This Article is Sure to Ruffle Some Feathers...

[AJK]

Note: In an effort to avoid possible lashon hara, I am going to copy and paste the article instead of linking to it. Yes, those of you "resourceful"/"don't care about lashon hara"/"know it's not loshon hara" types can likely find it with a quick google search, but I won't be the direct source for it.

Let the shmoozing begin.

Why it’s Time for Jews to Get Over the Holocaust

The Holocaust is considered the seminal event of modern Jewish history. In fact, it is usually taken as the line which differentiates between modern and pre-modern Jewish history. It is portrayed as the inevitable end toward which millennia of Jewish history inexorably led, the sum total of all our years in Europe, and the ashes from which Jewish autonomy, in the form of the State of Israel, was reborn. Modern Jews have taken it upon themselves to make sure that the memory of the Holocaust remains forever fresh. It’s about time they stopped.

This is not an opinion that is likely to be met with much applause from the Jewish community, which has dedicated untold resources, both financial and human, toward perpetuating the memory of the Holocaust. The remembrance of the Holocaust is considered to be an integral part of what it means to be a Jew, no less than if we had been instructed regarding it “Zachor Eis Asher Asah L’cha Hitler,” remember that which Hitler did to you (c.f. Devarim 25:17)*.

To be sure, the Holocaust is crucially important. But why does it need to be singled out as if it’s more special than other historical events, like it’s qualitatively different from other historical events, like it’s more than a mere historical event? While the Holocaust was on a much greater scale and horrifically well-organized, it was far from the first incident of a dominant power killing those deemed “inferior” on trumped up charges. Humans have been perpetrating horrible atrocities on each other for centuries.

If anything, the over-emphasis on the particulars of the Holocaust may be taking attention away from the universal human traits that made the event possible. The real lesson isn’t about Jews and Germans and 1935. It’s about the powerful and the weak, the superior and the Other, and its messages are for eternity. Doesn’t the Holocaust lose some of its meaning if its significance is magnified to the point where it can no longer be considered in context?

Holocaust denial is considered a crime in over a dozen countries. Surely this is an overreaction. Do we arrest flat-earthers? Ancient Astronaut enthusiasts? Believers in ghosts? Why should denial of a historical event be considered a crime, something detrimental to society? Those in favor of criminalizing Holocaust denial tend to answer that it invariably masks anti-Semitic sentiment, and therefore preaching denial of the Holocaust is tantamount to incitement to commit a hate crime. I find such logic absurd.

While I don’t deny that most Holocaust deniers are anti-Semites, I don’t see that as sufficient reason to imprison them. One cannot be punished merely for denying the truth. That is an individual’s prerogative, until it harms somebody else. And Holocaust denial has never actually harmed anyone, nor has it led to a rash of hate crimes. At best, it’s only one reason among many. Hardly reason enough to deem it a thought-crime.

Obviously, propagating ignorance of the truth isn’t a good thing, especially when that truth is an unsettling revelation about the flimsiness of human morality, but why is it worse to contradict established opinion regarding the Holocaust than to break with a consensus on anything else? Bad history is bad history, but we don’t generally arrest rogue academics, as offensive as their views might be. But Jews have fetishized the Holocaust, and built it up until it now represents all that is evil in the world. Thus, denying the Holocaust becomes synonymous with embracing the worst of humanity.

The Holocaust is also, apparently, too big to trivialize. Woe to anyone who makes a stray “Nazi” comparison. Or, to pull from current events, look at the backlash against the Chareidim who appropriated Holocaust imagery to protest the Israeli government’s clamping down on their presumed right to force women to the back of buses and throw stones at people they don’t like. Now, as should be obvious from the previous sentence, I am in no way defending the Chareidim. But I was disheartened to see how viscerally people took their protest.

It wasn’t just because of the untruth of their assertions, or because of the selfishness and shortsightedness required to compare the enforcing of the civil rights of others to genocide. It was that it was the Holocaust. You just don’t reference the Holocaust. Not like that, not so flippantly, so wrongly. You just can’t. It’s become something sacrosanct in our culture, an event never allowed to slip into familiarity, but something expected to remain eternally as raw as the day it first came to light. But no event can adequately bear that weight.

Historical events, even major and traumatic ones, have a way of being woven into the fabric of cultural memory, as they stop being news and start being history. People make casual, inaccurate references. It’s part of becoming commonly known human history. If anything, that’s good for the Holocaust. It means that everyone knows about it, everyone’s aware that something like it happened, even if they’re a bit fuzzy on the details. But then again, a fair amount of people aren’t quite sure which countries were fighting in the American Revolution. Yet we all know what happened on July 4th.

