A different take on the Holocaust
JMD Morgan
By Jerry Mazza
Online Journal Associate Editor
Jun 26, 2009, 00:26
Norman Finkelstein is not a wild-eyed Holocaust denier. In fact, his
parents were both survivors of the Warsaw Ghetto and the camps, his
father from Auschwitz, his mother from Majdanek.
A feisty intellectual raised in Brooklyn and expertly trained in
political science at Princeton and in Paris, Norman Finkelstein
published his book The Holocaust Industry � Reflections on the
Exploitation of Jewish Suffering in 2000, a second paperback edition in
2003, all of which created a �a firestorm� in Europe and little but
tsuris in America.
At the time of its writing, in the late �90s, Finkelstein was a
professor of Political Science at Hunter College in New York City. He
taught too at my alma mater, Brooklyn College, and Rutgers University,
most recently DePaul University in Chicago, from which he resigned when
he was denied tenure in 2007, most notably through the efforts of the
uncritical Holocaust booster, Alan Dershowitz.
Apart from the Wiki profile linked above, an interview by Victor Frolke,
ironically titled There�s No Business Like Shoah Business, Shoah meaning
�calamity� in Hebrew, a shorthand for the Holocaust, the title bearing
its own kind of Jewish wit, not unlike Finkelstein�s, and providing a
good inside view of the author�s wit, erudition, and convictions about
the Holocaust Industry. Finkelstein has accused as well Eli Wiesel and
Jewish leaders worldwide, including American Jewish elites, of a vast
shakedown of dollars from European countries and corporations, mainly
Germany, Switzerland and Poland, in the name of �needy Holocaust
survivors� when in fact the monies have gone largely to Holocaust
programs, memorials, studies, literature, museums, and, in general �the
Jewish community.�
Finkelstein also criticized Wiesel for taking $25,000 plus a limousine
for each of his lectures (given with a mystically proprietary pain) on
the Holocaust, forgetting, perhaps, the Gypsies had their own German
genocide in relatively the same percentage for their number. Wiesel
comes off vaguely like America�s self-appointed Sheriff Rudy Giuliani,
who made millions in speaking engagements on 9/11, multi-millions on his
own various companies post 9/11. This while he pushed first responders
to clean up Ground Zero in eight months not the allotted two and a half
years, and then walked away when those same first responders became
fatally ill and started dying off. I say this to level the
religious-political playing field here.
I add that another Italian-American, Senator Al D�Amato, made the
Holocaust his cause as his polling numbers were sagging, helping to
bully these same European nations and corporations into excessive and
misdirected Holocaust survivors� reparations. Of course, America paid
little to nothing for its failures to accept a limited number of
survivors, and turned away others.
Together Finkelstein tells us these various Holocaust causes form more
than a �cottage industry,� but a full-fledged promotion industry, fueled
by an ongoing ideology of �Holocaust correctness� that serves �certain
class and political interests.� Ironically, instead of helping the
Jewish cause, Finkelstein argues that the Holocaust Industry has become
�the main fomenter of anti-Semitism in Europe,� spreading an image of
greedy Jews. For his tough-mindedness, a genetic gift from his parents,
Finkelstein was labeled alternately �poisonous . . . a disgusting
self-hating Jew . . . something you find under a rock.� As Jesus, also a
Jew, would say, �Let he who is not guilty cast the first stone.�
Finkelstein, who is swift and astute man by nature, points out in the
Frolke interview that the New York Times in its Sunday Book Review
reserved a full page �to compare [his] book to �The Protocol of the
Elders of Zion,� a notorious anti-Semitic work, and called its author
�indecent,� �juvenile,� �self-righteous,� �arrogant� and �stupid.� Is
that all the news that�s fit to print or is it just a major media
organization serving the Holocaust Industry?
�I�ve looked it up; this review is worse than the one of Mein Kampf,�
Finkelstein says, in his high-pitched voice, full of moral indignation.
Finkelstein�s theory that the memory of the Nazi Holocaust is being
abused for political, moral and financial blackmail has had some
considerable impact. Not surprisingly, he has received death threats
from fanatics within the Jewish community and heard Elan Steinberg,
executive director of the World Jewish Congress, say, �Mr. Finkelstein
is full of shit� on the nightly television news in Germany. So much for
respecting a fellow Jew�s dissenting opinion.
