point. I just think that these events have forged a certain attitude, even more in Israel, where people (both Jew and Arab) are living in a constant atmosphere of hostility and immanent danger. I hope my Greek origins go some way towards explaining my poor spelling.
By the way, why did you go to Dachau? I don't ask in smarmy way, I am geniounly interrested to know what motivated you to go.
Hi Opressed Nation,
ReplyDeleteI tried to find Defamation and failed! Can you post a link where I can watch it online? I could only find previews not the whole thing.
Thank you
Teresa,
ReplyDeleteYou write how you are no longer proud of the version of Greek history that has been used in Greece to forge a national identity but fail to notice that much of the version of Jewish history you defend is Israel doing the same thing.
Jewish historians (and it noticeably is Jewish historians - why are others not reaching the same conclusions - these are liberal academics not racists) make a case that if the 'Jewish Holocaust' was a unique event in history and the suffereing of the Jews is somehow special (as you believe) then then there is a strong argument for a Jewish state and for them to be able to take actions in its defence that would not be tolerated by anyone else.
It is a form of nationalism and this 'history' is used to condone some dreadful actions by some Jews against other people. In the context of this debate being against nationalist policies and actions is important as being against racism.
All events in History are unique, there might be similarities or trends but all events are unique. I have found the documentary and I'm half way through it. I honestly hope that my willingness and effort to empathise with Jewish people is not being confused with the Israli propaganda machine. As I said I can see through that type of bull.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think you have proved you can't see through that 'type of bull'. I don't doubt your desire to empathise but unfortunately you have bought into a strong seam of Zionist propaganda. You are doing their work for them.
ReplyDeleteNo I have not! I am not a Zionist. I don't think they should even be in the Middle East, if for no other reason, the fact they are not safe there. And because I would like access to that part of the world (as a Christian pilgrim) but I won't venture because of fear of violence etc. So I'm not an anti-Semite but I'm not a Zionist either. I've just finished watching Defamation, and it was very good. For me, best quote was made by a Rabbi. "The way to be Jewish is to practice Judaism". And truly, a religious person can find healing in their faith and can find freedom from the pain and fear caused by other people's violence. It is obvious from that documentary that many Israelies have lost their way and are living in a bubble of truth invented for them and paid for by American money (as I always suspected, even before watching the doc.)
ReplyDeleteTo me, Judaism is still the most fascinating and influential religion I have studied. And I am in awe of their contribution to our way of thinking. They have given us the weekend (an even better invention than fire and the wheel), the idea of monotheism, the first aniconic religion the world has ever seen and more recently, I believe, Einstein, Freud and Marx were also of the Jewish tradition.
It's a shame that such a great nation has been driven to extremes because of the way they think the world is against them.
May I add to the original point about visiting camps. The young Isrealies visiting seemed to be shaken by the experience but they were really engaged. It's a great shame though that it was all delivered in such a "Jewish" context and more general issues of racism and intolerance were not really touched upon. But the place itself had quite an impact. So I still think it should be preserved. Non Isrealie youths visiting as part of an anti racist curriculum, should find it profound.
The only thing I don't like about the Jewish lobby is the fact that they have convinced people that Sarah Jessica Parker is pretty and deserves to be on the big screen even though she looks like a foot!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@Teresa
ReplyDeleteGlad you tracked down Defamation. It is good.
I went to Dachau because I was touring Europe and my friends decided to go. It was a very strange experience thinking of what happened there whilst looking at all these freshly whitewashed buildings and fat Americans walking around with their cameras and bright shirts. It felt too Monty Python. I had to laugh.
I think it must have been a significant moment in the breaking of my Zionist indoctrination although many years would pass before I stopped parroting Israeli propaganda at anyone who criticised "us."
Whether you like it or not you arguments do support Zionism. That 'fascinating' view oj Jewish history could still be influenced by Zionist thinkers. Come on, it's not that big a leap. History is not a single narrative, all history is open to interpretation, just as there are many ways to practice Judiasm or Catholicism. (Your favourite quote is pretty simplistic)
ReplyDeleteI am a pretty simple girl after all Joe, sorry to dissappoint.
ReplyDeleteDear Oppressed Nation, thank you for sharing! Your opinions matter a lot to me since they have come out of personal journey and thinking for yourself. It is hard for a simplistic gentile like myself (as Joe so kindly pointed out! Thanks mate!) to know where and how to strike a balance. If my views are accidentally Zionist (not my intention) I will endeavour to modify them.
Somewhere between the overoptimistic scholar who lost his job and the completly paranoid beliefs of those misinformed young Israelis, lies the truth.
The most worrying attitudes had to be those of the African American bunch who started going on about the Protocol etc. They were clearly not University graduates and yet they knew about it and the fact that it is meant to be fake. I had to go to Uni to find out about that and I was studying religion!
