Holocaust and Historiographical Issues

[Ben Kenobi]

LotM:

we seem to be talking past each other. I thought the original question was "was the nazi destruction of the Jews a unique genocide" NOT "was the destruction of the Jews uniquely genocide"

Sorry. I wanted to address Che's points on Cambodia.

As for the Holocaust being a unique genocide, if we can agree that unique in no way implies greater value than I think we can reach some sort of agreement.

Otherwise, I'm not really talking past you since unique can also mean 'unparalleled.'

However some genocides are more noteworthy to historians than others - and raise issues that others do not. Is that case with regard to the extermination of European Jewry - was it truely unique, or are we misled because of our western perspective.

That's an interesting thought, from my own field of study. There are issues that are raised by the Holocaust, unique events that I do agree with your analysis. I just don't think that any of the points you have listed qualify.

What sets the Holocaust apart is not the magnitude, more died in the Soviet Union. What sets the Holocaust apart is not the systematic destruction, nor the targets.
Assessing the nitty gritty, the hows and whys is where you get into the real uniqueness of the holocaust.

How did the Nazis strip Jews of their rights without incurring the wrath of the public? Why did not the people speak out against Hitler? Pol Pot never had a democracy to contend with, neither did the Rwandans. How were the modern scientific methods applied to killing Jews, and establishing the whole system of the work camps.

These are the real unique features of the holocaust.

[TCO]

Originally posted by MrFun

And what about homosexuals who were victims of the Holocaust in Nazi Germany?

Is this the wanting to be recognized as part of a victim class?

[TCO]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
[Q] Originally posted by Ben Kenobi








Assuming the CIA was wrong, most of the deaths came from starvation. The starvation was caused by people by lowered productivity, which occured when the US bombed the bejeezuz out of Cambodia in the early 1970s and Cambodea went from an grain exporting country to a grain importing one. This led to the instability which enabled the KR to topple Lon Nol (Sihanok having been overthrown by LN). Factor in the complete stupidity of cutting yourself off from the outside world and you have a great recipe for famine.

fatuous. But of course you live in a lefty conspiracy world. Little indy media weenie

[TCO]

Originally posted by MrFun
Ok -- thanks for your thoughts.

But I also thought about something else . . . .

To what extent did a number of Jews felt that they could only survive by helping administer the ghettos and concentration camps of Nazi Germany? Such as the kapos, for instance.
They were only deluding themselves by thinking they were indispenable in the eyes of the SS and other staff.


Also, nye brought up the basic perspective of Asians in regards to the Holocaust, which seems to make sense. An event always seems more important to the people involved, than those from the outside -- generally, speaking, I guess.
But what is also interesting is that Japan wants the world to focus on her World War II involvement as being victims of a nuclear holocaust, rather than remembering the crimes that Japan committed against the Chinese civilian population, as well as POWS of China, Great Britain, India, United States, and Australia.

I guess this brings up the question as to how does the process of identification based on victims and perpetrators affect human history?

Yeah, the Japs are worms on that issue. Had a friend who was getting **** when she was over there. Told here she should just say, "Remember Pearl Harbor!"

Go after us with a knife and we'll escalate and naplam your babies. So stay the **** dormant.

That and the picture of Macarthur with the Emperor!

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
What sets the Holocaust apart is not the magnitude, more died in the Soviet Union. What sets the Holocaust apart is not the systematic destruction, nor the targets.
Assessing the nitty gritty, the hows and whys is where you get into the real uniqueness of the holocaust.

How did the Nazis strip Jews of their rights without incurring the wrath of the public? Why did not the people speak out against Hitler? Pol Pot never had a democracy to contend with, neither did the Rwandans. How were the modern scientific methods applied to killing Jews, and establishing the whole system of the work camps.

These are the real unique features of the holocaust.

Correct. The systematic, scientific application of killing machinery to citizens of a advanced state with an enlightened citizenry. That killing was performed along racial lines by the state with the tacit approval by other citizens of that state. The killings, and willing complicity in them spread to other states and citizens of those states. It is compounded by the fact, among others, that many who were killed were refused asylum in other 'enlightened' states due to their race. It is quite frankly, chilling.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by TCO


Is this the wanting to be recognized as part of a victim class?

