Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Holocaust Denial / Revisionism Is Always Antisemitic

I've been following the fallout from the infamous tweet by Free Gaza founder Greta Berlin in which she promoted a video by notorious antisemitic conspiracy theorist Eustace Mullins that charged Zionists with perpetrating the Nazi Holocaust.

One tortured angle that seems to be featuring prominently in defenses of Berlin at certain websites (nope, no links to such sewers) is that while the video and her apparent endorsement of it are clearly anti-Zionist, they are not actually antisemitic because they don't blame Jews as a whole, just Zionists.

Now, there are many reasons why this is incorrect and ridiculous.  For one thing, we all know that the word "Zionists" is frequently substituted for "Jews" in antisemitic speech, interchangeably.  For another, any ridiculous, paranoid, irrational, batshit, conspiracy theory charging a large subset of Jews of something insanely a-historical is just as antisemitic as one which charges all Jews.

But I doubt that the partisans defending Berlin will be persuaded by these, plainly evident as they are.  So instead, I will simply point out that Holocaust denial and revisionism of any sort are always antisemitic.

There is no purpose to Holocaust denial and revisionism other than antisemitism.  There is no audience for Holocaust denial or revisionism other than antisemites.  It has always been that way, since the beginnings of Holocaust revisionism, and it will always be so.

It is established, incontrovertible, historical fact, which 100% of legitimate historians agree on, that the Holocaust was perpetrated by the German Nazi regime in concert with their fascist collaborators throughout Europe, and resulted in the systematic genocide of six million Jews and thousands of others.  Period.  To suggest otherwise is antisemitic, and has been so since it was first attempted.

In light of this, there can be no denying that the video, and Berlin's promotion of it, are antisemitic.  The question remains, what will be done about this by those in the pro-Palestinian community.  The world is watching.

8 comments:

  1. Yes, Berlin is an anti-Semite.

    So far the Pro-Palestinian community seems split. Funny enough it is people like JVP and Jews for Peace, taking the line that Berlin is just an anti-Zionist but not an anti-Semite.

    On the other side, it is the folks like Ali Abunimah over at Electronic Intifada who is saying that she is an anti-Semite and they don't want her as part of the movement.

    The world is sort of a wacky place when that stuff starts happening. But then again with our election here we know this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think JVP et al are much more threatened by admitting that there is anti-Semitism in the anti-Israel position than gentiles possibly can be. This is for a couple of reasons--as Reuven said, it undermines their position, and also forces them too close to realizing how often people say horrible things about Jews, and then, literally or metaphorically, add,"But not you, you're good, you've rejected the horrible ways of your people, and overcome brainwashing."

      I also think that they know that if they protest against anti-Semitism themselves, they'll be marginalized in a heartbeat. Abunimeh can say whatever he wants, more or less, but if JVP says, "This is anti-Semitism and either it goes or we do," the answer is always going to be, "That's right, betray the struggle, show that you're still on their side."

      Delete
    2. @Makabit: That was extremely well put. You hit the nail on the head.

      The only other thing I would add to what you and Reuven said is that there is also possibly the purely psychological angle at play.

      Arab anti-Zionists of the Abunimeh "one state" variety are motivated, at base, by the drive to improve the condition of Arabs and Muslims. They go about it in ways that are counterproductive to that goal and wrong, and antisemitic in effect, but that is their motivation.

      Jewish anti-Zionists are not generally motivated, in their heart, by this desire to help Arabs. Their fundamental motivation is to constantly 'prove' their lack of tribalism and post-ethnic nature to themselves and others.

      So Arab anti-Zionists of the Abunimah variety, being fundamentally motivated by a goal which is outside of themselves, are goal-oriented and anything that gets in the way of the goal - like the scandal of an obviously bathsit antisemitic tweet - is a counterproductive nuisance to them. Thus they will do what it takes to make it go away. To Jewish anti-Zionists, on the other hand, whose motivation is not fundamentally external goal-oriented but rather self-oriented, the accusation of antisemitism against someone is yet another opportunity for them to visibly demonstrate their lack of tribal loyalty, and this is more important than the effect on some external goal. Thus they closed ranks with and defended Berlin.

      Delete
    3. Yes, I think that makes a lot of sense. Thanks, I hadn't thought of that angle.

      Delete
  2. Which is the situation Jews in assorted left-leaning orgs have always faced. If you insist on Jewish women's issues, many feminists would close doors on you. If you try to be an anti-racism activist while demanding that anti-Semitism be addressed, similar. And this is a movement that is absolutely drenched with anti-Semitism, it is the raison d'etre, it's not incidental at all.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I remember hearing that ridiculous story about Zionists or Jews (I forget which) having been allies of the Nazis. It was when I was in grad school, a loooong time ago. I learned about it from Trotskyite activists handing out leaflets.

    Apparently, the logic (if you want to call it that) was that some Jewish leaders in Nazi-occupied central Europe made deals with local Nazi officials early on in the war to save as many members of their community as they could. I forget what deals they made. Perhaps it was bribes. And some or all of those saved left for Palestine. Or something like that.

    Sorry for the lack of detail, but that was it. That was the "alliance" they were talking about. I remember thinking at the time that this was beyond ridiculous, that no one would take this seriously. Little did I know...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That theory - in pretty much that same level of detail - used to be popular on Daily Kos. It was promoted by a user named eiron, who also claimed to have done just about everything possible on the face of the Earth.

      Delete