DOWNLOAD Genocide in Our Time - NewFoundations

Holocaust, a meaning with which we are still struggling,lies more in the ways in which it differs fromother genocides and not in the ways it is similar. Thosekey differences lie in the methodology employed in theexecution of the Nazis' plan to exterminate the Jewsand, novel to Feingold, in the fact that in destroyingsuch a large portion of the Jewish population it destroyeda people whose contributions had a majorimpact on Western culture, thus transforming the futuredevelopment of Western civilization. This impact,according to Feingold, will not be equally felt with thedestruction of those other groups, such as the Armeniansor the Gypsies, whose thinkers did not play assignificant a role in the development of Europeanculture.¹ 3. 19 ¹Feingold, Henry L. "How Unique Is the Holocaust?"In Genocide: Critical Issues of the Holocaust. Ed. byAlex Grobman and Daniel Landes. Los Angeles: SimonWiesenthal Center and Chappaqua, NY: Rossell Books,1983. LC 83-3052. ISBN 0-940646-04-8.Feingold asserts the uniqueness of the Holocaustand warns against trivializing the event by using it asa metaphor for all cases of oppression. He againstresses the idea that the Holocaust was unique in thatit destroyed the Jews, a unique people, who produceda great many significant thinkers without whomEuropean society would not be the same. He alsocharacterizes the Holocaust's uniqueness as resting ona few essential characteristics: in its radical evil, in itsscale, and more importantly in that it was the first timethat the modern Western industrial system — a systemintended to improve the quality of human life — wassystematically used for the destruction of life.¹ 3. 20 ¹Feuer, Lewis S. "The Reasoning of Holocaust Theology." This World no. 14 (Spring/Summer 1986): 70-82.Feuer, a well known philosopher, rejects the ideathat it is useful to call the Holocaust unique. A uniqueevent, he reasons, is one that can never happen again,"that is of necessity a class with one member. " Andyet a major, and to Feuer appropriate, concern aboutthe Holocaust is that we understand it in such a waythat we can ensure that a similar event will not happenagain. If it were truly unique, as uniqueness is definedabove, then our efforts to prevent recurrence arepointless: by definition this could not happen. ThereforeFeuer suggests that it is more useful to understand theHolocaust as being unprecedented and not unique.¹ 3. 21 ¹Fox, John P. "The Holocaust: A 'Non-Unique' Eventfor All Humanity?" In Remembering for the Future:\Working Papers and Addenda. Vok 2. Ed. by YehudaBauer, et al. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1989. ISBN 0-08-036754-2.Fox states that to gain insight into the significanceof the Holocaust for humankind, we must abandon "thebitter and often pointless debate about whether, for anumber of reasons, the Holocaust should be considereda totally 'unique' or 'mystical' event in the whole ofhuman history. " He feels a more correct approach mustinclude the study of those constant conditions ofhumankind and society that facilitated an event like theHolocaust. It is within this context that Fox claims that"what made the Holocaust 'unique'" was the conjunctionofboth the presence and leadership of Adolf Hitlerwith "all the psychological and social features of 'manin society'. ... "¹ 3. 22 ¹Freeman, Michael. "Genocide and Social Science. "Patterns of Prejudice 20:4 (1986): 3-15.From the point of view of the social sciences,Freeman finds that "the debate between uniqueness andcomparison [of the Holocaust] may be misleading bypresenting us with a false choice. " Some argue thatemphasizing the differences between the Holocaust andother genocidal events betters further understanding;others consider that a comparative emphasis betterachieves this same end. Freeman believes that bothapproaches may be useful in understanding any caseof genocide, including the Holocaust.¹ 3. 23 ¹Friedlander, Henry. "Toward a Methodology ofTeaching about the Holocaust. " Teachers CollegeRecord 80:3 (February 1979): 519-542.Recognizing that the Holocaust is increasinglybeing taught in American schools and colleges, Friedlanderoffers a rationale with which to approach thetopic. In the course of his discussion he highlights theobvious importance of the issue of uniqueness inteaching about the Holocaust. Only if comparisons toother historical events can be made can we rightly andproductively integrate the subject into a school curriculum.Friedlander warns that those who would makethe uniqueness of the Holocaust into "sacred history"stifle serious historical discussion. Friedlander alsodiscounts the concept that a unique aspect of theHolocaust includes the intention of the Nazis to annihilatethe Jews and instead focuses on the methodologyemployed as its outstandingly unique feature, sayingthat ". .. in technological efficiency it was sui generis.... "The Issue of the Holocaust as a Unique Event 59