The
Holocaust, Palestine and Israel:
Revision, Denial and Myth
by
Frank Scott
The
murderous treatment of European Jews during the Second World
War has become almost legendary in its depiction as a unique
and singularly important example of bigoted inhumanity, carried
to barbarous extremes. No other experience from among the overwhelming
number of historic cases of mass brutality has ever achieved
such status in western consciousness, partly because most of
the other slaughters were of third world, non - white people.
But despite this specific outrage being portrayed as an unparalleled
tragedy, injustice, bigotry and mass murder have been practiced
and gone relatively unquestioned since its occurrence, contrary
to the lessons supposedly learned from its example. Given this
contradictory impact, it should be permissible to look, as clearly
as evidence will allow, at exactly what took place, what its
moral lesson could be, what its political use has been, and
how it has helped perpetuate rather than end notions of racial
superiority and division that have dogged the world for millennia.
The
patriarchal belief systems on which Judaism, Christianity and
Islam are all based depend on faith, far more than material evidence.
What historic evidence exists is subject to human interpretation,
and as an example of how varied that interpretation can be, we
have these three religions. All are founded on the same original
story, with similar scriptures, prophets, and the alleged word
of god. God’s words apparently say different things to different
people at different times. Religious history, in which faith and
interpretation loom large, is really not that different from secular
history.
The
original story of the United States, for instance, was one of
European discovery, heroic conquest, incredible development and
national triumph. That was from the standpoint of the official
historians, before the revisionists had their say . A more modern
interpretation of that story includes the near physical and cultural
genocide of the native populations of the continents which Europe
discovered, even though people had been living on them for thousands
of years. A newer view of American history also saw chattel slavery
as something beyond an unfortunate economic arrangement which
led to civil war and racial misunderstanding, and more as an experience
of murderous human degradation carried to inhuman marketing extremes,
with social repercussions still apparent and still not fully understood
.
Historic
views and re-views of the past are taken by those with possible
preconceptions based on their education, training and belief systems;
historians can find selective truth in the material evidence at
hand, while creating immaterial evidence as well, often doing
so unconsciously, without any balance, and even stressing extremes.
In doing this they are not substantially different from religious
believers who pick and choose from what material evidence exists,
if any, to fit into the belief system . God and the accepted prophets
are sited to back up whatever is seen as good, righteous and just,
and a satan, with demonic assistants, is created to account for
the evil, craven brutality that is the darker side of human development.
Substitute us for God, and them for Satan, and we have much secular
history.
The
religious or scientific system produces its historians, who are
responsible not only for interpreting the evidence according to
the preconceived rules of faith and politics, but in many cases,
for the creation of evidence to fit within the mental structure
that thereby strengthens and reinforces the system’s foundation.
This
is not unique to one religious or national group, but is common
to all which have an established story of origin, and a following
interpretation of history to neatly fit into the original premise.
Given the dualism of western religious science, logical materialists
who claim physical objectivity as their basis supposedly have
nothing in common with the magical imaterialism of religion. But
despite age old battles between secularists and deists, neither
side in this either-or conflict really knows any more than what
is believed, accepted, and verified by the evidence that solidifies
the foundation of its system of belief. Anyone who contradicts
that evidence is either disregarded, or tossed out of the realm
of accepted reality. In the most extreme cases, the contradictor
is either imprisoned, or burned at the stake .
It
is in the serious questioning of rigidly held belief systems that
humanity - sometimes - advances beyond simple duality, arriving
at a relatively reasoned interpretation based on objective study
of material evidence, free of previously learned bias. In these
cases, divine good and demonic evil are left to the immaterialist
community, and the attempt is made to learn from previous experience
and hope for a better future that does not repeat past mistakes.
That hope is nonexistent when free thought and critical appraisal
are denied. It is in particular danger today, more so than in
the darkest ages of our past, when wanton slaughter may have been
the order of the day, but the weapons to affect it were infinitely
more primitive.
In
the aftermath of the Nazi assault on European Judaism , we have
seen a modern form of biblical interpretation evolve out of an
historic event. This interpretation is based almost as much on
faith as on verifiable fact. What should be at least fairly conclusive
according to examined evidence has become a religious belief system
in which no examination or question of evidence is allowed unless
it strengthens the already existing and accepted story. The event
is not only treated as unquestioned as the word of god, but if
dared to be questioned at all, punishable as blasphemy. Such is
the modern burden of what is called The Holocaust, having even
its name reflect a biblical sounding event, like The Creation.
