Re Comment #33020 by Ephraim:

Your aggrieved, exasperated, defensive tone in claiming a unique status for the victims of the Shoa reinforces Hedges’ point. With a little tweaking, your language could be retailored to fit many victims of other genocidal campaigns as well.

Thus: “As far as Tutsis are concerned, what makes the Rwandan genocide unique is because it happened to us. [Note to Epharim: murder, either singular or global in scale, is always “unique” for the victim[s], since their lives can never be replaced.] The whole world pretty much sat on its hands while the Hutus (with the tacit consent of our African neigbors) murdered us. That is the meaning of the Rwanadan genocide: that when push came to shove, except for a few brave individuals symbolized by people like General Romeo Dallaire and Paul Rusesabagina, the U.S., the UN, and indeed the world left us to our fate. . . .When we needed help it wasn’t there. That’s all we need to know.”

The Armenians, the Cambodians, and the those currently being decimated in Darfur could claim the same “special” status. A whole people being abandoned in a time of crisis by their fellow human beings is hardly a nonrepeatable event. Throughout history, to borrow from Auden, “everyone turned away/ Quite leisurely from the disaster.” Of course, the historical forces behind the Jewish holocaust were unique in the same sense that the historical forces behind the Cambodian, Rwanadan, etc., genocides are unique. Circumstances of time and place are fundamentally different in all these cases. But the piles of dead bodies have a disconcerting similarity. Thus Hedges is right in saying that the shared meaning of these different horrors is that “the line between the victim and the victimizer is razor-thin.”

Of course, supported by the sui generis history of European anti-Semitism, Nazi racist ideology brought about the extermination of millions---not just of Jews but of Gypsies, homosexuals, and dissidents, for each of whom death was indeed “unique.” But the systematic annihilation of massive numbers of Jews is not morally “worse” than the programmatic killing of Cambodians, Tutsis, etc. Different ideologies and methodologies produce the same result: the death of millions of innocent people.

As for economic compensation to the victims of Nazi war crimes, of course, as you suggest, it’s justifibale for the same reason that monetary restitution in any criminal case is justifiable. It’s an essential element of our Anglo-American legal system. I assume those who object to such recompense “on principle” would have no similar reservations about imposing a stern civil judgment that levied, say, O.J.’s current and future earnings. So that means you support similar compensatory schemes for the descendants of African-American slaves? Or wwas their deracination, enslavement, and death morally inferior to that of the Jews?

Admit it: it’s not just France and Germany you’d like to shut the fuck up. It’s anyone who questions the wisdom and legitimacy of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. Israel is one of the few successful democracies in the Middle East, but precisely for that reason the policies and actions of its government should be open to vigorous, free-ranging debate. Or should all right-thinking people simply reject the well-documented abuses suffered by the Palestinians as just more anti-Semitic propaganda? It is a tough life for many of them.

Incidentally, I am surprised to find you resurrecting the famous debate on the role of the Judenrat in the Third Reich, as mentioned (very briefly) in Hannah Arendt’s seminal study, Eichmann in Jerusalem. When that book was published in the early 60’s, New York intellectuals were divided into two camps, with the anti-Arendt camp condemning her as a self-loathing anti-Semite for her audacity in suggesting that some Jews might have played a role in the killing of other Jews. (See “sick, sick” Finkelstein’s mother’s comments on these collaborators, posted below.) Many friendships were destroyed in this controversy, and it is clear from your comments that the old wounds are easily reopened.

Oh, boy.

Look, maybe this will help:

1. Beyond the trivial point that every historical event is unique, the Nazi holocaust was unique because it:

--stemmed from the driving force behind a political movement to stamp out a particular group, though no doubt about an equal number of others were also murdered;

--was amazingly bureaucratized, mechanized, and efficient;

--was also accomplished over an incredibly short time scale, roughly 1941-1945 (for the major death-camp phase).

A lot of people got killed very quickly in an industrial fashion. That is, so far, historically unique from a scaling point of view, or, if you like, in death-rate per time period, as far as I’m aware, though perhaps someone can point to another example of which I am ignorant. Certainly two atomic bombs had an “impressive” death-rate/time ratio, even if the total didn’t approach the Nazi holocaust.

I take absolutely no inverted pride in this specially defined “uniqueness.” Hedges accurately points out that many Jews, perversely, do, whether for psychological or political reasons or both. I would love it if the Nazis had “only” killed a few hundred thousand Jews, for no particular reason like “race hygiene,” in a more lackadaisical manner, over a longer period of time. Fewer people would have died, they psychosocial wounds would not be as deep, and the dark ripples of that awful event would not still be splashing on our shores in the manner to which Hedges—and Finkelstein—allude, among others.

2. This specific definition of historical uniqueness notwithstanding, Hedges’ point is not only that the potential for a repeat lies dormant in all societies—*all*—but also that historical contingencies account for the fact that the Nazi holocaust, for now, still stands out.

("Stands out” in the specific fashion I defined above; whether it was “the worst” is a value judgement. It’s akin to picking which is worse: death by disembowelment or by neurotoxin, to make an imperfect analogy to an individual.)

Anyway, the point about historical contingency ought to be a unifying rallying call. The right mixture of events and beliefs can bring about the same or worse (in scale). That’s the lesson of the Nazi holocaust, which has very much been “sacralized” such that no one may dare learn from it in any rational manner without entering a minefield of hysteria. That the memory of the Nazi holocaust has been used as a political shield for current Israeli crimes (admitting the reality of which does not exculpate anyone else’s crimes—this should be obvious, but such is the level of discourse that I have to *state* it) is of no small import not only for the Palestinians and Lebanese but also for the entire world. One can draw one’s own conclusions about the morality of such a move, which entails a judgement of how conscious it is in each individual who engages in it, by one’s own lights. But the key point is the fact that this “Holocaust hand-waving” does occur, whatever the motivations, and it is extremely dangerous.

