Schlagwort: Holocaust

Auschwitz, 27. Januar 1945

am Januar 25, 2015

Von Clemens Heni

Am 27. Januar 2015 wird in Auschwitz der 70. Jahrestag der Befreiung durch die Rote Armee der Sowjetunion (UdSSR) begangen. Während die Befreier von Auschwitz nicht vertreten sein werden, jedenfalls nicht mit dem russischen Staatspräsidenten Putin, wird die Täternation dabei sein. In einer aufgeheizten Stimmung in Europa und dem Westen wird so getan, als ob „Steven Spielberg oder die Amerikaner“ Auschwitz befreit hätten, wie es der Journalist und ZEIT-Korrespondent in Berlin Mark Schieritz auf Phönix im Fernsehen überspitzt auf den Punkt brachte und einforderte, doch gerade jetzt die Rolle Russlands bzw. der Sowjetunion zu würdigen bei der Niederschlagung Nazi-Deutschlands und der Befreiung von Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Götz Aly wiederum, das getätschelte enfant terrible der deutschen Mainstream-Geschichtswissenschaft, tut so als ob ihn die Nicht-Einladung Putins stören würde, dabei hat doch Aly durch seine eigene Forschung seit Jahrzehnten einer Ökonomisierung des Holocaust das Wort geredet („Vordenker der Vernichtung“), 2008 rot und braun analogisiert, Kritik am Springer-Konzern 1968 mit der Bücherverbrennung 1933 gleichgesetzt und somit geholfen, das antikommunistische und die Shoah trivialisierende Feld vorzubereiten, das heute gegen „die Russen“ zurückschießt.

Dabei ist dieser Jahrestag US-Präsident Barack Obama völlig wurscht, er hatte den Termin nicht eingeplant (woher hätte er von diesem für ihn x-beliebigen x-ten Jahrestag auch vorab wissen sollen?) und ist in Indien. Nach einer aktuellen Studie der Bertelsmann-Stiftung wollen 81% der Deutschen nichts mehr vom Holocaust hören, den Blick in die schwarzrotgoldene Zukunft gerichtet.

Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland (BRD) wird beim Gedenken in Auschwitz durch zwei ehemalige DDR-Bürger vertreten. Nachdem es mit dem „Triumph des Willens“ nicht in jeder Hinsicht klappte, siegt heute der „Triumph des guten Willens“ (Eike Geisel) auf allen Kanälen, die „Nationalisierung der Erinnerung“ hat oberste kulturindustrielle Priorität.[1]

Bundespräsident Gaucks Behauptung, die ganz normalen Deutschen hätten 1945 als „Befreiung“[2] verstanden, widerlegt er in seiner Autobiografie 2009 hingegen selbst: dort beschreibt er, wie er zu Weihnachten 1944 vom „Weihnachtsmann“ einen hölzernen Panzer bekommen hat, weil er „ohne zu haspeln“ ein Gedicht aufsagen konnte.[3] Seine Eltern fürchteten die Rote Armee und die Sowjets („Russen“) und sehnten keineswegs eine Befreiung – von was, dem antisemitischen, völkischen, nationalsozialistischen Selbst? – herbei. Gauck setzt nicht nur obsessiv und mit System die DDR mit dem Nationalsozialismus gleich, nein: er fantasiert zudem, die Nazis seien ganz wenige böse Leute gewesen, die das ‚deutsche Volk‘ beherrscht hätten.

Der Bundespräsident steht im Trend einer neuen, zukunftsträchtigen Verharmlosung des Holocaust. In seinen längst bekannten und dokumentierten Reden und Publikationen diminuiert Gauck den Holocaust gleich mehrfach: Er setzt den Nationalsozialismus mit der DDR gleich und banalisiert dadurch ersteren zu einem bloßen ‚Unrechtsregime‘; er unterstellt Kritikern, welche die Shoah in ihrer Präzedenzlosigkeit und Einzigartigkeit analysieren, einen „psychischen Gewinn“, womit die modernen Gottlosen ein ‚inneres Loch‘ stopften. Gauck ist als politischer Aktivist bei der Veröffentlichung des „Schwarzbuchs des Kommunismus“ (1998)[4], der „Prager Deklaration“ (2008) und der Initiative „23. August 1939“ (2009) an vorderster Front mit dabei. Angesichts der „Prager Deklaration“ und der Gleichsetzung von rot und braun sprechen Experten in Jüdischen Studien wie Alvin H. Rosenfeld aus USA vom „Ende des Holocaust“[5], was auch die kulturindustrielle Verkitschung Anne Franks betrifft und viele weitere Facetten der Trivialisierung und Universalisierung der Shoah.

In Auschwitz wurden ca. 1,3 Millionen Menschen industriell vernichtet, darunter ca. 1,1 Millionen Juden. Die Opfer des präzedenzloses, nie dagewesenen Verbrechens, werden durch Gauck geradezu verhöhnt, wenn dieser Mann davon redet, jene, die gerade den präzedenzlosen Charakter der Shoah betonten, würden das als „psychischen Gewinn“ in einer gottlosen Welt verbuchen.[6]

Man kann also super stolzdeutsch den „Antikommunismus“ hochleben lassen und de facto die Präzedenzlosigkeit von Auschwitz und die Alleinschuld des Nationalsozialismus am Zweiten Weltkrieg zerreden – ja, zerreden – wenn man es nur wirklich will. Und Richard Herzinger will es und tut es und Springer freut es. Damit entwirklicht Herzinger die historische Leistung der Roten Armee, am 27. Januar 1945 das KZ und Vernichtungslager Auschwitz befreit zu haben. Für ihn ist die Betonung der Leistung der Roten Armee reine Propaganda der Kommunisten, da Stalin schon vor der Shoah ähnlich schlimme Verbrechen begangen habe. Herzinger schreibt im Geiste von Ernst Nolte und natürlich dessen Enkel/Sohn Timothy Snyder (Yale), dem Bestsellerautor von „Bloodlands“, einem Gebiet mit über 14 Millionen Toten zwischen 1932 und 1945, das Snyder erfindet, um die Einzigartigkeit des Holocaust zu leugnen bzw. zu trivialisieren.

Es gibt ein Denkmal in Israel, das in Gedenken an die heroische Leistung der Roten Armee und der jüdischen Soldaten in der Roten Armee errichtet und 2012 eingeweiht wurde:

“This is an opportunity to thank the Red Army,” said Peres. “Had it not defeated the Nazi beast then it is doubtful we would be standing here today. In World War II the Soviet Union prevented the world from surrendering.”