Historically, Finkelstein points out that the frequent Holocaust mention
arrived in the US only after the Six Day War in 1967, that is when
Israel was seen as a winner not a victim, and able to protect American
interests in the Middle East. It grew exponentially in both places,
becoming �an ideological weapon in the Palestinian conflict.� He points
out, ironically, that his parents, being real Holocaust victims, used
the specter of the Holocaust to defend Palestinian rights. Finkelstein
mentions, too, in the second part of his book that the Nazi Holocaust
�is ideologically recast to serve certain political ends.� And so, his
aim is to establish �a distinction between Holocaust scholarship and
Holocaust literature.�
This latter literature is the one to which Daniel Goldhagen�s Hitler�s
Willing Executioners belongs, according to Finkelstein, because it has
two dogmas at its core: one, �the uniqueness of the Holocaust and the
gentiles� [purportedly] eternal irrational hatred of the Jews.� For the
author this becomes �a very small step from �Holocaust framework� to
�Holocaust conspiracy.�� He questions who profits from �a body of
literature with no historical merit.� In other words, �it only exists to
serve certain political and ideological goals . . . It�s called the
sociology of ideas.�
When questioned if the success of Goldhagen�s book was due in some part
to �an almost masochistic feeling of guilt in certain parts of Europe,�
Finkelstein�s response is �not probable. And besides, the book was a
bestseller in the US, too, and America had nothing to do with the
Holocaust.� Finkelstein asks if the book would have been equally
successful titled Hitler�s Unwilling Executioners. He doesn�t think so.
Its thesis -- that the gentiles were all killers waiting for the
leader�s signal -- �was ideologically convenient. It is the same thing
the American writer Cynthia Ozick said after the 1973 War [when Syria
and Egypt attacked Israel]: �Why does everybody hate Israel? Simple
[stock] answer: All the world wants to wipe out the Jews.��
Asked if he was a conspiracy theorist, Finkelstein answered �I�m not
sure why you�re invoking the conspiracy theory. Look, whenever you show
patterns, whenever you go beyond the spontaneous actions of people, you
hear conspiracy theory! I think that there�s more to history than just
the spontaneous actions of people.�
Asked how Finkelstein first conceived the book, he responded, �This book
is a result of 15 years of reflection. While I was working to get
financial compensation for my mother, I listed on a piece of paper
around 60 things that really bothered me about the Holocaust business.
One of these was the whole notion of �survivors.� In the early days, I
knew that a lot of Jews were stretching it a bit in order to be
considered as �survivors� under the German reparation laws. If you were
in the Soviet Union during the war, you weren�t eligible. So I knew
people had falsified their papers -- which was fairly easy because there
was no way to prove it. The only numbers there were, were from Auschwitz.
�So for a piece I did about the reparations issue, I looked in the old
agreements, from the �50s, the Luxembourg Agreements. The German
government paid in all about $50 billion. And, in addition, it gave $10
million a year between 1953 and 1965 to the Conference on Jewish
Material Claims Against Germany -- a billion dollars in current values.
The Germans said that only 15 percent of this money went to the victims.
The large chunk of the rest of it, according to Ronald Zweig, an expert
on the subject, went to Jewish communities in the Arab world, such as
Iraq, and institutions, such as Yad Vashem in Israel.
�You know why they didn�t give everything to the survivors? That�s what
is so amusing. They said there weren�t any victims anymore. All their
needs had been met. So the irony is, after misappropriating the money in
the �50s because there weren�t any more victims, now they claim all
these needy Holocaust victims have languished in poverty all these
years, because the Germans gave them no money. I find that funny.�
When Victor Frolke asks Finkelstein, �Your mother received $3,500 from
the German government right after the war. What happened?�
�In the �50s my mother, a mathematician who worked for Chase Manhattan
Bank, was diagnosed by a doctor -- I believe it was a Jewish doctor --
as having extreme hysteria, but this was not from her experiences in
Majdanek, she was told, but from her difficulty with adjusting in the
U.S. -- which is, of course, a filthy diagnosis. The Claims Conference
was exactly designed to pay out money to people like my mother, who were
either unfairly or inadequately compensated by the initial reparations.
Cases like hers were being corrected by giving a lump sum. But she
didn�t get a penny. Only so-called outstanding Jewish leaders and rabbis
got anything.
�My father got injured in Auschwitz and was given a lifetime pension by
the Germans. They delivered the money promptly and efficiently. I still
remember the blue envelopes from Trier. My father had Alzheimer�s near
the end of his life and I was his guardian. Every three months I had to
go to the German consulate to pick up his checks and to prove that he
was still alive. At the end of his life it came down to $600 a month.
All in all, $250,000 during his lifetime.