A
terrible price was paid by the Jews of Europe in the experience
of this awful episode of history, but a heavy price is still being
paid, in some sense by the whole world, but mostly by Palestinians,
who played no role in these atrocities, though they have paid
dearly, and unconscionably, in their aftermath.
The
affect of the Holocaust on 21st century life continues to be as
profound, and dangerous, as its impact on the previous century.
What is euphemistically called “The Middle East Problem”
was really created by the western holocaust, and dumped on the
people of the Middle East. The solution to this problem involves
the West confronting its own responsibility, and ending its punishment
of the Arab world, especially the Palestinians, who have absorbed
generations of abuse and had a horrific, biblical vengeance visited
upon them for something they never did. Further, the accepted
story of the event, seemingly free of any material forces or consequences
save depravity and hatred of age old origin, invites a fatalism
which accepts ancient beliefs in a natural evil at the core of
humanity. Or at least, a majority of humanity, which seems historically
predisposed to persecute and murder a specific minority.
There
might be no better place to begin seeking a solution than at the
very event that has served to help create the problem. But any
attempt at reconsideration of this particular tragedy in a way
that questions some of the accepted story is treated as sacrilegious,
insane, unthinkable anti-Semitism, and in the most extreme cases,
as a crime punishable by jail or deportation. This was the case
with Ernest Zundel, one among many Holocaust Revisionists who
dare to challenge religious and political orthodoxy by questioning
our understanding of a human disaster which has helped perpetuate
human disaster.
Zundel
and other revisionists are called “holocaust deniers”
by those who label them in discriminatory fashion in order to
remove them from any serious consideration. The denigrating label
makes it seem as though they deny that any Jews were murdered,
or that Jews did not suffer terribly at the hands of Nazis and
their supporters. Calling these people names in order to reduce
them as beings is a bigotry no different, in essence, from using
derogatory labels like nigger, spic, kike or redneck. The label's
purpose is to belittle and deform, reducing people to caricatures
and worse; beings outside the realm of acceptability and not worthy
of consideration by “normal” people .
There
may be unsavory and bigoted types among those who call themselves
holocaust revisionists, but such people exist in business, government
and religion; do we entirely dismiss those worlds because some
of their practitioners may not meet our standards for acceptability?
Some who claim to be revisionists simply change the pejorative
“nazi” to the pejorative “communist” and
charge the same wholesale slaughters and incredible death tolls,
only with different victims and different murderers. Far more
important are the revisionists unmotivated by anything more than
a sense of human inquiry , who simply attempt to confront and
question accepted history with as much or as little bias as the
official historians.
Zundel
should be free to present his viewpoint and entertain his beliefs,
however unpopular they may be to those who often know nothing
more than what they have been told. This biased telling of the
story of individuals and events is a problem not only of the historic
past, but one we experience in everyday life. We are fed tales
which provoke bloody warfare and are devoutly believed and supported
by some, and just as devoutly disbelieved and opposed by others.
But neither school of thought is, as yet, proposing that all opposition
to its belief system be completely silenced, totally disregarded
or jailed. Some have indeed suffered such a fate, but they are
still the exception and not the rule. Unfortunately, among holocaust
revisionists, the rule is persecution; first, of the very idea,
and next, of the person expressing the very idea.
Our
political economy of religious science depends on the double standards
of dualism, but the issue of free speech tends to be revered by
people from all sides of the political and social spectrum. It
would be better for us all if we were less selective about where,
when , and on what subjects such freedom could be exercised.
Revisionists try to make the murderous history of the Holocaust
an aspect of reality, rather than a religious experience of unquestioned
worship and sorrow. This is their sin, but it is not only they
who suffer; all who profess a belief in freedom of _expression,
speech and thought pay a price. Yet, the attack on Zundel’s
free speech was barely noticed by the general public. Even though
it took place in Canada, it received no criticism from an American
civli liberties community which would be totally aroused if such
blatant suppression occurred in almost any other area of life,
and in any country. But that is not the case in the area dubbed
“holocaust denial”, where any outrage against free
speech and free thought is not only allowed, but righteously supported
and even vindictively applauded, wherever it occurs.
The
double standard regarding this issue is among the most troubling
of our social hypocrisies. One can easily imagine those depicted
as demons, like Saddam Hussein or Slobodan Milosevic, being regarded
as heroes, had they persecuted alleged holocaust deniers instead
of operating against Israeli and American interests, for which
they now face trial as war criminals.