The Holocaust has been imbued with so much significance, has received so much attention, that it can be difficult to remember that there once was such a thing as a Judaism that didn’t live in its shadow. But soon there may be again. The survivors are not immortal. At this point, there are no Holocaust survivors below the age of 70. Within 30 years, there will be almost none, period. It is very easy to keep something in the public consciousness when living witnesses to it are prevalent enough that administrators can call (at least) one in to every school on Holocaust Memorial Day. But as the survivors’ numbers lessen, and eventually, what they survived will fade to become another entry in the history books.

Historical events, as earth-shattering and history-ending as they seem at the time, eventually fade from the forefront of public consciousness and became memory: not the sort of memory that a person reflects on every day, but the sort of memory that sits in the back of the mind, always there but rarely focused on. And one must wonder, when the survivors are gone – when there is no more opportunity to let children hear firsthand testimony of the Holocaust – how much of a loss will that be? With all of the effort that has gone into recording testimonies of the Holocaust, from Yad V’Shem, the USC Shoah Foundation Institute for Visual History and Education, and others, has it not been documented enough? What are we missing? What more is there? We’ve recorded all we can. There are few historical events that have undergone greater scrutiny and preservation. Perhaps we can finally rest and acknowledge that we’ve done enough to ensure that the Holocaust can never be forgotten.

In a recent poll, it was found that most young Jews do not see their Jewish identity stemming from the Holocaust. This might seem shocking to the baby boomer generation, the survivors’ children who were forced to confront their parents’ painful past after decades of silence. But it makes sense. Who defines themselves by a horrific genocide? Who wishes to see themselves as eternal victims? What kind of Jewish identity doesn’t extend beyond the attempts to systematically exterminate us seventy years ago?
As more time passes between the Holocaust and the present, it is only natural for it to fade into the background and become merely another historical incident. People can’t focus on the past forever. It’s only natural that they move on, and it’s time for Jews to accept that.

*A play on the Biblical verse “Remember what Amalek did to you along the way when you came out from Egypt,” considered the source for the commandment to eternally remember the Amalekite attack on the Israelites just after they left Egypt, and to ultimately eradicate the entire nation of Amalek. For more information:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amalek#Commandments_to_exterminate_Amalekites.

[AsherO]

The author doesn't address many of the points they bring up, like why we're still obligated by the Torah to eradicate Amalek so many years after our exodus from Egypt.

The author also comes across as insensitive by implying that the survivors are one-foot-out-the-door and soon enough we finally won't have to respect them. 

Never forget, that's my take. While the world is indeed a safer place in many ways, it could happen again in a heartbeat היל"ת ח"ו if we let our (figurative) guard down.

[myb821]

Note: In an effort to avoid possible lashon hara, I am going to copy and paste the article instead of linking to it. Yes, those of you "resourceful"/"don't care about lashon hara"/"know it's not loshon hara" types can likely find it with a quick google search, but I won't be the direct source for it.

Let the shmoozing begin.

just saying i dont believe their is an inyun of lashon hara here as he the other put those out in a public "paper"

[AJK]

The author also comes across as insensitive by implying that the survivors are one-foot-out-the-door and soon enough we finally won't have to respect them. 

I can agree that he comes across as insensitive, but it doesn't seem the reason he mentions their eventual passing is so that he does not have to respect them. Rather, he mentions it in an effort to show that the Holocaust will not be (nor should it be) as significant as some people seem to have made/make it.

To be clear: not defending, just trying to explain.

give this guy 10 minutes in a room with my Auschwitz surviving Grandmother and lets see what he says. What a jerk

Apparently he's a descendant of holocaust survivors...

[AJK]

just saying i dont believe their is an inyun of lashon hara here as he the other put those out in a public "paper"

I don't want this to turn into a thread of the intricacies of lashon hara, but it apparently isn't so cut and dry. But I ain't no LOR, so by all means, if you (or your LOR) feels confident it wouldn't be lashon hara, google the author.

[myb821]

Also just to put this in perspective this was "publishes" by a "paper" that has recently been shown to publish articles just to create controversy.

[AJK]

Also just to put this in perspective this was "publishes" by a "paper" that has recently been shown to publish articles just to create controversy.

Ugh.

FYI, the article to which you're likely referring was published under a set of editors that have since been replaced.

[myb821]

Ugh.

FYI, the article to which you're likely referring was published under a set of editors that have since been replaced.

i dont believe that is completely true i just wanted to give some background info sorry if u disagree

[AJK]

i dont believe that is completely true i just wanted to give some background info sorry if u disagree

Oh, the board of editors was not replaced? That's what I had heard... my apologies.

[myb821]

Oh, the board of editors was not replaced? That's what I had heard... my apologies.

i believe which i could be totally wrong about that one or two of the editors stepped down but im pretty sure most of the board is the same

[AsherO]

I can agree that he comes across as insensitive, but it doesn't seem the reason he mentions their eventual passing is so that he does not have to respect them. Rather, he mentions it in an effort to show that the Holocaust will not be (nor should it be) as significant as some people seem to have made/make it.