. . . which is why the Holocaust seems to have so many important questions for us today in terms of the dynamics and issues with identifying people as victims and perpetrators.

So for myself, am I purposely setting out to identify myself as a victim? And am I doing so because of real threats from political and religious leaders, or have I created my identity on falsehoods?? What interests do I have in defining myself as a victim?
These are really rhetorical questions that no one can really answer for me, but just an example of how victimization and perpetration can be better understood for us today, by examining the Holocaust and its aftermath.


There should be more studies by historians on how the process of identifying with victimization and pepetration has had an effect on human society and its development.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Correct. The systematic, scientific application of killing machinery to citizens of a advanced state with an enlightened citizenry. That killing was performed along racial lines by the state with the tacit approval by other citizens of that state. The killings, and willing complicity in them spread to other states and citizens of those states. It is compounded by the fact, among others, that many who were killed were refused asylum in other 'enlightened' states due to their race. It is quite frankly, chilling.

Not only those points, but to what extent should the United States and other Allies have intervened to put a halt to the Holocaust without diverting too much resources to the actual war effort?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by TCO
Little indy media weenie

So *******, what parts do you disagree with? That the CIA was wrong? That the United Stated bombed the bejeezuz out of Cambodia? Do you deny that the U.S. supported and encouraged Lon Nol's coup against Sihanook? Do you deny that Cambodia went from a grain exporting country to a grain importing country?

Maybe you should learn something about the Indochina war before slinging insults.

[chequita guevara]

BK, from your second link, "When this estimate of the Khmer Rouge death toll was first publicized in the early 1980s, commentators in the West almost universally dismissed it as a product of “Vietnamese propaganda,” an invented figure designed strictly for political purposes. In later years, more sober analysts examining this three million figure also discounted it, basing their much lower estimates of the death toll on interview data, demographic analyses and other statistical methodologies." It's only been in the last decade the a systematic survey of the Kmher Rouge's activities have been possible. Since I haven't studied the Cambodia situation for over a decade . . .

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Ned
Also, I agree that the enslavement and discrimination against blacks in this country was very much like the Holocost.

I must of missed the part where Americans made it their goal to eliminate the african race.

[Timexwatch]

Just an observation....

Has anyone noticed that the term "Holocaust" used to mean specifically mean the Nazi Holocaust perpetrated against Jews, Gays, Political Dissenters and other groups is now being used by everyone under the sun to describe situations of much smaller magnitude? I'm beginning to think that other terms, like Shoah, should be used in order to specifically differentiate the Nazi Holocaust from other "holocausts". In attempting to put it in context, it seems to have been people have lost their perspective.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Timexwatch
Just an observation....

Has anyone noticed that the term "Holocaust" used to mean specifically mean the Nazi Holocaust perpetrated against Jews, Gays, Political Dissenters and other groups is now being used by everyone under the sun to describe situations of much smaller magnitude? I'm beginning to think that other terms, like Shoah, should be used in order to specifically differentiate the Nazi Holocaust from other "holocausts". In attempting to put it in context, it seems to have been people have lost their perspective.

good point . . . .

[Ben Kenobi]

It's only been in the last decade the a systematic survey of the Kmher Rouge's activities have been possible. Since I haven't studied the Cambodia situation for over a decade . . .

Well to be fair it always helps to have good sources.

I never claimed 3 million, and it seems the revised numbers reflect anywhere from 1.5-1.7 million. It's always nice to have more data than less, to get a better grasp of the real tragedy rather than one more nebulous.

As for the term Holocaust, I think it ought to be reserved for the Nazi atrocities, but that the term genocide ought to apply to a broader spectrum of tragedies that meet the criteria of a systematic extermination of a group of people by the state.

[Heresson]

1. The Nazi holocaust is unique, because it was out of historical charecter. It was commited by one of the most advanced, civilized peoples on the planet

It was not out of context. Were the Germans one of the most civiolised nations, it is a matter of discussion.
But since XIX century, they were in much part heavily nationalistic, and that their hatred turned to Jews may be some suprise, but their general behaviour doesn't have to be completely suprising

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Ned
Also, I agree that the enslavement and discrimination against blacks in this country was very much like the Holocost.

If you meant "very different" but still morally reprehensible, then I would agree.