Jews, Israelis, Armenians, and the not-so-noble French aside (Vichy, anyone?)—imagine Genghis Khan with Zyklon B. Imagine a Nazi-like holocaust today or in the future with the increased technology available? I think that’s Hedges’ point: the less we think about such things, the more likely it is they will occur.

Perhaps the following will also help people understand where Hedges is coming from. As a secular Jew who lost family in the Nazi holocaust, I have to say that since Hebrew school in the ‘70s, I have been disgusted with lines like, “Never forget the six million,” a line that instantly effaces the six million *other* human beings, who happened not to be Jews, that the Nazis wiped out. This kind of remembrance/effacement is not universal among Jews (or non-Jews)—of course—but it is pretty widespread in my experience.

I think that fact supports Hedges’ main thesis without avoiding the reality that roughly 50% of the Nazis targets fell into one defined grouping.

In closing, perhaps future commenters can discuss how best to organize society and culture such that future genocides are less likely to occur rather than bickering over different subjective reactions to various atrocities, either those mentioned, or those not yet mentioned. The fact that such a “discussion” could go on forever, with each group holding up an example of an atrocity (of whatever magnitude over whatever timescale using whatever methods) done to itself, while denying that their ancestors ever did *anything* like *that* is the kind of perverse narcissism that Hedges describes, and which we frankly don’t have time for, as a species. Tribalism of any kind is simply not a “luxury” our species can afford, with nuclear weapons, global warming, and other grave challenges facing us. We either become one big tribe or we go down...I think Ben Franklin put it better: we either hang together or we will surely hang separately.

Americans have commited genocide against every “Non European” since 1620. So did the Spanish Conquistidors in south and central america. The extermination of “outsiders” goes back thousands of years. Read the Old Testement. All about slaughter and genocide. Humankinds legacy. Genocide did not start in the 20th century.

Some of you really ought to go out more! What is this insane self-centerdness, especially when it comes to Jewish suffering! “The Jews were killed and no one said anything”, guys no one ever says anything! Look around you, Palestinian kids are shot in the back and no one says anything, worse it is somehow justified, Iraquis are dying in unacceptable numbers and we are told that there is progress on the ground. NO ONE EVER SAYS ANYTHING! Hedges and Finkelstein are trying to say something and you are shutting them up with your Hollywoodized version of History!
This epic take on anything happening to Jews and your deliberate minimilizing of the suffering of others will only lead you to oblivion.

Re: Comment #32987 by Emrehan Delibas on 10/24 at 9:46 am

Hello Emerhan,

I wanted to dispel a number of false claims and false accusations in your comments.

You stated that the Armenian genocide are “allegations”. Other deniers also refer to the Armenian genocide as the “so-called Armenian genocide”. Many ultra-nationalist Turks along with the misinformed Turks refer to the Armenian genocide in this manner.

I find it to spoon feed some facts by THIRD PARTIES witness to the genocide, NOT ARMENIANS. What do they have to gain? The French, Germans Britain, Red Cross. I also find it hardly plausable that they all collaborated in witnessing the Armenian genocide. They are independent witnesses. 

Some trains were used but were not humane but rather death boxes. Nor will you find in these documents that the forced death marches were a result of combat to protect the innocent Armenian men, women, and children, if so why wernt they asked to come back home. Maybe becasee hardly any Armenians out of one in a half million were left alive.

http://www.armenian-genocide.org/us-7-21-15-text.html

http://www.armenian-genocide.org/us-7-20-15-text.html

http://www.armenian-genocide.org/br-11-27-16-text.html

http://www.armenian-genocide.org/br-11-15-22-text.html

http://www.armenian-genocide.org/br-12-26-16-text.html

http://www.armenian-genocide.org/br-stats-text.html

In 1997 the International Association of Genocide Scholars, an organization of the world’s foremost experts on genocide, unanimously passed a formal resolution affirming the Armenian Genocide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Association _of_Genocide_Scholars

Hope this information will inlighten all of you, especially the people who deny the Armenian genocide. I agree the genocide only has one side other then the Turkey’s denials, because it is on the side of the facts otherwise may be called the truth.

I do want to note that some Turks, Kurds at risk to there own lives did save some Armenians from the Turkish Army killings and deportations.

On a parallel note my Grandfather saved a number of Jews when he use to be a truck driver durring WWII, he smuggled Jews to safety. He did not want to see the same thing happen to the Jews as what befell the Armenians.

Cheers!

Re Comment #32891 by Jeanette Friedman:

“The fact that you need to stoop into the gutter to quote Norman Finkelstein proves you are as ignorant of facts and history and human decency as he is.”

Really, Ms. Friedman, you are ill-advised to criticize Mr. Finkelstein (and, via guilt by association, Mr. Hedges) for swimming in the same gutter from which you have apparently plucked most of your key ideas (if automatic reflexes can be described as “ideas").

You thus might want to reconsider raising the issue of “human decency” with respect to critics of Israel’s policies inasmuch as you and your allies demonstrate so very little of that trait when attacking putative adversaries such as Tony Judt, Norman Finkelstein, and now Chris Hedges.  Mr. Hedges’ article will no doubt earn him top billing on your interminable list of the current “enemies” of Israel in particular and the Jewish people in general.