Zundel
may be the best known among many who are critical of the holocaust
story, but who hardly deny that Jews were viciously persecuted
and murdered by the Nazis. He has been dogged for years because
of his expressed doubts regarding many aspects of the accepted
history, and as a result suffered physical attacks, the firebombing
of his home, and costly court cases finally leading to his imprisonment.
Among his blasphemous thought crimes he dares to believe that
all Germans were not uniquely evil, inhuman monsters, as they
are depicted in much of the holocaust story. Germany has been
the main financial backer of Israel, contributing billions of
dollars in retribution payments, and has been most fierce in smothering
free speech when it comes to this issue. But there are still many
who believe that Germans should be judged as unparalleled among
humans for their collective sin, and this has been internalized
by their government. In keeping with its guilt driven policies,
Germany locked Zundel in jail as soon as Canada expelled him for
his crime . And what was this offense? Under cover of visa problems
and alleged influence on potentially violent groups, Zundel was
really guilty of daring to express doubt in the official story
of the Holocaust, that doubt usually being not only about the
number of dead, but also concerning the plan and method of carrying
out mass murder . His is only the most serious and recent attack
on a revisionist. Many others have suffered loss of jobs , physical
attacks, and been imprisoned. In several nations, it is a punishable,
criminal offense to dare question the Holocaust in any ways that
displease the keepers of its official history.
The
horrendous treatment of european Jews , their forced exodus from
national homelands to concentration and slave labor camps, and
their further brutalization and murders, are believed part of
a centrally planned process of annihilation. This historically
unique crime was industrialized, with an around the clock production
line of transport, gas chambers, crematoria and almost unimaginable
cruelty. That is the brief outline generally accepted by most
of the world, or at least the western world, which might as well
be the whole world given the power balance. Of course, gas chambers
were not alleged to be the only method employed for these mass
murders, and the basic crimes were known of before that aspect
of the story was established. But though official records and
scholarship account for many deaths attributable to other causes
and methods, the popular acceptance of the phrase “six million
died in the gas chambers” is hardly ever discussed as being
impossible. In fact, there is almost as much use of the dreadful
sounding “six million died in the ovens”, with many
believing that six million living human beings were actually thrown
into mass fiery pits. The world was witness to the awful films
of the liberated camps , the emaciated survivors, and the piles
of skin and bone corpses. It is as if these sickening images were
not enough, and even more ghastly ones have to be created in order
to identify this as history’s most terrible crime.
That
such an incredible murderous deed, of such massive proportions,
was concealed from the world until long after it took place is
barely acknowledged as worthy of any question. Several histories
of the war were written at its end which made no mention of this
particular horrendous crime. Some survivors of the concentration
camps wrote of their terrible experiences, with no mention of
gas chambers. Are we to believe that all these writers , including
Eisenhower and Churchill, were simply anti-Semites?
This
awful scheme for exterminating an entire people was ordered by
passionate zealots who were motivated by irrational hatred. Yet,
conversely, it was organized by a core of dispassionate, bureaucratic
clones, and then carried out by a stoic force of robotic killers
. And this hideous production was performed while Germany suffered
devastation in the war, with many of its people going hungry,
its economy sorely lacking industrial supplies and its imminent
defeat looming. Might there be legitimate cause for questioning
at least some parts of the generally accepted story? Should critical
reappraisal be completely forbidden, given that this insane act
of collective murder was the major rationale for the displacement
and destruction of another people, the Palestinians, far removed
from any connection to Europe save for their domination by its
colonial power?
And
considering the depiction of Germans as a collection of homicidal
monsters, couldn't one of these satanic sadists have considered
a photograph of his, and their, horrendous work with gas chambers?
Is there any wonder that the same bureaucratic number crunchers
who tabulated every single person rounded up and sent to a camp,
were unable to tabulate the actual murders? And since all gas
chambers were allegedly destroyed by the Germans - who seemed
anxious to get rid of all evidence of the crime, but were extremely
careless about leaving alive participants in committing the crime
- isn't it worthy of question that their existence is based on
stories and confessions after the fact, with no one actually witnessing
these mass murder machines in action?
It
should not be a crime to wonder why not one actual photo of a
gas chamber exists, that all were destroyed and only reproductions
of them are offered as evidence. The only photos are of doors
or passages leading to such chambers, and showers said to have
served as gas chambers, but these all defy logic and only serve
belief. Would we accept explanation for the atomic bombing of
Hiroshima or Nagasaki by being presented with photos of roads
leading into town? Or the testimony of survivors and participants
in the bombings, but with no other evidence except their testimony
that the cities were devastated by such a weapon?