Memorial für die Rote Armee in Netanya, Israel, 2012

Zum obsessiven Antikommunismus der Liberalen, Bürgerlichen, Konservativen und Reaktionäre kommt jedoch noch ein Element hinzu. Die Kritik am Islamismus und seiner Pro-Nazi-Geschichte ist bedeutsam, gerade in Zeiten des Jihad, des muslimischen Antisemitismus und der Islamischen Staates (IS). Doch man kann es auch unwissenschaftlich und politisch grotesk machen. Und dann geht es um Geschichtsklitterung und die Stilisierung des Großmufti von Jerusalem, Amin al-Husaini, zum Obernazi, der Hitler erst zum Holocaust inspirieren musste. So schreiben die Nahostforscher Barry Rubin (1950–2014) und Wolfgang G. Schwanitz 2014 in einem Buch bei dem renommierten Verlag Yale University Press, es sei für Hitler bis zum Besuch von al-Hussaini am 28. November 1941 nicht klar gewesen, ob die Juden nur abgeschoben oder vernichtet werden sollten:

„But there was another consequence of the al-Husaini-Hitler meeting [28. Nov 1941, d.V.] to cement their alliance. A few hours after seeing the grand mufti Hitler ordered invitations sent for a conference to be held at a villa on Lake Wannsee. The meeting’s purpose was to plan the comprehensive extermination of all Europe’s Jews. Considerations of Muslim and Arab alliances, of course, were by no means the sole factor in a decision that grew from Hitler’s own anti-Semitic obsession. But until that moment the German dictator had left open the chance that expulsion might be an alternative to extermination.”[7]

Die beiden Autoren ignorieren großzügig nahezu die gesamte Holocaust- und Antisemitismusforschung, man denke nur an Hans Safrians Studien über Eichmann[8], Daniel J. Goldhagens Doktorarbeit über „Hitler’s Willing Executioners“ mit ihrem zentralen Satz „No Germans – No Holocaust“[9], oder Jochen Böhlers Dissertation „Auftakt zum Vernichtungskrieg. Die Wehrmacht in Polen 1939“, in der er z.B. anhand von Bundesarchivakten Einträge von deutschen Soldaten dokumentiert, die in antisemitischer Diktion ihre Eindrücke beim Einmarsch in Polen 1939 zum Ausdruck brachten.[10] Auf diesem antisemitischen Feld baute später der Vernichtungskrieg der Wehrmacht gegen die Sowjetunion und die Juden ab Juni 1941 („Unternehmen Barbarossa“) auf.

Doch nun wie Rubin und Schwanitz den Großmufti al-Husaini, ein ausgewiesener Antisemit und Freund Hitlers, als Stichwortgeber für die „Endlösung“ herbei zu fantasieren, das entbehrt jeder Grundlage und desavouiert sowohl die Holocaust- wie die Islamismusforschung.

Bedeutend und von herausgehobenem Interesse sind hingegen die Erkenntnisse der jüngsten kritischen Antisemitismusforschung. In ihrer Studie „Antisemitismus im Reichstag. Judenfeindliche Sprache in Politik und Gesellschaft der Weimarer Republik“ analysiert die Historikerin Susanne Wein[11] erstmals die Protokolle der Reichstagsdebatten, bettet sie in die politische Kultur der Zeit ein und zeigt wie offen und auch codiert der Antisemitismus in der Weimarer Republik von rechts bis links und der Mitte war. Sie schreibt über Zeitungsberichte bezüglich eines der großen Skandale der Republik, den „Barmatskandal“ Ende 1924/1925, und die antisemitischen Implikationen:

„Die Artikel der Barmatskandalisierung verwenden das physiognomische antisemitische Stigma der großen Nase nicht explizit, doch z.B. der Satz ‚Kutisker […] riecht herum‘ zentriert auf das Olfaktorische und degradiert die Person wiederum zu einem Tier, das herumschnüffelt. Die Bildsprache rekurriert demnach neben dem vorherrschenden Bezug auf die Botanik auch auf identifizierende Metaphern aus der Zoologie. Drittens steckt Gestank im Bild des kranken Volkskörpers. Dieser hat je nach Dramatisierung des jeweiligen Artikels eine eiternde Stelle oder ist mit Eiterbeulen übersät und entsprechend gering werden die Heilungschancen eingeschätzt, wobei in jedem Fall sofort reagiert werden muss. Alle Artikel dieser Art beinhalten den dringenden Aufruf zum Handeln, um die Krankheit zu bekämpfen, bevor es zu spät ist und die drastischen Bilder greifen auf Vernichtungsvokabular zurück. Der korrumpierende ‚(ost-)jüdische‘ Kapitalist wird vermischt mit dem Bild des ‚fremden Ostjuden‘, der Seuchen einschleppe. Beide Figuren „hängen“ am bereits durch den Krieg geschwächten deutschen Volkskörper und ’saugen ihn aus‘. Dieses aggressiv-antisemitische Bild aus der Medizin, das ‚den Juden‘ als Erreger und Überträger von Krankheiten entmenschlicht und ihn zum lebensunwerten Parasiten macht, bewegte sich noch auf der verbalen Ebene, hatte jedoch eine Kompatibilität zur künftigen nationalsozialistischen Tat.“[12]

Diese Analyse ist entscheidend, um die Vorgeschichte von Auschwitz und der Shoah besser verstehen zu können. Das erklärt nicht Auschwitz, aber den Weg dahin.

Auch Forschungen über den auf die Vernichtung der Juden zielenden Antisemitismus eines Achim von Arnim in seiner Rede „Über die Kennzeichen des Judentums“, den er vor der „Christlich-deutschen Tischgesellschaft“ im Frühjahr 1811 gehalten hat, der von dem Literaturwissenschaftler Heinz Härtl als der „schlimmste antisemitische Text der deutschen Romantik“ bezeichnet wurde, worauf die Historikerin Susanna Moßmann hinweist, sind von enormer Relevanz.[13]

Hier zeigte sich das christliche deutsche „Abendland“ und jeder einzelne Teilnehmer und jede einzelne Teilnehmerin oder Sympathisant und kuschelnder, sie „ernst“ nehmender Gesprächspartner der völkischen PEGIDA (und verwandter)-Aufmärsche und des Extremismus der Mitte ist in Haftung zu nehmen für diese antisemitische Tradition im Geschwätz vom schönen deutschen „Abendland“. Und jene Anti-PEGIDAisten, die ihren Judenhass als Antizionismus kaschieren, sind die andere Seite des gleichen, heutigen Deutschlands. Verschwörungswahnsinnige agitieren immer häufiger auch offen gegen Juden, Geldwirtschaft oder das „Finanzkapital“.