In your statement, I looked in vain for a point-by-point refutation of Chris Hedges’ main thesis since, as others here have pointed out here, his piece does contain some factual and logical flaws---none of which, in my opinion, seriously undermine his central contention. What I found instead was invective doing the work of thinking.

Your ideological doppelganger Alan Dershowitz exemplifies this tendency to ignore substantive points raised by opponents and instead respond not with closely reasoned, carefully documented counterarguments but with hysterical, mendacious, and relentlessly ad hominem rhetoric. Readers should be afforded a characteristic glimpse of this style at its most vicious, as reported by the much-maligned Norman Finkelstein on the occasion of the publication of his book, “Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History. [2005]”

What follows isn’t just an isolated anomaly, a Really Terrible Example ripped out of context, but a run-of-the-mill distortion/lie committed by someone who can’t hold his own in an honest argument. (I invite Ms. Friedman to counter Finkelstein’s charges with something other than “but he’s just a self-hating Jew.” And, yes, I realize that debates about the mass murder of the Jews---along with those of the Gypsies, homosexuals, etc.---should not be reduced to an exercise in dialetics, but you and your comrades have ensured that these exchanges often devolve to that level. It’s all about scoring those killer debating points, about who gets the last word---at whatever cost to the truth.):

“Finally [writes Finkelstein apropos of his book] I would like to comment on [Alan] Dershowitz’s repeated claim that I stated that my late mother was a Nazi collaborator (kapo).”

“In an article for FrontPageMagazine.com (’Why is the University of California Press Publishing Bigotry?,’ 5 July 2005), Dershowitz alleged that ‘[Finkelstein] suspects his mother of having been a kapo ("really, how else would she have survived?” he asks rhetorically),’ while in a statement posted on his Harvard University Law School webpage, Dershowitz wrote that ‘He suspects his own mother of being a kapo and cooperating with the Nazis during the Holocaust’ (http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/Dershowitz/statement)."
“A more elaborate version of this claim appears in his new book The Case for Peace:
‘Finkelstein even doubted his own mother’s denial that she was a kapo, asking whether her frequent statements that “the best didn’t survive” constituted “an indirect admission of guilt?” The most he was willing to do was “assume” that his mother answered him “truthfully.” But he questioned even that assumption: “Still, if she didn’t cross fundamental moral boundaries, I glimpsed from her manner of pushing and shoving in order to get to the head of a queue, which mortified me. . . . Really, how else would she have survived?“‘

Finkelstein responds, “My late mother was a survivor of the Warsaw ghetto, Maidanek concentration camp and two slave-labor camps. Every member of her family was exterminated. After the war she was a key witness in an INS Nazi deportation hearing and at the trial of Maidanek concentration camp guards in Germany (where I was also present).”

“She has been written up in many histories of these postwar hearings. Here is the excerpt from my memoir that Dershowitz consulted to reach his conclusion:”

“Except for allusions to relentless pangs of hunger, my mother never spoke about her personal torments during the war, which was just as well, since I couldn’t have borne them. Like Primo Levi, she often said that, being ‘too delicate and refined, the best didn’t survive.’ Was this an indirect admission of guilt? Much later in life I finally summoned the nerve to ask whether she had done anything of which she was ashamed. Calmly replying no, she recalled having refused the privileged position of ‘block head’ in the camp. She especially resented the ‘dirty’ question ‘How did you survive?’ with the insinuation that, to emerge alive from the camps, survivors must have morally compromised themselves.”

“Given how ferociously she cursed the Jewish councils, ghetto police and kapos, I assume my mother answered me truthfully. Although acknowledging that Jews initially joined the councils from mixed motives, she said that ‘only scum,’ reaping the rewards of doing the devil’s work, still cooperated after it became clear that they were merely cogs in the Nazi killing machine. When queried why she hadn’t settled in Israel after the war, my mother used to reply, only half in jest, that ‘I had enough of Jewish leaders!’ The Jewish ghetto police always had the option, she said, of ‘throwing off their uniforms and joining the rest of us’—a point that Yitzak Zuckerman, a leader of the Warsaw ghetto uprising, made in his memoir. (It was always gratifying to find my mother’s seemingly erratic or harsh judgments seconded in the reliable testimonial literature.)”

“Still shaking her head in disbelief, she would often recall how, after Jews in the ghetto used the most primitive implements or even bare hands to dig bunkers deep in the earth and conceal themselves, the Jewish police would reveal these hideouts to the Germans, sending their flesh-and-blood to the crematoria in order to save their own skins. One of the first acts of the ghetto resistance was to kill an officer in the Jewish police. On a sign posted next to his corpse—my mother would recall with vengeful glee—read the epitaph: ‘Those who live like a dog die like a dog.’”

“Still, if she didn’t cross fundamental moral boundaries, I glimpsed from her manner of pushing and shoving in order to get to the head of a queue, which mortified me, how my mother must have fought Hobbes’s war of all against all many a time in the camps. Really, how else would she have survived?” (http://www.NormanFinkelstein.com, “Haunted House")

“Comparing the actual text with his presentation of it gives a hint of how Dershowitz typically reports sources in his publications. I will forgo comment on the moral character of an individual who defames a survivor of the Nazi holocaust after her death.”

Who’s in that gutter now, Ms. Friedman?

I am speechless.  This is one of the most hateful pieces I have ever read.  Seriously, my jaw dropped, my heart sank and my body shuddered.  Rather than saying, in the basest terms possible, how I feel about Mr. Hedges’ piece, I will instead thank Ephraim for his most eloquent, evenhanded, insightful & honest Comment #33020.  It is shameful that pieces such as Hedges’ constantly force us to take steps backwards and as we have no choice but to engage and uncloud that which emanates from the biased and negating swirls of rhetorical darkness. 

