Time to Rethink How We Teach the Holocaust

[this article was printed in the London Jewish Chronicle, a pdf of which can be found here. Full pre-edited article text below]
Remembering the Holocaust is one of the few imperatives of contemporary Jewry, one of the few things the disparate streams of the Jewish people can agree upon. But what exactly are we remembering? The Shoah narrative is normally retold in a way that positions the Jews as an object in someone else’s drama: the subject is Hitler, his rise to power, and what he did to the Jews. In this narrative, the Jews only react after the fact, bewildered. Jews here play the part of the powerless victim, a person with little to no agency. As in Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s List, the Jews are nothing but supporting actors in Oskar Schindler’s story; as in Roman Polanski’s Pianist, it took the goodhearted Gentiles to save the talented Jews; as in the much-recounted story of Anne Frank, the most Jews could do was hide away and hope.
The hammering home of the status of the Jew as a powerless victim has instilled a nearly reflexive contemporary Jewish identification with any party that is perceived as powerless, deeply affecting Jewish identity. The passion of the post-genocidal generation of 1968 was rooted in this self-identification. As the French philosopher Alain Finkielkraut records in his masterful political memoir, The Imaginary Jew, “from Spartacus to Black Power, an instinctive and unconditional solidarity united me with all of the earth’s damned.”
Leading members of today’s young generation also find power and solace in the identity of the Jew as the Other. Jennifer Bleyer, the founder of the iconic Heeb Magazine, which is directed at young intellectual Jews, wrote that she “preferred the definition of Jews as ultimate outsiders.” Popular youth magazines and websites heavily reflect this opinion. That a young hip British group chose to call itself “Jewdas” shows this yearning for pariah status isn’t limited to one corner of the Diaspora.
There is, of course, nothing inherently wrong with identifying with the underdog. Unfortunately, however, in today’s post-1967 world, fellow Jews are rarely seen as the underdog, and Israel in particular is increasingly not seen as worth of solidarity. Instead, the ultimate underdogs in many people’s minds are the Palestinians.
There is, of course, nothing inherently wrong with supporting the Palestinians either, providing one does so in the context of supporting a two-state solution that confers self-determination for the Jews as well. But in recent years, leading members of the Jewish intelligentsia have pushed that option off the table—justifying their opposition to Zionism with allusions to Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. As Alvin Rosenfeld cites in a pamphlet published by the American Jewish Committee, scholars such as Jacqueline Rose have compared Herzl’s Der Judenstaat to Hitler’s Mein Kamf, Michael Neumann states that Israel has embarked on “a kinder, gentler genocide,” and collections of “progressive” Jewish writing such as Wrestling with Zion edited by Tony Kushner and Alisia Solomon sprinkle each essay with just enough references to the Holocaust as to take the comparison of Zionism and Nazism as a given. One need not agree with Rosenfeld’s conclusions to be shocked by his citations.
To confront this strain of thought that would turn Jews against the Jewish State, and to provide a more realistic understanding of Jewish power and our options in the Middle East, it could do us well to remember what we as a community did do with that power that we did have at the time–and what responsibility we bear as a community for the tragedy and the smokestacks. Few of us remember the vociferous debates within world Jewry before the demise of European Jewry began. For example: In 1935, the Menorah Journal – a leading intellectual journal of American Jewry – published an article by propaganda scholar and journalist Louis Minsky arguing that American Jews had been too aggressive thus far in their dealings with Hitler. Arguing that “the policy of fighting antisemitism by public agitation, parades, mass meetings, oratorical invective, persistent moralizing, boycott” has been disastrous, Minsky further claimed that “the aggressivist strategy, far from succeeding, has, on the contrary, aggravated the situation both in Germany and in this country.”
This line of argument is echoed by many in the Jewish community today when Jews attempt to take on threats broadcast loud and clear by elements in the Middle East. Instead of uniting against Iran, or providing a solid front against the same Hamas that keeps kidnapped soldiers and reporters from even the Red Cross, prominent intellectuals rail against the “Israel Lobby” in the leading intellectual publications, calling Jews to think twice about supporting the policies of the democratically elected government of Israel–all the while blaming the community for being too aggressive. Historical events may not repeat themselves, but historical relationships do-and unless we remember our own failings prior to the Holocaust, we might be doomed to repeat the consequences.
If we want the Jewish People to grow every stronger as a supportive community, it is time we rethink the narrative we teach our children. As history has proved time and again, the international community will not step in to stop a genocide in progress, no matter how many times we call upon them to remember times past. Never again is a fine slogan; but if we truly want to see these words borne out, we need to recognize which “again” we should never once more repeat: never again should we be powerless to act, and never again should we choose inaction when genocide crouches at the door.

Advertisements

Comments Off on Time to Rethink How We Teach the Holocaust

Filed under Uncategorized

Comments are closed.