Das sind nur einige Aspekte, die angesichts der 70. Wiederkehr der Befreiung des Konzentrations- und Vernichtungslagers Auschwitz in den Blick zu nehmen wären.

Von einigen wenigen Forscherinnen abgesehen, sind es heute fast nur noch Satiriker, die in der Lage sind und die den Mut haben, die Realität in Worte zu fassen, hier die Satire-Redaktion von SpiegelOnline:

„Bundespräsident Gauck wird dagegen selbstverständlich bei der Gedenkveranstaltung vertreten sein. Schließlich waren es deutsche Soldaten, die sich den Okkupanten heroisch entgegenwarfen. Außerdem wären Auschwitz und somit auch alle damit verbundenen Feierlichkeiten ohne Deutschland niemals möglich gewesen.“

Für sachdienliche Hinweise und intellektuelle Inspiration danke ich Karl-Hans Wieser und Thomas Weidauer.

[1] Eike Geisel (1998): Triumph des guten Willens. Gute Nazis und selbsternannte Opfer. Die Nationalisierung der Erinnerung. Hg. von Klaus Bittermann, Berlin: Edition Tiamat.

[2] Joachim Gauck (2005a): Schuld und Schuldverarbeitung in Übergangsgesellschaften, in: Rektor der Universität Augsburg (Hg.) (2006), Gesellschaftspolitisches Engagement auf der Basis christlichen Glaubens. Laudationes und Festvorträge aus Anlass der Ehrenpromotionen von Prof. Dr. Andrea Riccardi und Dr. h.c. Joachim Gauck am 17. Juni 2005 an der Katholisch-Theologischen und an der Philosophisch-Sozialwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Universität Augsburg, Augsburg: Selbstverlag, 45–58, 52.

[3] Joachim Gauck (2009): Winter im Sommer – Frühling im Herbst. Erinnerungen, in Zusammenarbeit mit Helga Hirsch, München: Siedler, 21: „Weihnachten 1944 bestand ich meinen ersten öffentlichen Auftritt auf einer wahrscheinlich von der nationalsozialistischen Frauenschaft veranstalteten Weihnachtsfeier. Ich vermochte ein ganzes Weihnachtsgedicht aufzusagen, ohne mich zu verhaspeln und ohne zu stocken: ‚Von drauß, vom Walde komm ich her…‘ Der Weihnachtsmann war so gerührt, dass er versprach, nach der Feier noch bei mir zu Hause vorbeizukommen und mir ein spezielles Geschenk zu übergeben. Er hielt sein Versprechen: Ich bekam einen weiteren Panzer aus Holz.“ Wer sich im Alter so scheinbar wehmütig an die nazistischen Kriegszeiten erinnert, hat keine Distanz zur deutschen Geschichte. Denn das Narrativ wird nicht beispielsweise mit einer Reflexion gebrochen, was vierjährige jüdische Jungen und Mädchen zur gleichen Zeit erleben mussten.

[4] Stéphane Courtois (Hg.) (1997)/1998: Schwarzbuch des Kommunismus. Unterdrückung, Verbrechen und Terror. Mit dem Kapitel „Die Aufarbeitung des Sozialismus in der DDR“ von Joachim Gauck und Ehrhardt Neubert, München/Zürich: Piper. Die Originalausgabe erschien 1997 in Paris bei der Editions Robert Laffont; Joachim Gauck (1998): Vom schwierigen Umgang mit der Wahrnehmung, in: Courtois (Hg.), 885–894.

[5] Alvin H. Rosenfeld (2011): The End of the Holocaust: Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

[6] „Unübersehbar gibt es eine Tendenz der Entweltlichung des Holocaust. Das geschieht dann, wenn das Geschehen des deutschen Judenmordes in eine Einzigartigkeit überhöht wird, die letztlich dem Verstehen und der Analyse entzogen ist. Offensichtlich suchen bestimmte Milieus postreligiöser Gesellschaften nach der Dimension der Absolutheit, nach dem Element des Erschauerns vor dem Unsagbaren. Da dem Nichtreligiösen das Summum Bonum – Gott – fehlt, tritt an dessen Stelle das absolute Böse, das den Betrachter erschauern lässt. Das ist paradoxerweise ein psychischer Gewinn, der zudem noch einen weiteren Vorteil hat: Wer das Koordinatensystem religiöser Sinngebung verloren hat und unter einer gewissen Orientierungslosigkeit der Moderne litt, der gewann mit der Orientierung auf den Holocaust so etwas wie einen negativen Tiefpunkt, auf dem – so die unbewusste Hoffnung – so etwas wie ein Koordinatensystem errichtet werden konnte. Das aber wirkt ‚tröstlich‘ angesichts einer verstörend ungeordneten Moderne. Würde der Holocaust aber in einer unheiligen Sakralität auf eine quasi-religiöse Ebene entschwinden, wäre er vom Betrachter nur noch zu verdammen und zu verfluchen, nicht aber zu analysieren, zu erkennen und zu beschreiben.“ (Joachim Gauck (2006): Welche Erinnerungen braucht Europa?, http://www.bosch-stiftung.de/content/language1/downloads/Stiftungsvortrag_Gauck_fuer_Internet.pdf (eingesehen am 25. Januar 2015, S. 14f.)).

[7] Barry Rubin & Wolfgang G. Schwanitz (2014): Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East, New Haven: Yale University Press, ohne Seitenangabe (E-Book). Nun: Der Holocaust war Ende November 1941 längst im Gang, wie in der Ukraine in Babi Yar, unweit von Kiew, wo am 29./30. September 1941 in einem der größten Massaker der Shoah über 30.000 Juden ermordet wurden. In Litauen gab es Pogrome an den Juden noch bevor die Wehrmacht nach dem Überfall auf die Sowjetunion am 22. Juni 1941 überall angekommen war, wie erwähnt sind auch Morde an Juden im Zuge des Überfalls auf Polen 1939 Teil des Holocaust. Im Februar 2014 hat David Mikics den Autoren wegen dieser These, der Mufti habe Hitler quasi die Idee zur „Endlösung“ und zur Wannseekonferenz gegeben, scharf kritisiert. Schwanitz‘ Replik entkräftet die Kritik überhaupt nicht.