Given
the overwhelming evidence that clearly verifies the persecution
and murder of so many, why is it that this major part of the story
is so reliant on after the fact memories or detective work? That
several million people were killed this way and that not one photo
exists is certainly worthy of questioning, given that so much
else was recorded in photos and film. We have abundant pictorial
evidence of the dreadful conditions of the camps, the horrible
images that have been imprinted on us over the years. Yet, none
of these showed a gas chamber, its ruins, or recorded comments
about its existence . How can it be a sin and why should it be
a crime to question this story? Is it odd that some might see
the denial of that freedom as part of a political program to insure
that Israel is above any criticism and kept a safe place for world
Jewry, even though its reality has been quite the opposite? The
record of an earlier episode of inhuman brutality in the United
States offers an uncomfortable contrast.
During the wretched era of American lynching, more than two thousand
blacks were dragged from their homes or prison cells and publicly
hanged, often having their bodies literally torn apart after killing.
These bestial events were sometimes viewed by hundreds of people
in an often festive atmosphere of collective madness. Countless
photographs exist of these bizarre, barbaric affairs, with families
proudly posing, even smiling, in front of a brutalized black body
hanging from a tree. There may be legend and myth surrounding
much of this period, but there is undeniable evidence of the bloody
deeds in these photos, some of which were made into postcards
and mailed to friends and families, later becoming exhibits at
museums and galleries.
Should
this terrible episode of American history be offered as proof
that we were the most beastly race on earth? Far worse than later
Germans, who didn't gleefully photograph their atrocities and
happily share those photos with friends? Why not try to learn
more about this sordid past, rather than simply see the atrocities
as acts of a deranged people, having no basis in material history
save as a description of mass psychosis, based on age old biblical
hatred of...Africans? After all, we have no historic verification
for how many Africans were murdered during what was called, less
biblically, “the passages”, when slaves were stuffed
onto ships like animals, and beaten, starved and drowned while
crossing the Atlantic Ocean, with death toll estimates ranging
from a few to many millions. Has it been blasphemy to examine
that history , as closely as evidence will allow, in order to
arrive at something approximating what actually took place? Does
any reexamination of this brutal period, including a revisionist
pointing out that some slaves lived in more material security
than some workers, indicate a form of “slavery denial”?
We
certainly cannot change the fact of inhuman chattel slavery in
our past, nor the tremendous impact it has had on our national
development. But confronting our past might help us change the
present. Nearly half the prison population of the USA is black
, and ghettos and poverty wracked communities still number black
residents in the hundreds of thousands. That should be reason
enough to want to learn more about that past and how it affects
our society today . Really confronting such questions and seeking
answers based on social justice and humanitarian values could
mean social revolution, but even if we don't go that far, knowing
more can at least help us mythologize less.
We
would not make the crimes committed by the Nazis any less horrid
by removing myths, legends and emotional slander from the very
real pain and suffering they caused. What of the many alleged
tales of their ghastly practices, like making soap from the body
fat of dead Jews, stuffing pillows with their hair or making lamp
shades from their skin? Some of these are still repeated by those
who simply accepted any tale of German degeneracy, no matter how
mindless sounding or lacking any basis in fact. The generally
accepted and horrendous enough toll of a million deaths at Auschwitz
was once believed to be more than four million. These inflated
death toll figures and tales of bizarre brutality are no longer
tolerated by anyone with claims to serious scholarship, with agreement
here between revisionists and the official historians of holocaust
studies.
Survivors
are no less cursed with memories of an awful reality when these
kinds of exaggerations are faced as fabrications born of panic,
gullibility, and retaliatory hatred . This at one time unquestioned
parade of inhuman horrors became part of accepted history and
helped lead to the birth of a new nation, Israel, established
as a haven for the persecuted survivors of this bloodcurdling,
genocidal campaign conducted by the Nazis.
israel’s
existence since its origin in 1948 has remained critically unquestioned
by the mainstream west and its officially sanctioned political
opposition, mainly because of the horrors the world learned about
the Holocaust. And learned, and learned, and relearned. Hardly
a day passes that some TV program, film, workshop, museum display,
lecture or school curriculum is not dealing with what took place,
in horrifying detail. People are gripped and shaken by the vicarious
experience of this tragedy, recreated in veritable theme parks
of misery and suffering. They are compelled to wonder how people
could perform such contemptible violence, and how it could have
happened without outside intervention. But these same people still
support doctrines of racial supremacy and the mass murder of war
; they draw no connection to the lesson supposedly learned from
the holocaust tragedy, since that lesson seems specific only to
that single experience and its relation to the unquestioned need
for Israel as a haven for Jews.