The truth will set you free, Mr. Hedges, if you will only accept it for what it is.  But you will not, and instead you lash out like a medieval solder struggling within layers of steely armor, working desperately from fear to obfuscate truth and demean the sanctity of human suffering. 

You, Ephraim, are a candle burning brightly, a beacon generating its own light openly, for all to see, a strong and comforting source of human warmth for those cast out in the name of hatred and fear. 

Thank you Ephraim; you have reanimated my spirit and brightened my day.

As far as Jews are concerned, what makes the Shoah unique is because it happened to us. The whole world pretty much sat on its hands while the Nazis and their fellow travellers murdered us. That is the meaning of the Shoah: that when push came to shove, except for a few brave individuals symbolized by people like the Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg, the Japanese Consul to Lithuania Chiune Sugihara, and Oskar Schindler, who risked their lives to save us, the world left us to our fate. We honor those who helped us. And we will not forget or forgive those who abandoned us. Your protestations of how we “use” the Shoah fall on deaf ears.

While it is an established fact that anti-Semitism on the part of various countries was a big factor in the lack of effort to save the Jews from Hitler, it was not the only factor. There was a war on; priorities had to be set. So I can easily understand the Allies putting the invasion of France over bombing the rail lines to Auschwitz. However, that just begs the question: even if we accept, for the sake of argument, that everybody really wanted to help the Jews but they just didn’t have the bandwidth, the result is the same: nobody helped us. Anti-Semitism or lack of resources, it just doesn’t matter. When we needed help it wasn’t there. That’s all we need to know. This is not necessarily a condemnation; intellectually, I can easily understand the justifications. Once the war came, everyone, Jews included, would be best served by devoting all resources to defeating the Nazis. But that still doesn’t change what happened: when faced with the Nazis, almost everyone just turned their Jews over to them. Once we know that, nothing else is relevant.

People like Norman Finklestein object to the “Jewish money-grubbing” surrounding compensation for a very simple reason, it seems to me: they want their rage to remain pure, white-hot and incapable of being assuaged. This gives them moral authority and keeps them unsullied by any attempt to really address what happened or to allow people to try to atone for it. For people like Finklestein, putting any kind of a price on what happened to us brings the Shoah down to the level of mundane reality and robs it of its ineffable sanctity as a club for him to beat the Jews who are so tacky as to demand compensation. By refusing to accept any compensation, he maintains his moral authority over the perpetrators and can convince himself of his own righteousness. He is a sick, sick man.

Well, compensation is weregild, blood money. The idea that Jews might cause more anti-Semitism by demanding that the perpetrators actually pay for what they did to us is, well, obscene. A guy punches me for no reason and knocks my teeth out. And so people say “Don’t ask him to pay your dental bills, he might get mad at you. And everybody will think you’re cheap”. I mean, you’re joking, right? 

I don’t particularly like to discuss the Shoah, and I’m a Jew. So I can easily understand why gentiles don’t want to talk about it. So, fine, don’t talk about it. Personally, I would prefer that all of that money that goes towards building Holocaust museums would go instead to Jewish day schools and other such institutions so we could educate our youth and stem the tide of wholesale assimilation that is plaguing us now. I will agree with you on this, though: a Holocaust Museum in DC makes no sense to me. Put it in Berlin where it belongs.

Howver, the fact that we have a museum doesn’t prevent anyone else from having one. You want one? So build the damn thing and leave us alone.

Finally, regarding the Arabs: the creation of Israel did not force anyone off their land. The Arab war against the UN Partition Resolution is what caused that. The Arabs (most of whom had been Nazi allies during WWII, BTW) gambled on a war and lost. Them’s the breaks. And besides, why should we care about what you think about Jews taking responsibility for their own fate against the opposition of people who had done their best to either kill us? I mean, really: we’re supposed to care what the Germans or the French think of Israel? They tried to kill us or helped the people who were doing it. Get a grip. Those people have no right to do anything except keep their damn mouths shut. When Israel starts rounding up Arabs, gassing them, extracting their gold teeth and using their bodies for fertilizer, then they can say something. Until then, STFU. As it is, Arabs in Israel sit in the Knesset and the Supreme Court. Tough life.

And before you go around condemning the Judenrat (and neatly implying that the Jews themselves were Nazi collaborators and complicit in their own destruction), let’s see how you react when somebody puts a gun to your head and says “Give us 10 people by noon or we’ll kill everyone right now.”

I’m not quite sure of Hedges’ point (covet not thy neighbor’s genocide?), but in any event I sure hope his next lecture is devoted to the Palestinian penchant for claiming privileged status as victims of a new holocaust.

The author lauds the French action to silence Turkish opinions, saying that it would force Turks to accept the “truth” and overcome “historical amnesia.”

What pains me most about these allegations of genocide is that they are entirely one sided, and often contain completely false information.

For example, the Ottomans ordered a relocation of the Armenians in areas where combat occured (not an order to kill, in fact archives document that there was an order to protect the travellers and many were sent by trains)...this relocation occured in 1915. 

Throughout WWI, Armenians fought with the French and Russians...committing huge massacres and human rights abuses of Turks…

In 1918, Armenia (Transcaucasian republic) signed a peace treaty with the Turks, recognizing borders and all...it was after the Mondros Armistice which ordered the confiscation of the weapons of all Ottoman soldiers that the Armenians decided to take advantage of the situation and CONTINUE FIGHTING…

Letters by Boghos Nubar brag about how about 250,000 Armenian men (nearly the entire Armenian male population, pre 1915 statistics) fought against the Turks…

Archives also document that over 500,000 Turks were MASSACRED by Armenians…

In fact during the whole time frame of WWI to 1923, over 2.5 MILLION MUSLIMS were killed, and the BALKANS WERE ETHNICALLY CLEANSED OF TURKS…

Yet we talk about genocide between two belligerent nations?  We talk as though Armenians did nothing against the Turks, as though Turks just attacked for no reason at all?