[8] Hans Safrian (1993)/1997: Eichmann und seine Gehilfen, Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer.

[9] Daniel Jonah Goldhagen (1996): Hitlers willige Vollstrecker: ganz gewöhnliche Deutsche und der Holocaust, Berlin: Siedler.

[10] Jochen Böhler (2006): Auftakt zum Vernichtungskrieg. Die Wehrmacht in Polen 1939, Frankfurt a.M.: Fischer, 46–48.

[11] Susanne Wein (2014): Antisemitismus im Reichstag. Judenfeindliche Sprache in Politik und Gesellschaft der Weimarer Republik, Frankfurt a.M. u.a.: Peter Lang (Zivilisationen & Geschichte, hg. von Ina Ulrike Paul und Uwe Puschner, Band 30; zgl. Diss. FU Berlin 2012).

[12] Wein 2014, 197.

[13] Susanna Moßmann (1996): Das Fremde ausscheiden. Antisemitismus und Nationalbewußtsein bei Ludwig Achim von Arnim und in der »Christlich-deutschen Tischgesellschaft«, in: Hans Peter Herrmann/Hans-Martin Blitz/Dies. (1996): Machtphantasie Deutschland. Nationalismus, Männlichkeit und Fremdenhaß im Vaterlandsdiskurs deutscher Schriftsteller des 18. Jahrhunderts, Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp Taschenbuch, S. 123–159, 152.

Huge event at Mount Scopus honors leading researcher on antisemitism

von admin

am Juni 3, 2014

in Allgemein

By Dr. Clemens Heni, Director, The Berlin International Center for the Study of Antisemitism (BICSA)

25–28 May, 2014, Israel’s biggest and one of the biggest conferences world-wide ever on the topic of antisemitism was held at the Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of Antisemitism (SICSA) at Hebrew University, Jerusalem, on the occasion of the retirement of historian Robert Solomon Wistrich. The International Conference was entitled “Anti-Judaism, Antisemitism, Delegitimizing Israel.”

(View from the Maiersdorf Faculty Club over Jerusalem*)

The location was beautifully chosen. From the terrace of the Maiersdorf Faculty Club, where the event was held, one has a stunning view over Jerusalem. On the other side of Mount Scopus, just a five minute walk away at the gorgeous Amphitheatre, one looks out over the Judean Mountains and desert up to the Dead Sea and Jordan.

(Hebrew University, Campus, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem*)

Robert Wistrich is the author of 17 books and the editor of 12. His work has been translated in many languages. He published over 350 articles between 1973 and 2011 – you find a complete list of his writings from 1973 through 2011 in the German edition of his Muslim Antisemitism, published in 2011 by Berlin based publishing house Edition Critic.

(Prof. Robert S. Wistrich’s German edition of his bestseller brochure from 2002 with the American Jewish Committee on Muslim Antisemitism, published in December 2011 with Berlin based publishing house Edition Critic)

I know of no other scholar who has such a record and continued reflection on antisemitism, the “longest hatred” and “lethal obsession,” as Robert frames it very precisely. His first article was published in 1973 about “Karl Marx, German Socialists and the Jewish Question.”

(Amphitheatre, Hebrew University, Mount Scopus)

Wistrich is known for “stepping back” and looking at the big picture, as he emphasized during his long talk at the conference. He focused on Jewish anti-Zionism, starting with famous Austrian literary critic Karl Kraus. The outstanding nature of Robert’s scholarship became again obvious during his presentation: like almost no one else he is able to jump from 19^th century Jewish anti-Zionism and Reform Judaism to Judith Butler and Noam Chomsky’s 21^st century Jewish anti-Zionism. He is not drawing direct lines and is very well aware of the differences between Hannah Arendt and Judith Butler, for example. The latter needs the German-Jewish thinker to bolster her own anti-Zionism. Arendt’s criticism of the nation-state, though, is indeed dangerous when it comes to the Jewish state. Still, this might differ from the very outspoken hatred of Zionism known from many Jewish-Austrian thinkers through the 1930s and that of the Butlers, Chomskys or even Finkelsteins of our time.

(Prof. Robert S. Wistrich during his presentation at the SICSA conference, Tuesday, 27 May, 2014)

Robert Wistrich dedicated several of his books to his mother Sabina. She made aliyah age 100 in 2010. When asked at Ben-Gurion Airport if she was so fascinated about Zionism to make aliyah at that age, she said: “No, I just want to see the book of my son. That is the reason I came to Israel.” She was thinking of her son’s comprehensive history of antisemitism, A Lethal Obsession. Anti-Semitism from Antiquity to the Global Jihad, a 1184-page volume, published that year.

Robert Wistrich’s research can be put in five categories:

1) The Left and Antisemitism

2) Jewish History

3) Hitler, National Socialism and the Holocaust/Shoah

4) Theories and the analysis of antisemitism and anti-Zionism

5) Muslim antisemitism

Contrary to many, Robert sees Friedrich Nietzsche in the most positive sense of the word as the most anti-German philosopher ever. Nietzsche was not a forerunner of fascism and Nazism. Instead, he embraced the Old Testament and the Jewish “naiveté of the strong heart.” One of the best talks at the huge conference was given by Margaret Brearley (not only because of her wonderful British accent). She dealt with German anti-Jewish esoteric and occult or paganist thinking from Friedrich Schiller through German romanticism and Schopenhauer.

Robert Wistrich was born in April 1945 in Kazakhstan. His father, Jacob Wistreich, a former member of Hashomer Hatzair, was displaced by Stalin (I do intentionally not use the word „deported“ as this means in German to be deported to a Holocaust site). This displacement by Stalin saved his life. Robert Wistrich lost half of his family in the Shoah.

Robert grew up in England, learning Polish, French, then English, German and Hebrew. He also knows or can read and listen to several other languages, including Yiddish, Russian, Ukrainian, Czech, Italian, Spanish, Latin, Dutch, and Arabic. His focus on Jewish history in Habsburg Austria is of tremendous importance. For example, he analyzed in his 1985 study Hitler’s Apocalypse the antisemitism of Hitler, including the time before 1914. Hitler lived in Vienna from 1907 until 1913. I mentioned this during my presentation at the conference, as we are increasingly facing scholars and authors who distort Hitler’s antisemitism. Take Brendan Simms from Cambridge, England, as an example. He argued in 2014 in an article for International Affairs that the First World War made Hitler an anti-English soldier. Only later did he become antisemitic, according to Simms. The same holds for American journalist Jonah Goldberg (National Review Online) who claims that Hitler was a leftist and “socialist” as he writes in his truly troubling and barely scholarly book Liberal Fascism. I emphasized that the notion that Hitler was left is utterly wrong. For example, “German Socialism,” as we call it, was based on private property and capitalism. The core of this “German Socialism” was hatred of Jews and the creation of the “people’s community” or Volksgemeinschaft in German. Hitler was an antisemite and the most far right politician ever. He was not an anticapitalist and not a “man of the left.”

