Quote of the day—Auschwitz Memorial‏ @AuschwitzMuseum

When we look at Auschwitz we see the end of the process. It’s important to remember that the Holocaust actually did not start from gas chambers. This hatred gradually developed from words, stereotypes & prejudice through legal exclusion, dehumanization & escalating violence.

Auschwitz Memorial‏ @AuschwitzMuseum
Tweeted on November 26, 2018
[Correlation to present day circumstances are left as an exercise for the reader. Possible reference materials are here and here.—Joe]

9 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Auschwitz Memorial‏ @AuschwitzMuseum

  1. The victims of Auschwitz, very unfortunately, did not possess the three prerequisites to prevent their victimization.

    Currently, we – “we” being Americans – still possess one of the three, and active steps to constrain the first one may provoke a correcting response. I say “may” because the other two – awareness of the severity of the problem and willingness to undertake the drastic steps necessary to correct the problem – appear to be somewhat lacking in strength.

    It’s been often mentioned that the “threshold has yet to be crossed” to justify action, but I’m wondering what this unique threshold is supposed to look like.

    • “I’m wondering what this unique threshold is supposed to look like.

      It changes every day, along with the status quo. In practical terms, that line is officially crossed when you’re dead.

      It’s that Overton Window concept. We’re already far over that line, in the general thinking of, say, the 1950s (or, pick your decade) but in 2019 thinking we have some way to go yet. Such will always be the case, until we’re dead (Those could be real showers after all, and so it would be pre-mature to act until we find out). Thus we have nothing to say to the Jews of the 1930 except, “Hey, brothers and sisters; we’re just like you! See you on the other side!”

  2. And people who think we’re too “good” for it to happen here should remember the statistics. No matter how good you think you are, if you were magically transported to 1940s Germany you were much more likely to fall in behind Eichmann than Schindler…..

  3. One interesting aspect to the Jewish / Nazi holocaust is how the claimed number of victims has changed over time. Initial reports were >15 million. Then revised downward to ~12 million. Later revisions moved downward, and the current common number used in US schoolbooks is ~6,000,000 Jews, plus more “mental defectives,” homosexuals, gypsies, and other disfavored groups. Interestingly, though, the best estimate number of Jews in the area in 1939 was a little more than 5 million, and estimates are that roughly half of those managed to emigrate by 1944. Published estimates of total world Jewish ethnics by year don’t take anything close to a 6 million drop in that time-frame.
    The first plaque at Auschwitz claimed 4 million were killed there. Later that was revised to 2.5 million. Later it was revised to 960,000. Numbers for other museums and locations have likewise been revised, and always in teh same direction. The archaeological evidence people keep looking for keeps not materializing. The best current Israeli estimate I’ve seen based on documentation and excavations to verify numbers is about 1.5 million Jews.

    My goal is not to minimize the horror of the deathcamps – it WAS horrible. But it has all too often been used as a political football to shut down debate, silence opposition, hurl accusations to paint opponents as antisemitic rather than further reasonable and effective measures. IOW, people use it too bully others into silence… much as the Nazi’s and Socialists bullied dissenters into silence for being insufficiently revolutionary or whatever.

      • Hmm, I thought Joe and his commenters were striving for accuracy in all things, such as data, words, and deeds. I took anon’s comment as fitting into that category. Clarity is good. Or, are you suggesting that we should pay no attention to historical stories?

        The people who generated the 6M number have admitted to making up a story for political purposes. It was very effective. We need to be aware that this sort of thing is possible, and to be on guard that our opponents don’t pull the same sort of hand-waving story invention/exaggeration to our detriment. The Progressives are very good at script writing, as they have had a century, at least, to refine their talent.

      • I’d suspect that is to point out that propaganda happens both before and after the fact of events, and the actual facts often matter less than the narrative which gets successfully pushed and generally believed.

  4. It NEVER starts with an “Auschwitz”. There is always a “recipe” to follow that starts with just words but always escalates. Hitler followed this recipe for the Jews and Gypsys. Stalin used it on Ukrainians etc. Mao used it on ANYONE that he didn’t like, Pol Pot demonized intellectuals and successful business people. Now we see the EXACT SAME LANGUAGE used by the left to demonize anyone that doesn’t agree with them. This language is ALWAYS just THE FIRST STEP. If unopposed it will always progress….to violence, laws banning groups by ethnicity, beliefs etc. and eventually “the boxcars”. It’s a method as old as man and one the left is making use of every day.

    • “Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the communist …”

      That may have worked then, but will history rhyme?

Comments are closed.