Wednesday, September 21, 2022

Would a moratorium on discussing the Holocaust end antisemitism?

 The PBS network recently aired a series of documentaries bundled under the title: “The US and the Holocaust.” Like all such works, it was said that this one too will contribute to the understanding of the past, which is a necessary condition for the horrible past never to be repeated again.

 

But is that true? Or is it a deliberate deception? Or is it wishful thinking? Well, let’s examine the situation that impelled those questions more closely to see where the truth may be hovering.

 

When an event as momentous as the defeat of the axis powers takes place, which it did at the end of World War II, and when literally the whole world is seen to sit at the start of an era during which the bitter moments of the pre-war are unlikely to happen again – but they do – we are obligated to demand the introduction of drastic changes to the way we’ve been thinking about our ability to reason realistically.

 

The Holocaust was the genocidal practice of an era whose aim was to exterminate the Jews and a few other undesirables from the face of the Earth. It failed to accomplish its goal given that Jews are still around; are still alive and kicking, as do members of the other undesirable groups. But while this is an undeniable fact, it is also undeniable that the use of the Holocaust as poster child for a campaign that seeks to eradicate its repetition under the slogan: “Never again,” has been a failure.

 

Given that genocide has happened again and again in Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America, we are obligated to question our ability to reason realistically. Doing so should force us to reject the old approach and adopt a new one, even if the new seems on the surface to call for counterintuitive measures that contradict what we’ve been doing up to now.

 

To be sure, what we’ve been doing, is that in recognition of the fact that the Jews have suffered the most during the Holocaust, we deferred to them all matters relating to the subject. This was a mistake because a plaintiff can never be appointed to judge the defendant he is accusing, and expect him or her to pronounce a verdict that will render justice to all sides. In this case, the verdict will have had to address what caused the Holocaust to happen in the first place, and make sure it will never happen again.

 

Since strong signs of antisemitism are now coming from around the world (including America that was thought to be the safest place for Jews to live in and thrive) thus indicating that a return to the conditions which brought about the first Holocaust, is upon us again – we would be derelict in our duty to ourselves as a human race if we did not reverse our mode of thinking, and did not work to find a permanent solution to that repetitive occurrence.

 

But where do we go from here?

 

The first thing we do is tell the Jews they did the best they could, we thank them for their effort, and we add as politely as we can that their best wasn’t good enough. We let them know that we understand, even feel the pain that must have been felt by the hundreds of people who were thrown into wagons and sent to concentration camps where they worked hard and left to starve before being poisoned and incinerated.

 

But in all fairness, it must be said that we also feel as strongly if not more so for every little girl that’s kidnapped by a monstrous pedophile who would drag her into the woods as she screams her lungs off: “mamma, mamma, help me mamma,” knowing that she is alone, that no one hears her and that mamma will not help. The holocausted little girl knows she’ll die alone and in hiding at the hands of a merciless monster, having done nothing to merit this fate.

 

The holocaust that’s suffered by these girls, and the one suffered by all those who realize they will not be saved, and that no one will know what happened to them, touches us more than does the Holocaust of Jews that had each other for company, and knew that their story will be told, as amply demonstrated in the series: The US and the Holocaust.

 

For that reason, we need to make it a rule that to draw a comparison between the Holocaust of Jews and the others, does not lead to the blacklisting of a writer, the cancellation of an actor, the demand for a judge to resign, the firing of a teacher or any such act as have been documented to happen time after time when the Jews had a monopolistic control over the history of the Holocaust.

 

We also need to make it so that there shall be a strong suggestion for the Jews to refrain from discussing their Holocaust for at least one year, a moratorium that will give the rest of humanity a much needed breather.

 

Will that dampen the spirit of antisemitism? If yes, how and why will this happen? Honestly, we won’t know the answer to these questions until we try the approach.

 

But given that on its surface, the approach seems closest to the system of democracy, we are justified to assume it may well be the worst system to use, but will stand as an exception to all the others – as pointed out by Winston Churchill.