At least in passing I could mention that there were Marxist (and later post-Marxist) pro-Israel scholars. Take Leo Löwenthal, Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno and Critical Theory as an example. Most pro-Israel scholars and authors in America, the UK, South Africa, Australia and Israel think a priori that Critical Theory is anti-Zionist. That is not the case. But one has to be able to read German to discover the truth behind the origins of Critical Theory, founded in 1937 by Max Horkheimer. He had to struggle with Zionism, but supported Israel. He was aware of the Nasserist and Egyptian threat in the 1950s, for example. I have just published a comprehensive study on the topic of Critical Theory and Israel.

Gershom Scholem, one of the most famous Israeli and Hebrew University professors ever, became a political Zionist by the mid 1930s, turning his back on the “Brit Shalom” period of 1925–1933, based on binationalism and rather cultural Zionism. In my talk, I focused on scholars like Christian Wiese from Frankfurt University who embraces the binational ideology of Hans Kohn. In 2006, Wiese went so far as to quote from one of the most absurd anti-Zionist books so far, Jacqueline Rose’s Question of Zion from 2005. In that book, Rose wrote that Hitler was perhaps inspired to write Mein Kampf and Theodor Herzl to write Der Judenstaat at the very same concert of Wagner music. The problem is that Herzl finished his manuscript in May 1895. Hitler was born in 1889 and was never in France until 1940 when he conquered the country with the German Wehrmacht. Wiese quoted from the very chapter (pages 58–107) in Rose’s book where this antisemitic fantasy of the Hitler/Herzl association by the same taste in music appeared. Finally, I analyzed the scholarly shortcomings of Yale historian Timothy Snyder in his study Bloodlands, which distorts Auschwitz and the Shoah. I also emphasized his close relationship with anti-Zionist Tony Judt. Likewise I criticized Yale’s Seyla Benhabib and her defamation of Israel in 2010. Then, I mentioned troubling tropes in contemporary scholarship in postcolonial studies that distort the history of the Shoah.

At the conference at SICSA there were almost 40 speakers and presentations from four continents (America, Europe, Africa, Asia). Rabbi Abraham Cooper from the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles analyzed the shocking new wave of anti-circumcision and anti-kosher-slaughtering discourse all over Europe, including Germany. Tammi Rossman-Benjamin dealt with the BDS (Boycott Divestment Sanctions) movement in California at the huge University of California (state sponsored) educational system. New York’s Ben Cohen with his deep “Alabama” English accent (that remark was funny, as his accent obviously is British) focused on some core features of today’s antisemitism. He distinguishes between historical German “bierkeller” antisemitism and today’s “bistro” antisemitism. Rude agitation and the defamation of Jews as Jews were replaced in many western societies by the more sophisticated version of 21^st century anti-Zionist antisemitism. Stephen Norwood showed the overlapping of left-wing and right-wing antisemitism in the United States. He also emphasized that there was significant support in the American Catholic mainstream and the Church during the 1930s and World War II for far-right Jew-hatred like that of Catholic priest Charles Coughlin.

A very few presentations, though, gave several people pause. One speaker said that there is “no Palestinian people” – who, then, should acknowledge the Jewish state, one must ask. Another speaker went so far as to say that the “West Bank is temporarily occupied by the Palestinians.” This was portrayed as supposedly pro-Israel. In fact, it is damaging the Israeli society from within the pro-Israel camp. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this year said that a future Palestinian state in the territories should think about including Jewish citizens. In fact, since 1948, Israel has some 20% Arab and Muslim citizens as well. Why is everybody a priori thinking of a Palestinian state with no Jews? Today, some 20% Jews are living in parts of the disputed territories. Daniel Pipes wrote about Netanyahu’s “master stroke.” Although I was not able to attend all presentations I did not hear people discussing that idea. This master stroke by Netanyahu includes the acceptance of Jews living in Judea and Samaria and in an Arab state. That would be a signal to the entire Arab and Muslim worlds that Jews are accepted as citizens and are not the “sons of pigs and apes” as the antisemitic discourse in parts of the Arab world always suggests.

Another speaker at the conference said that Norwegian killer Breivik is a criminal, “but” he killed “socialist anti-Zionists and possible future anti-Zionists.” This was shocking not just to me and I left the room soon after.

Another speaker stressed that EUrope is already “Islamized” which was a rather racist comment and had nothing to do with a specific criticism of Islamism, Jihad and Muslim antisemitism. One speaker said that Islam as such is the reason for antisemitism and every single (believing) Muslim will become an antisemite sooner or later. Jihadists and Islamists are antisemites today, other Muslims will become antisemitic later. This is of course not the case. Take groups like British Muslims for Israel as an example, among many other pro-Israel Muslims. They are a tiny and oppressed minority in the Muslim community, but they exist. Or look at people like Irshad Manji, known for her modern translation of the Quran. She is pro-Western, pro-Israel and anti-Islamist. The ontologization of Muslims as “the enemy” sooner or later has of course to be rejected.

In addition, I would state: In May 2014, American anti-Islam activist Pamela Geller and her allies started an ad campaign in New York City. They show the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, talking to Hitler in November 1941. It is tremendously important to focus on that alliance, indeed. But what does the ad say? On the right side of that big picture one can read “Islamic Jew-hatred: It’s in the Quran”:

This reminds me, sarcastically, of leading Sunni Islamist Yusuf al-Qaradawi. He said in January 2009 on TV that Allah installed Hitler to “punish the Jews.” This Holocaust affirmation is unbelievable. Geller, who is of course pro-Israel and against antisemitism and Jihad, now insinuates that not just the Mufti but also Hitler was inspired by the Quran. The Quran and Islamic Jew-hatred was first and then came Hitler. This is also distorting the history of Islamism as a modern phenomenon in the Muslim world. To claim that today’s Islamist antisemitism is in the Quran – and promoting this ideology with a picture of Hitler – denies or obfuscates the very history of Islamism.