Most Armenian accounts are clearly plagarized from the Jewish Holocaust to gain sympathy and political support, with out any care for hard historical fact.

If we are going to talk about TRUTHS, then we need to see the WHOLE TRUTH.  Which is that Armenians - like the Great Powers - wanted to get a piece of the Ottoman pie, and the fought a war for that cause.

There was no genocide in 1915.  There was a relocation in 1915, after which there was a WAR which lasted until the establishment of Turkey and the treaty of Lausaunne.  Armenians also try to blame Ataturk for atrocities, but ATATURK had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RELOCATIONS, and was serving the army elsewhere in 1915.

In fact, if anyone is a denier, it is the Armenians, who completely deny that they killed any Turks and completely deny the historical statements of their own leaders of the time who openly state that the Armenians were belligerents in war, and that Armenian losses were exaggerated for political purposes!  Nestorian Christian George Lamsa even says that in villages where 10 Armenians were killed, it was falsely reported that the entire village of thousands was raped and wiped out.

This is why the French law is wrong.  Because it solidifies a version of history that is not based in fact, but built up over 90 years of propaganda.

Turks do not deny that some (disputed) number of Armenians died.  But Armenians entirely deny their own vile motives against the Turkish people and deny that they massacred over 500,000 Turks!!

Finally, one should see the 1919 King Crane report in which it was openly proposed that Eastern Anatolia be cleansed of Muslims and given to Armenians (comprising 10% of the population).  Turks were already forced to flee the Balkans with tremendous loss of life…

But I guess no one cares about atrocities done against Muslims...only Chrisitans…

What Armenians and Turks need is dialog, and the French law only prevents Armenians from talking openly and honestly about a historical tragedy for BOTH SIDES…

I do not think the lasting trauma of a genocide, can be measured or easily evaluated as a manipulative ploy, such as Chris Hedges asserts is being done by Jew and the state of Israel.
I think is somewhat cynical to write as Mr Hedges does that,"many Jews have found in the Nazi Holocaust a useful instrument to deflect criticism of Israel and the dubious actions of the pro-Israeli lobby as well as many Jewish groups in the United States.”

Many Jews who defend Israel’s right to exist, do not agree with the policies of the present government. However the holocaust reminds all Jews, that when their genocide was occurring, few countries were willing to take in Jewish refugees fleeing the persecution. World WarII was not fought to end the genocide, that happened to be a fortunate by product. Hence the Jewish desire to retur, establish and maintain a state.

Israel has some poor policies, but the holocaust is not an excuse so much as a reminder of what their fate could be. They have merely to look a Darfur to know what is in store for them if they fail. Muslims are killing far more Muslims in Darfur than Israel killed in Lebanon, yet this was largely ignored during the action in the Middle East. I do not support all of Israel’s actions but, the holocaust is more of a motive for Israel’s response and that of Jewish organizations, rather than a manipulative justification.

Incidently, Chris Hedges description of “Jewish organizations” sounds somewhat reminiscent of the old “International Zionist Bankers Plot”. Indeed ther are,"dark and dangerous lusts that must be held in check.” I wonder if Mr.Hedges has examined his recently.

Oh for heaven’s sake give it a rest all of you!!! This article is balanced and frankly quite superb! This me me me me me me me me me me me me phenomena of the new American Generation, especially the Jewish Generation leaves little credit to anything they have to say! Finkelstein is no gutter, he is saying things that are uncomfortably true especially to those who beleive in the UNIQUENESS of their cause and suffering! There is NO uniqueness, swollow it! Massacres and genocides have been going on for centuries and will go on for centuries unless one of you can change the human DNA! But without this claim of fake Uniqueness there is no Political Capital to be gained and that is what Hedges is saying and that is what is getting up all of your noses! And for the genius amongst you who is whining that Muslims (the Jews of this century) are not pointed at by Hedges with a guilty finger as perpetrators of Genocides like Christians and Jews should stop for a second and take in what is being said: The Turks commited the Armenian Genocide, they were Muslims. I guess some of you will only be satisfied with big words such as ARAB, or MUSLIM killers and JEWS off course victims. Turks is too subtle. And please spare me the Darfur crocodile tears, what about Palestine and Iraq, or they don’t fit to the Eternal Victim and eternal Killer scenarios you all base your reality and warped personalities on?

It takes extreme courage and a deeply felt love for truth to stand against that which is wrong. Right and wrong here do not represent shades. All genocide is evil and no group should use such horrendous suffering as stones on a scale to advance their political agendas. All unfairness leads to hatred, resentment and eventually blood lust. I too complement France for its latest decisions. And, BRAVO to you for letting your love for truth and fairness rise above prejudices. And to those who commented on small researth detail, they are like a fireman who, watching a fire rage, decides to discuss its origin instead of taking action to put it out.

“Anti- Semite” to me, means that I think an Arab is in fact, A Human Being.
Arabs were Our ALlies in WW1.

Most notable “Anti Semites”: Jesus, st Steven, John the Baptist, Martin Luther, Billy Graham, William Shakespeare, Henry Ford, Russian Czar Nicholas 2nd, Ben Franklin, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, General George Patton, President Nixon, to name a few.

