Holocaust Remembrance
Do Jews need to set aside one particular day in the year to remember the Holocaust? Is the fact that this dreadful event occurred something we could ever forget? Might it be possible that among some Jews Holocaust denial could be a form of life-affirming possibility? That the Holocaust was the vile figment of some lunatic's imagination? I suppose we could respond in the affirmative to all of the above.I don't for a moment doubt that most Jews think of the Holocaust on a continual basis. How could it be otherwise? That we are able to conduct our lives in what can only be considered normalcy is a miracle in and of itself. A testament to the resilience of the human spirit. If we think about the reason/cause of this difficult-to-apprehend monumental hate and its outcome, and the great numbers of individuals who would have had to be indifferent to the fate of millions of innocent people, that is what bogs us down almost as much as the fact that the Holocaust itself occurred.
Never again, we said. We would not go as sheep to the slaughter. Nor did we then, in fact. But when Jews averred that such an impossible event in world history could never be repeated, they meant not only for themselves. The world took little note when Armenians were slaughtered in huge numbers after the turn of the century. Thirty years is a long time in human history; perhaps we felt that what happened then was then, thirty years would have been a sufficient time-span to fully civilize people.
Man seeks to outdo himself at every opportunity. There are opportunities, they arise each time a territorial dispute erupts, a tribal war ensues, an ethnic or religious group feels itself disenfranchised, then feels perfectly justified in wreaking vengeance on a grand scale upon the transgressor. Africa and Eastern Europe have been excellent breeding grounds for ethnic cleansing on a grand scale. The Middle East is now breeding religious murderers on a breathtaking scale.
Just as the Nazis did, it is only necessary to begin dehumanizing the "other" in the perceptions of those who have the upper hand through politics or geography or economics or military might, or friends at court.
Time and again human groups transgress against one another in the most horrific ways. Time and again outsiders, onlookers, reporters, cannot fully trust their senses to believe that these atrocities will occur, are occurring. A slight hesitation, an unwillingness to intervene, to demand cessation for fear of retribution or even accusations of interference, appears to be a sufficient deterrence to becoming "involved".
When the first escapees from Nazi death camps reached Europe and safety, and desperately sought to engage the world in an attempt to secure intervention and rescue, they found themselves talking to the wind. Quite simply the stories they told of inhuman atrocities were not to be believed. And they simply weren't believed. The fact is what we term "inhuman atrocities" are actually quite human in nature, since we have amply proved ourselves to be fully capable of furnishing unending agony, of visiting dreadfully unspeakable torments, of imagining and acting on the most odious of behaviours toward one another.
We should remember this. We should also remember that we are imbued with free will and a knowledge of justice, that we are perfectly capable of behaviour in direct contradiction to that we so rightly abhor, and that mere condemnations of failures in humane behaviour are insufficient deterrents.
There are times when, much as one shudders to admit it, it is right and proper to intervene, even if it results in a war we do not want.
posted by Pieface @ Tuesday, April 25, 2006
<< Home