In addition, it also obfuscates the history of Austrian and German modern antisemitism that lead to the Shoah. Islamism is a very modern ideology, as historian and Islamic studies scholar, president of the Middle East Forum (MEF) in Philadelphia, Daniel Pipes, tirelessly emphasizes. Take Hassan al-Banna’s founding of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928 in Egypt as a kind of starting point for 20^th century modern Islamism as a mass movement. Old Islamic Jew-hatred rather resembled Christian Jew-hatred, and is distinct from German eliminationist antisemitism during Nazi Germany and the Shoah. Pipes is also always emphasizing the historical and political difference between Islam and Islamism, take 1798 as a starting point for the demise of the Muslim world and the emergence of Islamist ideology.

Holocaust remembrance is used as a tool to fight the Jewish state. This was a core message of one the most fascinating greeting remarks at the gala dinner at the first evening of the conference by Canadian scholar in law and politician, Irvin Cotler. He is known worldwide for his fight against antisemitism and he is using law to fight Jew-hatred like the incitement to genocide by Iran. Cotler focused on the supposedly well-meaning and for sure more sophisticated anti-Zionist activists of today. They say that the Holocaust was a horrible crime, like South-African apartheid. At this point I ignore the Holocaust distorting aspects of that very comparison or equation, by the way. For liberals in particular Israel has become in some respects the new “Apartheid State” or even “Nazi State.” And here is what Irvin Cotler emphasized: IF Israel is an apartheid state or even a Nazi state people have to fight it. The terms apartheid state and Nazi state are not just meant to defame the entire project of a Jewish state. It calls liberals, leftists and all other people of “good will” to arms, according to Cotler. Anti-Zionist antisemitism is seen by those activists as a form of “anti-fascism.” There is a moral “necessity” to be anti-fascist and therefore today “anti-Israel,” as those people insinuate. Cotler’s vibrant and impressive remarks were a model for the entire conference. People truly feel good to fight Israel as this is seen in their delusional worldview as an act of “anti-fascism.” Cotler grasped and criticized that ideology splendidly.

British legal scholar Lesley Klaff showed the mainstreaming of “Holocaust inversion” in the UK, using the example of the Liberal Democratic Party’s MP David Ward. Since 2010, the Liberal Democratic Party is a coalition partner of the British government under the Conservative Party’s leadership of Prime Minister David Cameron.

Political scientist Matthias Küntzel from Hamburg analyzed the failure of the international community to deal with the antisemitism of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Iranian regime. Meir Litvak from Tel Aviv University also dealt with Iranian anti-Zionist antisemitism. However, Litvak also said that Iran is much more a rational country and not driven by Islamist messianism, as some might think. Esther Webman focused on aspects of the Arab antisemitic discourse, including Holocaust denial. Milton Shain from Cape Town, South Africa, focused on left-wing and Muslim anti-Zionist activism in the former apartheid state.

Historian Laurence Weinbaum from the World Jewish Congress (WJC) in Jerusalem spoke about Polish antisemitism in recent decades and the failure of Poland to deal with its involvement in the Shoah and with its own Jew-hatred before and after 1945. At the end of the day, though, the glass of water is rather “half full” and not “half empty,” Weinbaum said, given the fact that Poland is the first country of the former East Bloc that tries to deal emphatically with antisemitism and its own history, thanks in particular to the scholarship of Jan Tomasz Gross. Sarah Fainberg and Samuel Barnai dealt with Russian antisemitism and anti-Zionism, like far-right groups that embrace Nazi antisemitism and the “8. SS Division Florian Geyer” which has supporters among hardcore antisemitic (and anti-Western) groups in today’s Russia, as Barnai showed in his vibrant talk. Fainberg underlined that it is very difficult to take sides in the current crisis in Ukraine. For sure Russia has to be criticized for its policies, but Ukraine is not just a victim: the conflict is much more troubling. Particularly when it comes to antisemitism, this becomes obvious. In addition one could say: take Stepan Bandera statues and pro-OUN (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists) propaganda during the uprising this year at the Maidan and in many parts of Ukraine as examples. Russian antisemitism and anti-Western ideology is also very troubling and not every Russian criticism of “fascist” tendencies and antisemitism in Ukraine is necessarily honest in nature, given similar tendencies in Russia which are not condemned by the Kremlin.

French philosopher Shmuel Trigano gave yet another proof of his deep insights in contemporary antisemitic tropes in philosophy, including post-modernism. Trigano frames contemporary antisemitism as disguised as “philosemitism,” which is in fact true. Remember Cotler’s focus on Holocaust remembrance and its abuse by anti-Zionists. Historian Dina Porat underlined the importance of the EUMC working definition of antisemitism. She knows that this was never a legal document. However, it is important, according to Porat, to have a document that states, for example, that comparisons of Israel to Nazi Germany are not criticism of Israel but antisemitism.

One of the highlights of the conference was for sure the talk by Indiana Professor emeritus in Jewish Studies, Alvin Rosenfeld. He dealt with the reactions – today we would say “shitstorm” – on his world-famous brochure “Progressive” Jewish Thought and the new antisemitism from 2006, published by the American Jewish Committee (AJC). In his monograph Rosenfeld analyzed Jewish anti-Zionist thought, including Jacqueline Rose, Michael Neumann and Tony Judt. The New York Times set the pace for the denunciation of Rosenfeld’s masterpiece. Several authors criticized terms and events that Rosenfeld did not even mention in his piece, like the “Iraq War” or terms like “liberals” or “the liberals.”

Finally, there was a small concert for the conference participants at the Botanical Garden at Hebrew University. The four Israeli Irish folk musicians, among them a kind of young Jerusalem version of Paul Simon, gave the participants a wonderful rest. The place was other-worldly, typical Jerusalem stones surrounded by trees and flowers. At some point, a bird joined the concert. Before, the visit of the head of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis I, in the Middle East, could not overshadow the fantastic experience at Mount Scopus.

The entire conference was just possible thanks to the support by the Knapp Foundation, New York, and Charles Knapp, who also gave a powerful greeting address at the very beginning of the event and thanked all participants at the very end of the gathering with an exceptional statement: we, the speakers, shall keep on doing our research the way we do it and the way he witnessed it. This would be like a “thank you” to him…

In addition, Felix and Daniel Posen were supporters of SICSA and the event. I was a happy Felix Posen Fellow of SICSA in 2003 and 2004, after having been a speaker at Robert’s first international conference as new head of SICSA in December 2002.