State
organized violence, human persecution and bigotry continue, and
civilized populations still tolerate racial and colonial policies
that treat people and their homelands as worthless, unless owned,
occupied or exploited by superior beings. These matters are relatively
unquestioned by many who are moved to tears by the story of the
Holocaust, since that event is treated as an almost separate reality
from human history, let alone the sub category of Jewish history,
whose thousands of years seem reduced to about five during the
war. And Israel is still perceived by many as a home for people
rejected by the world, with no place else to go. This is a gross
simplification, but so is the larger story. Israel did not just
“happen” in 1948, though that might as well be the
case given popular ignorance of its history.
In
the late 19th century, when the european zionist movement for
a jewish homeland was established, most Jews wanted no such home.
They were content being citizens in the nations where they had
become part of the fabric of life, having worked hard to overcome
bigotry that saw them as “other”. Many of them took
serious issue with zionism, which existed long before most nazis
were born, let alone in power. This historic fact is not just
overlooked, but is unknown to people who think of zionism only
in its socialistic form of the kibbutz, and see Israel as something
that happened purely because of the nazi assault on european Jews.
Among
several proposed sites, Palestine was the biblical real estate
most desired by many Zionists as a national homeland , since it
was believed to be their source, even by allegedly secular Jews
who claimed to be atheists. That contradiction still prevails;
one can strongly assert no belief in god, while accepting a homeland
for Jews in israel, because that land was promised to them by...god.
The Holocaust helps make it possible to overlook this contradiction
by siting the jewish tragedy at the hands of the nazis as verification
for the need to create Israel. And even though most of the world’s
Jews are moved to at least psychologically support Israel’s
existence, they have never been there and have no plan to even
visit, let alone become settlers .
The
fact that as late as 1942, some Zionists and Nazis were discussing
the island nation of Madagascar as a possible homeland for Jews
- with as little concern for the native people there as in Palestine
- is another little known aspect of the relationships between
two groups proposing the same alienating idea, along decidedly
different lines; that Jews did not belong with “others”
and should be living in their own, separate country .
With
no consideration for some of these matters, we inherit a history
with little if any context, negating any awareness of events that
lead to or connect from one to the other in any understandable,
if occasionally mind boggling way. Things suddenly happen, with
no explanation for events other than their being caused or provoked
by saintly angels or demonic monsters. Are there material, worldly
reasons for these events? Where do these situations and creatures
come from? We are not to ask once the story, the gods and the
demons have been established. That is, if we wish to remain helpless
creatures shaped by history, rather than active beings who play
a conscious role in its creation.
The revision of all history, literally to look at it again, is
necessary if we wish to create a future without repeating past
mistakes. The maligned school of Holocaust Revision could make
a contribution towards understanding and peace, rather than represent
a criminal assault against political religious belief, as it is
portrayed. Taking a new look at any part of history, recent or
past, may lead to greater awareness of material forces which are
controllable by humans. This contradicts the fatalistic view of
humanity as inherently beastly and in need of control by elites,
which are usually working for god. This biblical notion at the
core of many human acts of mass murder flies in the face of real
human experience and calls for more, not less questioning of what
we are told about anything.
Whether
it is fed to us as legend, myth or alleged fact, nothing should
be treated as unquestionable. Facts are too often based on as
little proof as the legendary and mythological. For a recent,
obvious example, we need look no further than “weapons of
mass destruction” in Iraq. Thousands of people are dead
and a government was destroyed because of those alleged weapons,
which do not, and did not, exist.
The suffering of the Jews in Europe during the second world war
would not become less tragic under critical appraisal, though
its political impact might change, and this is the major reason
for its being kept an untouchable topic. In order to maintain
Israel’s position as a special nation, the myth of the jewish
people as a forever endangered species is perpetuated. The Holocaust
is seen as the culmination of a long history of murderous persecution
of Jews by the rest of the gentile world, with no allowance for
anything but continued misery and eternal threat. This incredibly
negative and narrow view estranges people from humanity, and in
so doing helps create a warped history of isolation. A contradictory
ideological need to be separate and different from “them”,
while humanistically desiring similarity and equality with “them”,
can only prolong the problem of what is called anti-Semitism,
despite that language confusion which so labels Europeans who
are no more Semites than are people from Finland or Nigeria.