The Holocaust shouldn't be as significant as survivors made it, instead it should be as significant as he'd like? That's what I'd call disrespect.

FYI, the article to which you're likely referring was published under a set of editors that have since been replaced.

The first place I found on Google had this in their about us, which makes me think they at very least don't mind controversy (emphases mine):

Established in 2011 by students of Yeshiva University, The Beacon is a non-profit online publication for and by Modern Orthodox Jewish college students across the globe. The Beacon aims to reflect the wide range of opinions and ideas within the Modern Orthodox community, and is designed to allow comfortable room for all voices to be heard. The purpose of The Beacon is to provide a platform for young Modern Orthodox Jews to explore topics of interest to the changing world of Judaism, Orthodoxy, and their own lives in a balanced, fair manner, allowing all sides of any matter a chance to be expressed, as well as opening up conversations about global and local issues, from world news to neighborhood arts and culture. The Beacon is committed to the goal of free speech, but never at the price of ad hominem attacks.

[myb821]

The Holocaust shouldn't be as significant as survivors made it, instead it should be as significant as he'd like? That's what I'd call disrespect.

The first place I found on Google had this in their about us, which makes me think they at very least don't mind controversy (emphases mine):

that is correct and that is the place which this was published if you would like to know the other article the posted which caused controversy search for the article titel "How Do I Even Begin To Explain This" but let me warn you it is a little on the inappropriate side

[AJK]

The Holocaust shouldn't be as significant as survivors made it, instead it should be as significant as he'd like? That's what I'd call disrespect.

I am certainly not going to defend him, but, again, I don't think that's what he's trying to say. Ultimately, I think he's suggesting that the Holocaust should not be any more significant than any other atrocity/historical event.

The first place I found on Google had this in their about us, which makes me think they at very least don't mind controversy (emphases mine):

Perhaps. But "not minding" is not equivalent to "purposely creating."

[springles]

I dont get the purpose of the article.  He never addresses what the reasons for remembering are.  Without addressing that how can we discuss whether those reasons merit our never forgetting. 
I would like to ask him one question, "would you tell your sister the same thing if she was raped?"

[AsherO]

that is correct and that is the place which this was published if you would like to know the other article the posted which caused controversy search for the article titel "How Do I Even Begin To Explain This" but let me warn you it is a little on the inappropriate side

Are you posting from your cellphone or something, you're having an inordinate amount of typos today...

Edit: Article is NSFW!

I am certainly not going to defend him, but, again, I don't think that's what he's trying to say. Ultimately, I think he's suggesting that the Holocaust should not be any more significant than any other atrocity/historical event.

But you'll agree with me that he probably doesn't mourn the churban like they did 1850 years ago. I might suggest that that isn't necessarily a good thing:

כל דור שלא נבנה בית המקדש בימיו כאילו נחרב בימיו

[myb821]

my bad just trying to do like 5 things at once and have not been looking over my posts before i submit lol

[dirah]

The real lesson isn’t about Jews and Germans and 1935. It’s about the powerful and the weak, the superior and the Other ...
 

The author is implying that anti-Semitism is just another form of racial discrimination like any other. Which means that he has no sense of history.

In a recent poll, it was found that most young Jews do not see their Jewish identity stemming from the Holocaust.
 

This seems to sum up the article. The author is upset that our modern Jewish identity stems from the Holocaust.
But this isn’t true. Real Jewish identity stems from our connection with Hashem, Torah and Mitzvos.

Perpetuating the memory of the Holocaust is important - but not because it defines who we are. It doesn’t.
Perpetuating the memory of the Holocaust is important because it is a stark modern example of why anti-Semitism is not just another form of racial discrimination. It is in a class of its own. No other form of discrimination holds a group of people to a different standard than the rest, and no other form of discrimination regards a group of people as the cause of all evil.
One of the primary objectives of Holocaust deniers is to deny this simple truth. They want the world to think that there is nothing extraordinary about anti-Semitism. They want the world to think that anti-Semitism is just another standard case of prejudice. And the author is playing right into their hands.

[mclovin]

The author is implying that anti-Semitism is just another form of racial discrimination like any other. Which means that he has no sense of history.
This seems to sum up the article. The author is upset that our modern Jewish identity stems from the Holocaust.
But this isn’t true. Real Jewish identity stems from our connection with Hashem, Torah and Mitzvos.

Perpetuating the memory of the Holocaust is important - but not because it defines who we are. It doesn’t.
Perpetuating the memory of the Holocaust is important because it is a stark modern example of why anti-Semitism is not just another form of racial discrimination. It is in a class of its own. No other form of discrimination holds a group of people to a different standard than the rest, and no other form of discrimination regards a group of people as the cause of all evil.
One of the primary objectives of Holocaust deniers is to deny this simple truth. They want the world to think that there is nothing extraordinary about anti-Semitism. They want the world to think that anti-Semitism is just another standard case of prejudice. And the author is playing right into their hands.

+1