Many conference participants said that they are looking forward to the future work of the honoree. His focus on the “longest hatred” paved the way for many scholars in recent decades. People who know the current situation among research centers on antisemitism world-wide are aware of the fact that this is an exception from the rule. It was a privilege for all speakers and participants to share their views on antisemitism, anti-Judaism and the delegitimization of Israel with the historian of antisemitism of our time.

However, we have to be realistic. Future generations of scholars even in Israel are not necessarily very much involved in the study of antisemitism. Nor are they known for a vibrant Zionist approach… Time will tell what research in antisemitism will look like in the years to come. Perhaps this conference was the peak of an entire generation or even several generations of scholars in antisemitism, headed by Robert Solomon Wistrich.

(Backcover of the German edition of Robert S. Wistrich’s Muslim Antisemitism, Dec. 2011)

* Many thanks to Lesley for sharing these pics with me and for her encouragement; as ever, I would like to equally thank Leslie for her editing; finally and in addition, the support and encouragement in recent days by friends and colleagues from around the world was wonderful, thanks so much to Simon, Steffi, Elena, Peter, Thomas, Milton, Jonathan and Neil.

Holocaust education: Are we learning the right thing? By Ron Hutter and Fred Winegust

von admin

am November 9, 2013

in Allgemein

On November 9, 1938, the Nazis unleashed a series of riots against the Jews of Germany and Austria. In the space of a few hours, thousands of synagogues, Jewish businesses and homes were damaged or destroyed .400 Jews were killed and for the first time, tens of thousands of Jews were sent to concentration camps simply because they were Jewish. This event came to be called “Kristallnacht,” “Night of Broken Glass” or “Night of Pogroms” for the shattered store windows that carpeted German streets. These well organized nation-wide pogroms with ordinary Germans being involved and being silent or applauding witnesses, were an essential turning point in Nazi Germany’s persecution of Jews, and a significant event in Holocaust history.

There have been noble attempts to educate people about these unique events. In Canada, Holocaust Education Week has been running in Toronto for 33 years in various locations around the Greater Toronto Area with the objective of educating the greater community at large about the lessons of the Holocaust, so that they could be understood and never repeated again. Some have called this the largest annual education event of its kind in the world.

Now, with the 75^th anniversary of The Night of Pogroms over the coming days, the effectiveness of Holocaust education is being called into question. Is it enough to have the remaining survivors tell their stories so we have an unbroken chain for future generations? Are we actually providing the right education or are we avoiding education on some of the root causes of the Holocaust, and by so doing, also missing reasons for the resurgence of anti-semitism in the form of anti-Israel boycotts, sanctions and divestment (like the BDS movment or current EU policies starting in 2014 towards Israeli goods from the disputed territorites) today?

Jews have been living in Europe for over 2000 years. Communities in Italy, along the Rhine, the Iberian Peninsula and elsewhere once thrived. The Jews served as merchants, physicians and later as advisers to the monarchies who recognised their value. Unfortunately their presence, beliefs, customs and success also sowed the seeds of their downfall when Christianity became the dominant religion in Europe. While paganism was replaced by the ‘Good News’, various pagan elements were incorporated in the new religion such as yuletide as well as superstitions that have endured to this day.Many of these superstitions were (and in some countries still are) about Jews, such as using Christian children’s blood in the making of Passover bread, or the poisoning of wells during the Black Plague.

The Holocaust that ended in 1945 with about 70% of European Jews murdered was supposed to be the shameful end of European antisemitism. Indeed, for some decades it was not politically correct to be openly antisemitic. That taboo has changed. Experts are puzzled. How can it be that post-Holocaust Europe still retains its antisemitism? Why has post-Holocaust European education failed in this regard?

In 2012 the Bundestag-Report, commissioned by the German Parliament, presented findings indicating that 20% of Germans hold antisemitic views. It reported that even school children use the word “Jew” in a derogatory sense. The recent Bielefeld Study of eight European countries reported that about 40% of respondees indicated that Israel has genocidal policies towards the Palestinians. In Germany this is 48% and Poland 63%.

Concurrent with these studies are continuing attempts to ban Jewish religious traditions such as circumcision and ritual kosher slaughter (neither practised in the same way as Muslim customs).Jewish communities in Germany have been taken aback by the populist wave of anti-Jewish sentiments under the guise of ‘protecting children’s rights’. Despite a detailed brochure explaining facts and myths of circumcision, published by the American Jewish Committee in Berlin, medical and legal experts supported by some politicians, advocate a ban on ritual circumcision. Various explanations given, such as ‘causing’ psychological trauma are clearly absurd and unscientific, given that Jewish boys are circumcised at eight days.

There is a great deal of misinformation where circumcision is lumped together with female genital mutilation. Even those that do acknowledge differences, dark but vague warnings about permanent physical and emotional damage are disseminated. Countries such as Switzerland, Sweden and Norway have banned kosher slaughter, and Poland followed suit early 2013. Clearly there are attempts to snuff out Jewish traditions under the guise of human and animal rights. While Germans during the Holocaust used gas to kill Jews, Europe now seems to want to deprive Jews of their cultural oxygen by eroding basic Jewish traditions.

Additionally, about half of Europeans believe that Israel is a quasi-Nazi state despite the fact that the EU definition of antisemitism also includes drawing comparisons between contemporary Israel and the Nazis.Various explanations are given for such beliefs including ignorance, traditional prejudice and attempts to level the field after the Holocaust, thereby blurring distinctions between perpetrators and victims and projecting German guilt onto the Jews.

How is it possible that after the Holocaust, a country such as Germany, can still have a problem with significant antisemitism? Some researchers believe that more education about the Holocaust is needed. However in a country like the Netherlands where Anne Frank’s hiding place attracts many tourists apart from Dutch children learning about her tragic story, soccer crowds chant “Ajax (a Jewish associated team) Jews to the gas”. In Hungary, soccer crowds make hissing noises like gas whilst chanting ’Auschwitz’. The fact that they do so, indicates they are not so ignorant and know what Auschwitz and gas chambers existed. In Cracow, Auschwitz Tours are prominently displayed.