�All the survivors I talk to -- the Finkelstein residence quickly became
known as CCBC, Claims Conference Buster Central -- say the same thing:
We want the money that was distributed by the German government; we
don�t want the money given to the Jewish organizations. I think that is
one of the most devastating insights on the Holocaust industry -- that
the victims of Nazi persecution trust the German government more than
they do the Jewish organizations.�
When Finkelstein is asked about Jewish organizations claiming too much
money, and complaining that people like his mother didn�t get enough, he
responds �Some people misinterpret my book as saying I�m against
compensation. Oh no, I�m not! I�m all for compensation. But it should
only go to the real victims, and not to pseudo victims or to Jewish
communities and organizations.�
When asked if he, Finkelstein, considers himself a second generation
Holocaust victim, he answers firmly: �I think such a concept is
repulsive. That�s simply an effort to milk the Holocaust for another
generation. If I had ever said that to my mother, she would have given
me a good smack in the face! And rightfully so!�
Finkelstein�s personal morality is exemplary. And I think that�s part of
the resentment towards him: that his critics don�t live up to his
standards. Frolke suggests Finkelstein �believes only camp survivors are
real Holocaust survivors.� Frolke asks �What about Jews who fled to the
Soviet Union, came back and had nothing -- why not call them �Holocaust
survivors� as well?�
�Fine, then we should call Palestinians �Holocaust survivors.� If you
make the definition so elastic, so flexible that it includes refugees,
then you should count them all.�
�That wouldn�t be fair to the real survivors,� Frolke comments.
�It�s not a question of fair. You can�t argue on the one hand that the
Holocaust is fraught with moral meaning, and then trivialize the term
�Holocaust survivor� by including everyone. There is a difference
whether you spent the war on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, like Mr.
Kissinger, or you spent it in Auschwitz . . . Since Hitler targeted all
of world Jewry, Israel Singer says, anybody who has survived is a
Holocaust survivor. But I would say, what about all the Vietnamese
people who suffered from the politics of Mr. Kissinger? Are they
Holocaust survivors? No, no, we can�t call them that. Do you think the
Vietnamese received one nickel of compensation? Forget it. The U.S.
won�t even officially apologize.�
When Finkelstein asserts that the �Holocaust Industry� has become an
even bigger Holocaust denier than the usual Holocaust deniers, Frolke
wonders, �How so?�
Finkelstein responds that �The official number of Holocaust survivors
the Israeli government now gives is a million. Or 960,000, to be exact.
At the same time Jewish organizations have been claiming, since the
early �90s, that 10,000 die each month. So that would mean that in 1990
there were 2 million survivors left. In 1990, not more that a quarter
could be alive from World War II. That means 8 million in May 1945.
Well, there were fewer than 8 million Jews in all of Nazi-occupied
Europe. In other words, if these numbers are correct, the Holocaust
didn�t happen. As my mother used to say, if everyone who claims to be a
Holocaust survivor actually is one, who did Hitler kill?�
When reminded that in 1998, when Swiss banks restituted $1.25 billion to
Jewish organizations for dormant Jewish accounts, Finkelstein is asked
if they get should get their money back. He responds, �The case should
have been handled by the international Claims Resolution Tribunal,
instead of by the World Jewish Restitution Organization. They could have
processed the claims and given out the money to those who deserve it.
�By the way, nobody noticed one of the most interesting revelations in
the book: that banks in the U.S. also sit on dormant Jewish accounts
from the war. It�s not even my own finding. It�s on Page 2 of the
Volcker Report [the $500 million audit report on Switzerland that came
out in 1999]. It amounts to $6 million, of which only $500,000 is going
to be paid. In other words, the American record is worse than the Swiss!
That�s what Seymour Rubin, American delegate during the negotiations,
testified to the House Banking Committee. Not a word reported anywhere.
Not a word.� When asked what American banks were involved, Finkelstein
answered, �Nobody knows. We have to do a $500 million research report
just like the Swiss to find out. We might never. We would be on a slow
boat to Munich.�
When Frolke says to Finkelstein, �you are totally opposed to the claims
that are now being laid on property owned by the 3.5 million Jews who
lived in Poland. Your family is from Poland. You could get some money
back after all.� Finkelstein answers, �No! It never occurred to us. We
don�t want the money. My mother�s father owned a little tobacco store,
my father�s father owned a little lumber mill. Jewish organizations are
claiming back my grandparents� property without asking our permission.
We never gave our sanction! It�s grave robbery!