Iraq had 14 UN Violations. Israel has 70.
1 of the Worlds Worst Human Rights Offenders, keeping 700 Pal. children in their Dungeons, head & back shooting them at will. ENogu.

The obvious lack of mention to the present day, today, genocide of the people of Darfur makes this article mostly mute.

Where is the reference to stopping this genocide that is being supported in part by every individual that knows of it’s ongoing existance?  Where is the mention of Muslims in your sentence naming Jew, Christian, etc?  Are those that still dance in the street claiming death to all Jews, all non Muslims in Darfur, all Americans, not performing genocide?

The importance of the Holocaust is that it recognizes the presence of the evil and give all a spring board to touch it and to rebuke it.  The Holocaust was participated in by the world not just the Germans. This is partly what the Amrmenians covet, that the Jews have a platform now to tell the world they are guilty.

The question should not be why don’t the Jews recognized and publicize that they were not alone in the camps.  The question is why don’t others speak out about it?  Why do they pretend it was only the Jew?  Because if they did acknowledge this they would give it even more power, power they really don’t want to give to it.  The power to say that all are responsible, all need to take a stand, and even more importantly that all could be subjected to this evil not just those Jews.  It just needs a venue, poor, sick, old, young, handicapped, female, political party, or uneducated take your pick for the day.

This is what the Armenian’s truly covet is recognition that they suffered.  The recognition that it was wrong and the power to say that world is responsible.  The poor people of Dafur want this too and as loud as they cry the world remains silent.  So take that to the UN.  Where are they today for these people that lost their lives and homes years ago?  In nice comfy homes denying any problem exists.  They are protecting terrorists that they know are the cause and money supporting this new genocide in Darfur, except it isn’t knew anymore.

The fact that you need to stoop into the gutter to quote Norman Finkelstein proves you are as ignorant of facts and history and human decency as he is.

Why don’t you just demand that Israel be dismantled? You and Judt and all the rest of you just don’t get it. And your lies and misconceptions underline the fact that the New York Times is now a newspaper that is not worthy of the paper it is printed on. They can’t even write an obit without stealing information from our website without giving proper credit.

Why should anyone trust anything you say? It’s all distorted lies from the left.

Jeanette Friedman
Editor
Together
For the American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants

Dear Rich,

It’s little bit more than being a Denialist, It’s pretty amazing that whenever genocide refered in media, journalists seems to do anything to present the perspective of Armenian propagandas. whenever there is an attemp to present our side of the story it always preceded such as “ Turkish goverment claims” Seriously.. we all do know that there are some dishonest goverment officals in all goverments and Im sorry to say my goverments spokespeople doesn’t seem to be responding as they should have still It still doesn’t proves anything.

Some of those evidence you have mentioned and I have seen pictures that claimed to the pictures of genocide.. well guess what most of those pictures did investigated and most of those pictures and files came as fake, Why would I belive any of other files which hasn’t been confirmed by all authoritys could be real?

No Turkish people would accept this genocide same as No Armenian hertigage would care about what we say about this.

i do know that Armenians did got killed as a result of massacre via ottomons neighboars and because of the murderous acts commited by armenians.. Peacheful? why allways these details forgotten to mention? Ottomon empire was the only country that ever let other minoritys do their own religious belives and live their lifes peacefuly if there weren’t crimes against ottomon I do not belive anything would have happened and guess what..

Armenians did riot when Russia try to invde us and Armenians wanted their own indipendence.. to be honest I would understand that but I also do understand how ottomon would want to deport armenians out of country. But if you call a massacre as “genocide” You should really learn what genocide means. I also say this to the writer of this article.

Finaly I feel compelled to mention
Ottomon Empire has nothing to do with Turkish Republic. It doesn’t means that anyone could charge the massacre ottomon did for protecting themselves with a nerborn decomratic country.

Regarding the David Harris-Gershon comments: You are comparing apples and oranges. A similar museum (as the two you mention) would be “The Jewish Peoples’ Museum”, not “The Holocaust Museum”; museums similar to “The Holocaust Museum” would have to be similarly NARROWLY-themed and titled something like “The ‘How North America Was Stolen and Any of the Previous Owners Who Weren’t Slaughtered Were Pushed into Hellhole Concentration Camps’ Museum” and “The Amassing of the Greatest Wealth in Human History Based Upon the Margin of Utility Provided by Slaves Imported from Africa and Treated like So Much Cattle Museum and Purposely Not Protected by The US Constitution Museum”. I was in DC and I didn’t see those two, just the “This is Why Israel Gets to Dictate Our Foreigh Policy Museum”. And I really looked!

Chris, I read your book War Is A Force That Gives Us Meaning.  Your writing is deeply religious in its own way.  I learned something about human nature from your book.  You are definitely one of the best journalists around.  In your book, you didn’t take sides regarding Israel/Palestine.  But that was in 2002.  Israel is a horribly aggressive state.  Don’t listen to any of the negative comments on this site.  Just keep writing these articles so people like me know there’s a sane voice on this violent planet.

While your article illuminates a painfully unique phenomenon with regard to collective suffering, it is surprisingly shoddy given your background, Chris.

The second-to-last paragraph is a perfect example of how careless you are with both the facts and logical constructions in this essay.

First, while The Holocaust Museum is not on The Mall in Washington, DC, The Museum for the American Indian - a museum that indeed does treat the collective suffering of Native Americans - is situated centrally in DC. To miss, or ignore this fact, is inexcusable. (I’ll also add that the African American Museum is just steps away. You should visit them both, Chris. Research helps sometimes.)

Second, to suggest that the lack of one museum should de-legitimize the need for or existence of another is logically equivalent to saying that nobody should enjoy democratic freedoms until and unless everyone does. Were you a proponent of separate-but-equal?