Others, such as sociologist Wilhelm Heitmeyer of the University of Bielefeld blame antisemitism on economic hardship. However Germany is relatively prosperous, yet all synagogues and Jewish community centres have police guards outside. Moreover, a country like Norway which has one of the highest standards of living and prosperity in the world, is also one of the most antisemitic, notwithstanding it has only about a thousand Jews. Portugal and Spain are amongst the most antisemitic European countries according to the Bielefeld study, yet have very few Jews. On the other hand, in non-European countries where there is significant poverty as in India and where Jews have lived for about 1700 years and sometimes attained prominent positions, anti- Semitism among the Hindu majority is rare.What then can explain Europe’s Jewish problem?

The Holocaust has been described as a Jewish tragedy. It is not generally discussed as a failure of all that Christianity is supposed to stand for. And yet, therein lies the nucleus of Europe’s Jewish problem.

The founders of Christian thought are to be found in the Gospels where Matthew teaches that ‘His blood be upon us (Jews) and upon our children’ (27:24–25). In John (7:1–9) the Jews are referred to as the enemy of Jesus and compared to Satan. John is also the most popular gospel and the most anti-Jewish. While the Vatican has made attempts to reinterpret these texts, it needs to go further. One of the great founders of Christian thought was Augustine, who introduced the term “eternal witness” as the fate of Jews for rejecting Jesus as the messiah. Jews were doomed to be impoverished, homeless and wandering the earth unloved by their hosts. Augustine’s theology has been the basis of Christian oppression of Jews throughout the millennia. The story of Jews in Europe is mostly about forced conversions, pogroms, being expelled, cast into ghettoes and burned.Significantly, Jews became the stereotypical undesirable ‘other’ of European thought as well as in art, literature and music. For instance, the crusaders on their way to the holy land, wiped out Jewish communities in Germany. Later, Martin Luther advocated the expulsion of Jews and the burning of synagogues and Jewish holy books. Some 400 years later, his wishes would be carried out on his birthday on “Kristallnacht” in 1938. Luther’s theology would also be used in the defence of the Nazi war criminals in the Nuremberg trials after the war. In the 18^th century, European Enlightenment philosophers such as Voltaire, argued for the liberation of mankind, but maintained their hatred of Jews.

With the advent of German nationalism, the hep-hep riots in Germany targeted Jews while Wagner’s opera ‘the flying Dutchman’ played on the theme of Jewish homelessness and wandering through metaphor. Wagner’s irrational hatred of Jews – despite his support from Mendelssohn and conductor Hermann Levi – is well known. In literature, Grimm’s fairy tales, enjoyed by many children, included some antisemitic stories such as “The Jew in the bramble.” Indeed, Germany’s Nobel Prize literary icon, Gunther Grass, who belatedly admitted his membership of the SS, wrote a poem in 2012 that demonised the Jewish state, Israel. Most Germans in a survey agreed with him.

Musical celebrities, like former Nazi party member, conductor von Karajan, are highly idolised, his conduct during the war ignored .The Karajans and Grasses of Europe are glossed over at best. At the Berlin Film Festival the movie ’Paradise Now’, won several awards. The movie is an apologia for Palestinian suicide bombers. The sole Jew in the movie is one who gets paid for smuggling the suicide bomber across the border. These examples are a mere drop in the ocean. The Jewish problem in Europe is pervasive. It is therefore understandable that post-war Germans have transformed or integrated most of their old hatred of Judaism and Jews to resentment of the “collective Jew,” the Jewish state. This is reflected in a very biased media and cartoons.

For instance the highly respected Sueddeutsche Zeitung, abused a cartoon (made for another story with no connection to Israel or Jews) depicting a beastly looking god Moloch representing Israel, being served by Germany. Its resemblance to the cartoons of Nazi publication, Der Sturmer was remarkable.

While classic antisemitism is mostly a thing of the past, it is not always so. The anti-Judaic stance by traditional churches such as the Church of Scotland, stating that G-d’s covenant with the Jews has lapsed (and hence its link to the holy land), as well as the promotion of Israel boycotts by other churches and clerics such as Bishop Tutu continues to persist. The Lutheran churches in Germany and Scandinavia host radical anti-Israel guest speakers, many advocating boycotts and divestment of Israel and supporting radical NGO’s to undermine the democratically elected government of the Jewish state.

On the other-hand, Europe, including Germany has been largely indifferent to the persecution of Christians in Arab countries. It appears that the obsession with the Jewish state – where all non-Jewish citizens enjoy freedoms that can only be dreamed of in Arab countries – trumps genuine concern for their Christian brethren in Egypt and Iraq.

The difficulty with Europe is that it cannot reconcile its traditional antisemitism with modern developments and the unexpected course of history.It is ambivalent at best towards the Jewish state, and understandably so, for the stereotype of the Jew, who has been forced to wander unloved, homeless, and impoverished over 1800 years has now, not only a home, but a prosperous home that is a remarkable success story, exceeding hopes and expectations. Israel has won many Nobel prizes that Europe envies. In the last decade, Israel has won 7 science based Nobel prizes compared to Germany’s 4 and France’s 6. It is called the start-up nation because of its cutting edge research and development in bio medical, engineering, pharmaceutical, water and clean energy technologies.

All this, after the Holocaust and being in a state of constant war. In contrast, much of Europe is struggling economically and also demographically.It is no wonder that the EU invited Israel to participate in the Horizon 2020 program in scientific research – the only non-European country to be invited. Europe desires the know-how of the Jewish state, while resenting it at the same time.

This is reminiscent of the Jews in medieval times when they were needed in trade and medicine, but also resented as people who did not accept Jesus as the messiah. Importantly, the Jewish state’s existence and success, has put the theology of Augustine and stereotype of the Jew on its head – hence the resentment and envy of Europe. It is this cognitive dissonance that Europe must deal with. Reinterpreting the basis of traditional Christian thought that would be in harmony with 21st century reality is the challenge Europe needs to face. Would Europe have the courage or will to do so? Or, are Augustine and Luther so deeply ingrained in the psyche and culture of Europe, that Europe will remain a prisoner of its ancient beliefs and folklore?

Perhaps by exploring this in more depth, programs such as Holocaust Education Week can begin to change the dialogue from one of explaining what happened during the Holocaust to engaging in a dialogue to understand and eventually render irrelevant, the anti-Jewish teachings of the Christian church, which led to the Holocaust. Clearly, the present course of events especially in Europe requires a rethink and expansion of Holocaust education to include hitherto neglected issues.

Ron Hutter is a clinical psychologist currently practising in Berlin, Germany

Fred Winegust is a business development professional in Vaughan Ontario, and was part of the team that co-founded Toronto’s Holocaust Education Week