If i am not mistaken that same publication is a number one seller in some Arab countries.
In all, I am glad that an increasing number of Jews are moving forward from the Holocaust and are getting over the trauma and freeing themselves from the hate it must have caused.
The maker of the film is clearly what Isreael needs more of and hopefully he will do more work and influence more people.
As for the war mongering American Jews, well... what can I say. They think they are Jews first and Americans second but it's obvious which is the greatest influence.
Thanks again Oppressed Nation
and please don't be judgemental about fat people, it can happen quite easily!
Teresa,
ReplyDeletejust think what you are saying. I agree with 'Nation of' on most of what he has said but the Zionists also 'think for themselves' and have personal experience', it is just that their conclusions are self-interested and self-serving, from my point of view.
People with 'personal experience' can be just as wrong as those without. Most of us have to make up our minds, thankfully, without personal experience. Or are you suggesting that only those who have personal experience can comment?
Surely education is about learning to explore a range of sources and then make up your mind. Which side you take can depend on your values, but from an academic perspective, I would argue that objectivity is key to drawing useful conclusions. Looking from a distance can provide that objectivity.
As an aside, the Irish-Americans also managed to maintain the IRA for many years. The rights and wrongs of that can wait for another post. I have Irish family, I am not sure whether that makes me particularly objective about the subject.
Wasn't this blog supposed to be about how we preserve important historical sites than the issues of zionism?
ReplyDeleteObviously Auschwitz can't become another piece of real estate, you know that joe!!
Anyway congratulations on your well flighted Swannesque delivery which has tempted all and sundry to belt the Jewish question into the grandstand..
Lazbot,
ReplyDeleteReal estate? No. I hope that my piece shows a profound respect for the site and the victims. Of course the Auschwitz site should be preserved - how? is a difficult question. I just think it should be sealed.
However Auschwitz plays a vital part in Holocaust education and that discussion leads, as various people have argued, to Zionism. History is not a story, it is usually a form of interpretation for political ends. Making people become critical readers of established 'history' is pretty much the point of this blog.
Thanks for your congratulations, fascinating and very emotional subject for many. I feel like I have gone ten rounds with a professional fighter.
Sorry Joe,
ReplyDeleteI was not looking for objectivity! I am not an academic or an Historian. I just want to achieve empathy with others and dialogue. Also I want to learn. The opinion of a Jewish person, who has visited a camp and who has come out of the other end of Zionist indoctrination, is of great interrest to me. I would however engage in discussion with pretty much anyone.
It also takes my mind off the intolerable boredom I face at home.
No view is more important than another, but some people put more effort in reaching a view, also they are in a better position to have an insightful view.
Teresa,
ReplyDeletewhat is the point of empathy without truth? Objectivity is the bedrock of truth.
Joe
Are you a Vulcan or human? There is no such thing as objectiviy, kid yourself if you must, everyone is influenced by their upbringing and by what they know (that is why education is so important). Everyone is peddling their angle. There are facts but the interpretation of those facts is pretty limitless.
ReplyDeleteEducation is important because it should provide individuals with the analytical skills to weed out the various threads of self-interest and personal baggage to find a 'more' objective truth - it is a process where the conclusions are being continually being refined as more information becomes available.
ReplyDeleteThe danger of your position is that no matter how well-meaning your empathy is - and it is absolutely vital when discussing or educating people about the Holocaust - as the post argued - if it is merely an emotional response without trying to discover the true context, then all of that well-meaning support can be used (as the documentary argues and 'Nation of''s experience shows) by Zionists to justify attrocities against other races.
Is that the legacy that you wish to see for Holocaust victims?
As I said I'm not an Historian. When I was an RE teacher my main aim was to create empathy for other peoples views. And believe me it is needed. So, what i am interrested in is views, feelings and beliefs. Little room for objective truth, the only thing I could hope for is inform my students' feeling and beliefs with facts. I hope Nation of is quietly glad that there are such over sympathetic gentiles out there that they are in danger of being "accused" of Zionism.
ReplyDeleteThe Jewish people and their history as well as their religion still hold a very special place in my heart. Don't forget I do follow the most famous Jew of them all!
The bottom line is that I do not support what is going on in Israel, however I would rather (if someone was to pigeon hole me) be confused with a Zionist than an anti-Semite!
If you ever hope to change a person's belief/opinion, you must get them to feel accepted and valued, not cornered and under attack with their beliefs belittled.
Joe,
ReplyDeleteI know most followers of the blog have moved on from the above topic. Better late than never though. I just wanted to thank you for touching on such a difficult topic and for taking such a level of criticism and ear bashing. I have found it challenging, informative and opinion shaping. So, thank you and well done!