I am disappointed. The seed from which this essay emerged is important. Your essay, however, is not. And that’s unfortunate.

Yanki,

Here are some facts denialists like yourself fail to read in the history books.

German ambassador Count von Wolff-Metternich, Turkey’s ally in World War I, wrote his government in 1916 saying: “The Committee [of Union and Progress] demands the annihilation of the last remnants of the Armenians and the [Ottoman] government must bow to its demands.”

Henry Morgenthau Sr., the neutral American ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, sent a cable to the U.S. State Department in 1915:

“Deportation of and excesses against peaceful Armenians is increasing and from harrowing reports of eye witnesses [sic] it appears that a campaign of race extermination is in progress under a pretext of reprisal against rebellion.”

Morgenthau’s successor as Ambassador to Turkey, Abram Elkus, cabled the U.S. State Department in 1916 that the Young Turks were continuing an “. . . unchecked policy of extermination through starvation, exhaustion, and brutality of treatment hardly surpassed even in Turkish history.”

Ismail Enver Pasha, Ahmed Cemal Pasha, Mehmed Talât Bey, and a host of others were convicted by the Turkish court and condemned to death for “the extermination and destruction of the Armenians.”

No proof that Armenians were being treasonous, women and children accused of treason?

Armenians were law abiding citezens of the Ottoman Empire (now Turkey) for centuries, they had no reason to fight the Turks at the time other then defend themselves from ultimate butchery.

Hello,

Wow am I shocked to see an anti-semetic blog on this site? Nope I’m sure not. Another sleeze web blog designed to bash the US and it’s allies around the world. What a joke.

“What distinguishes the Jewish Holocaust from any other event is that it is the only historical attempt by a government to erase the existence of a particular religion.”

The Nazis were not trying to erase the Jewish religion, they were trying to exterminate the Jewish race.  If people had a few drops of Jewish blood in them, it did not matter if they were atheist, non-practising, or even converted to Catholicism.

It’s sad to see articles that has been misguided. It’s over dramatized. I have to correct that there isn’t any fact that actually provides hard evidence that there has been any genocide to Armeanian People,

If you actually read up some history that you would see that first of all Turkish Republic is a whole new country. You cannot first of all claim something like this based on Ottoman Empire, Second of all please show me any country that wouldn’t “deport” a minority that lives in their border in the time of war. Which country would risk those minority fight against them?

Armenians deported from Ottomon empire back than for being cautious for treason.

Again there hasn’t been a genocide to armenians and Im sorry to say There has been people died on both of the sides but I do feel sorry for those who lost their lives but a false claim isn’t brining any solution and I know for sure that Turkey would never accept that genocide claim because there isn’t any

“When we sanctify ourselves we do so at the expense of others.” And eventually of ourselves too, because what goes around comes around. How incredible that Zionism, a movement whose aim was to rescue the oppressed Jewish masses of Eastern Europe, ends up putting every Jew in the world at risk on account of what the Jewish settler-state Israel is doing to the Palestinian people. Then, when they’re caught in the act, for the Zionists to fall back on “Why we’d never victimize another people. How could we?  We’re the original victims.” That’s beyond chutzpah. It’s madness.

What distinguishes the Jewish Holocaust from any other event is that it is the only historical attempt by a government to erase the existence of a particular religion. It is precisely that which makes it unique.
-Howard king

What a moronic statement! The native americans were exterminated as well as their entire religious views by the us Gov’t, you obviously need to read some history books....

And you, Howard King, make the point of the article’s author.

First, The Holocaust Museum is not on the Mall, is not part of the Smithsonian Institution or U.S. Government (although it does serve as the official US memorial of the Holocaust), and was primarily paid for by private funds.

Second, the museum houses the Committee on Conscience, an advisory institution conducting world-wide genocide research. The Committee on Conscience is the leading non-partisan advisor to the US government on Darfur and Chechnya. Contrary to your claim, the Holocaust Museum does not ignore other genocides.

Third, The Holocaust Museum was never meant to be a memorial to the dead of all tribal conflicts which have ever plagued mankind. What distinguishes the Jewish Holocaust from any other event is that it is the only historical attempt by a government to erase the existence of a particular religion. It is precisely that which makes it unique. Comparisons to other genocides are misleading.

And please Mr. Hedges, quoting Norman Finklestein’s analysis in “The Holocaust Industry” is as spurious as Clarence Thomas’ understanding of the average African American.  Just to set the record straight, Israel claims no special right or privilege in insuring the preservation of it nationhood. It is the only sovereign nation whose destruction is being openly called for by other nations. Israel will do whatever it needs to do to protect it’s existence, and is self-admittedly as morally guilty as any other nation in effecting its preservation. What you and Finklestein are doing is holding Israel to a higher standard because of its people’s history.

The article is powerful in its ability to provoke thought and awareness where it is sorely lacking on the wider implications of genocide and its history.  What interests me in this conversation as well is the topic of suffering itself.  The currency of suffering.  We are raised in Catholicism, for example, to believe that our salvation is based upon our suffering in this life, our SACRIFICE.  Does that not create generations of those who view life basically as pain and struggle and therefore place an expect-ation in us of those outcomes, regardless of what we do?  So, in essence, a generation of victims and perpetrators?  It has been said that once mothers and fathers see no glory in sending their sons and daughters off to war that perhaps war will lose its allure.  The same needs to be said to those wearing and envying the cloak of genocide.

Thank you Mr. Hedges, for making an argument that, as you are not Jewish, will surely see you branded as an anti-semite and, were you Jewish, would see you branded as a self-hating Jew.  The Lebanese incursion did much to knock the scales from many eyes, but there are those who continue to believe that Israel was justified in attempting to grab Lebanese land as far as the Litani River.