�I say: Enough. The American Jewish community is rich enough. It doesn�t
need to evict Polish peasants from their land, Polish tenants from their
homes and Polish sick from the hospitals for more money. They have
plenty of money. Mr. Bronfman just sold Seagram for $27 billion. That�s
plenty. You don�t have to impoverish Polish people even more.�
When asked, �What if your grandparents� lumber mill is owned not by a
poor Polish family but by a wealthy former Communist apparatchik? Still
not interested? Finkelstein answers, �That wouldn�t make any difference.�
When asked, �Have you ever been to Auschwitz?,� Finkelstein answers,
�No. I�ve lived with the Holocaust for 40 years. That�s enough. I don�t
need to have more of it. I�m not like one of those second-generation
Holocaust victims that go lie in a gas oven.� And so, we�ll leave
Finkelstein�s story at that for now . . .
There�s much more to know, to find out, about the Holocaust from this
amazing man, Norman Finkelstein. I offer this article up as a belated
review. It�s never too late to understand, to change your opinion about,
what you thought was absolute truth and is not. Give Norman a look.
You�ll never look at the Holocaust the same way again.
Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer living in New York City. Reach him at
gv...@verizon.net. His new book, �State Of Shock: Poems from 9/11 on� is
available at www.jerrymazza.com, Amazon or Barnesandnoble.com.
Nebulous
"JMD Morgan" <John...@email.non> wrote in message
news:Obidnbc7b8k_YNvX...@giganews.com...
The Death of Lord and Lady Dalhousie
ALAS! Lord and Lady Dalhousie are dead, and buried at last,
Which causes many people to feel a little downcast;
And both lie side by side in one grave,
But I hope God in His goodness their souls will save.
And may He protect their children that are left behind,
And may they always food and raiment find;
And from the paths of virtue may they ne'er be led,
And may they always find a house wherein to lay their head.
Lord Dalhousie was a man worthy of all praise,
And to his memory I hope a monument the people will raise,
That will stand for many ages to came
To commemorate the good deeds he has done.
He was beloved by men of high and low degree,
Especially in Forfarshire by his tenantry:
And by many of the inhabitants in and around Dundee,
Because he was affab1e in temper. and void of all vanity.
He had great affection for his children, also his wife,
'Tis said he loved her as dear as his life;
And I trust they are now in heaven above,
Where all is joy, peace, and love.
At the age of fourteen he resolved to go to sea,
So he entered the training ship Britannia belonging the navy,
And entered as a midshipman as he considered most fit
Then passed through the course of training with the greatest credit.
In a short time he obtained the rank of lieutenant,
Then to her Majesty's ship Galatea he was sent;
Which was under the command of the Duke of Edinburgh,
And during his service there he felt but little sorrow.
And from that he was promoted to be commander of the Britannia,
And was well liked by the men, for what he said was law;
And by him Prince Albert Victor and Prince George received a naval
education,
Which met with the Prince of Wales' most hearty approbation.
'Twas in the year 1877 he married the Lady Ada Louisa Bennett,
And by marrying that noble lady he ne'er did regret;
And he was ever ready to give his service in any way,
Most willingly and cheerfully by night or by day.
'Twas in the year of 1887, and on Thursday the 1st of December,
Which his relatives and friends will long remember
That were present at the funeral in Cockpen, churchyard,
Because they had for the noble Lord a great regard.
About eleven o'clock the remains reached Dalhousie,
And were met by a body of the tenantry.
They conveyed them inside the building all seemingly woe begone
And among those that sent wreaths was Lord Claude Hamilton.
Those that sent wreaths were but very few,
But one in particular was the Duke of Buccleuch;
Besides Dr. Herbert Spencer, and Countess Rosebery, and Lady Bennett,
Which no doubt were sent by them with heartfelt regret.
Besides those that sent wreaths in addition were the Earl and Countess of
Aberdeen,
Especially the Prince of Wales' was most lovely to be seen,
And the Earl of Dalkeith's wreath was very pretty too,
With a mixture of green and white flowers, beautiful to view.
Amongst those present at the interment were Mr Marjoribanks, M.P.,
Also ex-Provost Ballingall from Bonnie Dundee;
Besides the Honourable W. G. Colville, representing the Duke and Duchess of
Edinburgh,
While in every one's face standing at the grave was depicted sorrow.
The funeral service was conducted in the Church of Cockpen
By the Rev. J. Crabb, of St. Andrew's Episcopal Church, town of Brechin;
And as the two coffins were lowered into their last resting place,
Then the peop1e retired with sad hearts at a quick pace.