Given
the verifiable history of Jewish persecution in the past, can
that possibly justify the persecution of Palestinians in the present?
Assuming that there was indeed a plot by european gentiles to
murder all the Jews of the continent, why should people who have
no real or fictional connection to such a sin be the ones to pay
the awful price of its atonement? And even if it is necessary
to insist that one inhuman episode was unique and different from
others, that one suffering was more painful than another, how
can any benefit be gained by causing still more suffering? No
horror experienced in Europe should serve as rationale for punishment
inflicted on people other than Europeans, if any at all are to
still be paying for this experience of inhuman slaughter among,
sadly, many such historic experiences. A more recent human disaster
can offer several comparisons, even if only in the treatment of
the story.
As
an example of how closer examination of events which take on near
legendary proportions can lead to better understanding, consider
the disastrous day Americans remember as “911”. It
did not become less tragic when investigation revealed that the
original estimated death toll of nearly 7,000 was actually just
over 3,000. The bereaved were no less saddened , the nation no
less shocked . Nor, unfortunately, were political forces swayed
to change their policies based on this lowered figure. But history
was served in moving the story from exaggeration, arrived at during
chaotic moments when all matters were barely verifiable, to the
actual human cost and impact of all those deaths. Lowering the
death toll was not a form of 911 “denial”, and it
did nothing to change the essence of the event.
Many
still believe it was the worst thing to ever happen, if limiting
the area of events to the USA. But far more people have been killed
in bombings in other countries than died that day in America,
and to acknowledge that fact - still generally unacknowledged
- might help to better understand why this act of terrorism might
have taken place, rather than viewing it as a gesture of sadistic
madmen who didn't like our style of dress, our democracy, or our
social behavior patterns . Were they simply “anti-americans”,
for some ancient, irrational biblical reason? Or were there social
and political as well as religious motivations for their murderous
attack? Would it hurt us to move beyond simplistic, reductionist
explanations in order to arrive at some understanding of material
reality that might help our relations with the rest of the world?
The
reexamination of 911 did not overlook the enormous cost in death
benefits and the number of hustlers who rushed to claim money,
posing as kin of those who allegedly perished. In this, it bore
a relation to what some call the “holocaust industry”,
referring to the money making aspects of that tragedy that entice
scam artists as well as legitimate victims. Finding an actual,
verifiable death toll saved money for insurers, but the material
evidence was examined not only to save money, nor to hurt the
memory of survivors, but to help see the disaster from a more
reality based perspective. We are still learning about the poorly
reported and even more poorly explained 911 events, and the wars
and further terrors they have unleashed in Afghanistan and especially
Iraq. Many still believe that Arabs had nothing to do with them,
and that they were organized and executed by the U.S. government.
Others claim it was the Israeli Mossad, and some believe it was
the act of a vengeful god, punishing us for whatever sins these
divinely oriented conspiracy freaks perceive. But none of these
theories, though they may be argued, laughed at or ridiculed,
are forbidden. Nor are those who entertain them threatened with
jail . This is as it should be, but isn't, where the Holocaust
is concerned.
Israel’s seemingly spontaneous “immaculate conception”
in 1948 is no more materially verifiable than the older religious
legend, but is as devoutly believed by a community of the faith.
The Palestinian people who lived in what later became Israel were
conveniently removed from material or critical consideration.
They were denied as a people and never considered as humans of
any importance , so it was easy to buy them out, kick them out,
or wipe them out if they resisted. Their painful history of injustice
has outraged most of the world, as evidenced by countless votes
in the United Nations which go against continued theft of Palestinian
land and brutalization of the Palestinian people. But the nature
of their suffering receives hardly a blink from the center of
global power in the USA, where real Palestinian Deniers are an
infinitely greater problem than any alleged Holocaust Deniers.
The American government and major opinion shaping institutions
have participated in the creation of Israel as a lily-white land
of suffering inhabitants, first escaping the horror of the Nazis,
and then preyed upon by the dreadful Arabs, portrayed as bloodthirsty
demons anxious to “push Israel into the sea”, as one
of the favored slogans has it. This colorful defiance of geography
and politics may have actually been expressed as a desire by some
witless opponent; more likely, it came from an Israeli and has
become useful to repeat in provoking fear and anxiety among Jews
all over the world, as the horrible holocaust story is rerun in
their imaginations each time a threat to Jews is perceived or
alleged . And these threats usually seem to happen in a social
vacuum, occupied by an innocent people in a rarified world befitting
a fairy tale as much as a physical reality.