I hadn’t known about Finkelstein’s family history and am shocked that his mother received so little by way of reparations.

Be prepared for some nasty feedback.

Genocide is something that has occured since the start of civilization. As have been mentioned earlier the suffering in Rwanda, Sudan, the former Yougoslavia, Turkey are just more examples of post Holocaust genocide attempts.  what happened to that language “never again!” which has finally been surfaced in CA to stop all business with anyone doing business with Sudan.
The reason the Israel and the Jewish community has been able to capitalize on their “victim” tab is by exposure.  The fact that the Holocaust was an attack on a religious and cultural communit not secluded to Europe and Israel has a lot to do with it.  The Jewish population at the time had many prominent figures and supporters in bothe the U.S and British Govt. which aided the survivors. Unfortunately that is not a luxuary that the Rwandans had nor those suffering currently in Darfur.
Another problem that one would have thought would be a mute point by now is still the “White” standard.  From a World Powers point of view unfortunately you are more likely to help someone who is similar to you than otherwise.  This may or may not be the reason for delayed intervention into Rwanda, and delayed intervention with Bosnian Muslims, yet increased intervention with the white serbian christians… Like mentioned in the article genocide is something we can “all” be capable of acting out but you are less likely to act this out against someone who has similar beliefs and appearance as yourself.  This goes the same for aid/ relief.  The fact that stopping genocide invloves military and will involve risking lives, countries are more likely to get approval if they can market the victim as somone that could be your neighbor rather than an obvious foreigner.  This is all unfortunate and I myself stand strong behind the old words of “never again”, but it has happened again and again so we must remember that regardless of apperance and belief everyone is vulnerable and deserves help and reparations, not just those that can.

Not sure what Rich meant when he said Hedges has “no knowledge of this issue.” His article is about genocide and the real life (in some cases) and the potential (in others) exploitation of the tragedy of genocide for political ends to silence critics the community’s actions that occur after the fact. 

You can search for the word “genocide” in the Chris’ book “What Every Person Should Know About War” via amazon.com’s Online Reader: 

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0743255127/ref=sib_dp_ srch_pop/104-8275223-8659111?v=search-inside&keywords=g enocide&go;.x=0&go;.y=0&go=Go!

The link shows that the author’s written on and researched the question of genocide.

As far as the exploitation of genocide, he’s talking about how the ADL claims[1] a moral exemption criticism for Israel in the name of the Holocaust. Like when Israelis drop 1 ton bombs on residential neighborhoods in Gaza[2] or using cluster bombs against against Lebanese villages[3] and white phosphorous bombs[4] (a weapon that the International Committee of the Red Cross says should be banned) against Hezbollah, the latest incarnation of Hitler himself[5].

1. “ADL Calls Amnesty International Report ‘Bigoted, Biased, And Borderline Anti-Semitic’”
http://www.adl.org/PresRele/IslME_62/4878_62
See also: “Human Rights Watch: ‘Israeli Gov’t War Criminals’”
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11& ar=274

2. “Bush joins in condemnation of Israeli attack,” Guardian, 07.23.2006 http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,761908,0 0.html

3. “Shooting without a target,” Haaretz Editorial, 9.18.2006
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/762427.html

4. “Israel admits using phosphorus bombs during war in Lebanon”, Haaretz, 10.22.2006
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/777549.html

5. “Noam Chomsky’s Love Affair with Nazis,” by David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22454
(yes, this is just for laughs)

oh Chris, haven’t you heard?

“Everyone is now on notice that an association with Michael Lerner is tantamount to an association with Norman Finkelstein, and that support for Tikkun is support for the enemies of Israel.”

-- Alan Dershowitz,
THE JERUSALEM POST,
16 October, 2006

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=11591934552 01&pagename=JPost&#x2F;JPArticle&#x2F;ShowFull< /a>

A powerful article.  In the current environment of political correctness in this country it also requires immense bravery to write any opinion critical of Israel and its agents in this country.  No doubt attempts are underway right now to smear the author and label him as an anti-semite.

Thank you for this article.  It is a rare person these days who is willing to call a spade a spade, can put aside popular dogma, and get to the heart of matter.  The fact that an intelligent, reflective writer like Finkelstein is derided as a self-hating jew, while lunatics like Alan Dershowitz are accepted main-stream academic personalities points out that we, as a nation, have gone down the rabbit hole.  Black is white and right is wrong.

Genocide is genocide regardless of its perpetrators.

Very eloquent, succinct and true. I have read a lot about The Nazi Hollocaust,I have been aware of the Armenian one , equally aware of its “lesser intitelement” in the world of suffering. Being from the Middle East, having lived in the West, and having a Palestinian heritage I must applaud the fact that you approached every aspect of this complex issue of “Hollocausts”, and that you have covered every argument thoroughly and have ended the article with your own beautiful input into this ongoing debate. Thank you.

The conduct of Israelis is similar to those that brought about holocaust. The difference is that Israel continues to deny its demonic behavior.

I applaud Mr. Hedges for so sensitively addressing this crucial aspect of genocide. Until now, I thought I held these concerns virtually alone.

Mr. Hedges makes a critical point about recognizing the capacity for evil in human nature, as in “we can all become killers.” I need to remind myself of this when I contemplate what kind of people are capable of strapping bombs to themselves and killing innocents.  Are such people really human? Are they susceptible to any logic or persuasion or response apart from violence?  Are you?

Dear Chris,

Respectfully, I need to reply that you are missing the point