The
contradictory notion of Jews as a historically blessed, special,
privileged sector of humanity, and at the same time as a historically
scorned, hated and brutalized group as well, is reinforced by
the conflicting histories of Israel, Palestine , the Holocaust
experience and the status of Judaism in the world today. To say
that a people hated and persecuted by the gentile world - which
means just about everyone else - for thousands of years, and then
slaughtered in the worst pogrom of them all, could become powerful
enough to hold sway over governments and public opinion is dismissed
as just another form of anti-Semitism. The mere mention of Jewish
power, exercised in obvious fashion and so acknowledged by many
Jewish groups and publications, reduces not only zionists but
large segments of the gentile world, including its left wing,
to screeching charges of anti-Semitism at those who defiantly
refer to “the power that dare not speak its name”.
But the U.S. government and media and their global subordinates
do not hesitate to follow the story so outlined, perpetuating
the myth that becomes reality when so many not only believe it,
but act on that belief.
Jewish
ethnic and cultural gifts to the arts and sciences have made incredible
contributions toward making the human community whole. Biblical
and ideological Judaism contradicts that wholeness by treating
the rest of the world as “other” and insisting on
its own uniqueness . Much of the world is drawn to the warm, humanistic
culture, while it is repelled by the cold, alienating ideology.
Just as mainstream science and much non-biblical religion reject
difference and see humanity as one race with common origins, a
biblical fundamentalist view holds to an ancient notion that divides
us into a deity’s less or more favored races. The political,
economic and psychological burdens of maintaining such older belief
systems are at the root of a global crisis. In an all too real
sense, we continue struggles with believers in immaterial legend
and fable, while reality demands that we wake up and face a material
world threatened by our wasteful and destructive divisions. These
ancient belief systems might be beneficial if their humanitarian
messages of equality for all took precedence over their patriarchal
teachings of the superiority of only some. We face failure the
longer we continue paying halfhearted lip service to the wisdom
of their most loving prophets, while we incur the cost of paying
wholehearted debt service to the deceit of their most hateful
profiteers .
Human suffering and brutality are a sad part of our history, but
we needn’t mythologize their experience or make them special;
rather, we need to understand that they impede our development
. We can learn from our most terrible mistakes, but not if we
fetishize and treat them as unique, almost divorced from history
rather than representing a terrible example of our worst behaviors,
practiced in the selfish, short sighted ignorance that continues
to rule our relations. Our bloody past and present make it clear
that It is possible to slaughter hundreds, thousands, even millions
of people, without an extermination plan or gas chambers.
History
is full of wholesale massacres, of people being regarded as worse
than insects or rodents, and barbarically murdered in horrendous
acts of brutality. Some of these were perpetrated over many years,
some over a few weeks, some a few days, and some, instantly. During
the same war that killed so many European Jews, the cities of
Dresden and Tokyo, among many others, were reduced to ashes in
firestorms that killed tens of thousands of people in a matter
of minutes. These poor souls were indeed, burned alive, and there
was no need to deliver them to death camps or crematoria; the
crematoria were delivered to them. Yet these and other brutal
acts of mass murder were written off as excusable acts of war
that killed “the enemy”, said enemy deserving such
a fate for being part and parcel of the war. Had the outcome been
different, how many allied generals would have been tried for
these mass murders, and executed as war criminals?
Why
does one horrible slaughter receive an unending stream of commemorations
and reparations, while hundreds of others are barely a drip in
the brain pan of humanity? Why does the Holocaust loom so large,
and yet serve as a rationale for the brutalization of a people
who had absolutely nothing to do with Nazis or Europe? And who
can certainly not be guilty of anti-Semitism, In as much as they
are, unlike the ashkenazi Jews of Europe, Semites themselves?
Could a better understanding of what happened to the Jews of Europe,
and of the underlying causes that brought about fascism, help
the world to better understand itself?
It
can’t possibly hurt us to learn what was at the root of
the Nazis’ blind hatred of communism, democracy and judaism,
and why they linked those hatreds, rather than continue accepting
ridiculous notions that reduce world history to perverse psychosomatic
disorders. What role did material events play in the creation
of national socialism in Germany, and how widely was it supported
by other nations? Contrary to simplistic belief, which has it
that the world instantly opposed the demonic evil of the Nazis,
many western powers were quite fond of their rabid anti-communism
and their strengthening of German finance capital . It is possible
to learn more about a terrible episode of history without denigrating
those who suffered, but also by not making a totally different
kind of human out of them, thereby perpetuating a dangerous myth
of original difference, when we most need to acknowledge that
we are all members of the same human race.
Fear
of present victimization because of past history, whether based
on fact or fiction, is not healthy for any human individual or
group . Rising above our past mistakes, our legends and our superstitions
in order to deal with real problems can contribute to growth in
knowledge and assurance of a future possibility for all of humanity.
That assurance is a necessity for the success of the human race,
and not just one nation, sect, religion or clan .
Seeing
the rest of humanity as historically bent on persecuting and eventually
murdering all Jews is hardly the healthiest way to sustain religious,
ethnic, national or personal survival. One has to major in the
inhumanities to entertain such dreadful thoughts. When carried
for generations, they cannot help but lead to more suspicion,
misunderstanding and divisions which help create the inhuman mental
and physical horror that was the reality of the Jews in Europe,
and is the reality of the Palestinian people now. Bigotry and
murder do not need commemorative death tolls or special killing
machine techniques to make them worse or better; they need to
stop.
The
revisioning of the Holocaust might help Israel, Palestine and
Judaism itself by confronting contradictions based on ancient
beliefs which have no place in the modern world, and which help
create murderous misunderstanding the longer they are accepted.
Controversies involving which war, which mass murder, or which
act of totalitarian brutality was worse than another can only
make it seem that some were better than others. But it is all
acts of brutality that must be seen as the problem , and not just
one in isolation, if we are to arrive at a solution.
If
we do not learn from history, it is said that we are condemned
to repeat it, and that has been the case with the Jewish experience
of one war, and the resultant Palestinian suffering that could
lead to a greater war . Coming to grips with what was called the
final solution could bring about confrontation with what could
be humanity’s final problem of racial and ethnic hatreds
which are used to help perpetuate ideologies of domination. We
need a peaceful “final solution” in confronting the
greatest problem humanity has ever faced. Nuclear and biological
weapons have replaced the more primitive bloody tools of the old
political testaments and while we have seen what those weapons
could do, we have not yet fully realized the lesson of their creation.
They are products of age old biblical inhumanity, brought to modern
technological perfection in exercising mass murder in post biblical
fashion. We have to become a civilized people and learn to work
together , before we revert to primitive savagery and literally
blow ourselves apart.
The
Holocaust was representative of the darkest side of humanity,
but unfortunately, it still covers many with its shadow. Bringing
light to such darkness involves much more than rethinking one
episode of history, but given its enormous impact on collective
consciousness, this one issue could have an affect on many more.
They may seem an unlikely source, but Holocaust Revisionists could
help bring about an enlightenment that enables us to see through
inherited doctrines of ignorance and bigotry, kept alive by political
and biblical systems of superstition which contribute to furthering
the danger to humanity.
Confronting
the real tragedy of what was done in the past, and the role it
has played in furthering human suffering and injustice in the
present, will be necessary for us to end such suffering in the
future. The hateful anti-Semitism that was at the core of Nazi
treatment of Jews cannot be forgotten, but it shouldn't be remembered
by developing a ridiculous philo-Semitism that places one event,
nation or people above critical reproach. Like the Zionists and
Nazis who agreed that Jews were different from everyone else,
this is either/or dualism at its worst. Just as past bigotry and
brutalizing of Jews has scarred humanity, so does present bigotry
and brutalizing of Palestinians disfigure us all. And just as
we demythologize the American story and create a more hopeful
future by doing so, we need to demythologize the mass injustice
in Europe, and the mass injustice it brought about in the Middle
East. Two wrongs do not make a right, any more than two lies can
make a truth. And while the truth may not set us absolutely free,
it could certainly help us move closer to relative freedom.
Copyright
(c) 2005 by Frank Scott. All rights reserved.
This
text may be used and shared in accordance with the fair-use provisions
of U.S. copyright law, and it may be
archived and redistributed in electronic form, provided that the
author is notified and no fee is charged for access.
Archiving, redistribution, or republication of this text on
other terms, in any medium, requires the consent of the author
frank
scott
email: frank@marin.cc.ca.us
225 laurel place, san rafael ca. 94901
(415)457 2415 cell (415)847 4105