Carlo Strenger: Ahmadinejad, Netanyahu and the Holocaust: The ethics of memory
[Professor Carlo Strenger was born in Basel, Switzerland, trained in philosophy and psychology and received his PhD from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He currently teaches at the psychology department of Tel Aviv University, a member of the Institute of Existential Psychoanalysis, Zurich and of the Permanent Monitoring Panel on Terrorism of the World Federation of Scientists.]
When the German Foreign minister recently called Ahmadinejad a shame to his own country and people, he spoke the minds of many. Now that Ahmadinejad is not even recognized by many of his own countrymen and women as legitimate, and that the Iranian regime's legitimacy is questionable within Iran itself, it is time for the world to support the opposition by making clear what a miserable figure this fanatic ignoramus is.
Because an ignoramus he is: Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial is not a cynical ploy. He believes what he says - and he is unlikely to have invested much time in the huge historical evidence for the Holocaust.
The question then remains: is there anything interesting about Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial - except, of course, that it provides one of his 'arguments' against the state of Israel (unfortunately he hasn't read up on the history of Zionism, which started almost a century before the Holocaust, either)
I think there is something interesting. I have a heavy dislike for the question whether the Jewish Holocaust perpetuated by the Nazis does or doesn't compare to others; whether it is the worst of all genocides in history. How do you measure the horror of human cruelty and suffering? Do you count the dead? In this case Mao is probably the worst killer in history, closely followed by Stalin, with Hitler coming in 'only' third. Do you measure the means, the organization, the hatred, the irrationality and the sheer inhumanity?
While the Nazi Holocaust certainly has unique features, I do not think that this should be a moral or political argument for or against anything, including the existence of the State of Israel. That nowadays is simply a fact that even most Arab states are acknowledging.
I believe that it is the commemoration of the Holocaust that is unique. The Jewish people, after a period of initial shock, have turned remembering of the Holocaust and its victim into a moral duty. Historians, novelists, psychologists and filmmakers have invested huge energies simply in remembering; museums have been built around the world, simply to make sure that those murdered will not vanish without a trace, and that humanity should never forget what it is capable of.
Here is the question that I would like to pose to Mr. Ahmadinejad - without expecting a response, of course. Could it be that the main problem he has with the Holocaust of the Jews is that we adhere to a very strict ethics of memory, to use Israeli philosopher Avishai Margalit's felicitous phrase? That we try not to allow any of the victims to have died without a trace? That we try to mourn the horrors that our families have endured, without turning these horrors into mythical heroism?...
Read entire article at Haaretz
When the German Foreign minister recently called Ahmadinejad a shame to his own country and people, he spoke the minds of many. Now that Ahmadinejad is not even recognized by many of his own countrymen and women as legitimate, and that the Iranian regime's legitimacy is questionable within Iran itself, it is time for the world to support the opposition by making clear what a miserable figure this fanatic ignoramus is.
Because an ignoramus he is: Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial is not a cynical ploy. He believes what he says - and he is unlikely to have invested much time in the huge historical evidence for the Holocaust.
The question then remains: is there anything interesting about Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial - except, of course, that it provides one of his 'arguments' against the state of Israel (unfortunately he hasn't read up on the history of Zionism, which started almost a century before the Holocaust, either)
I think there is something interesting. I have a heavy dislike for the question whether the Jewish Holocaust perpetuated by the Nazis does or doesn't compare to others; whether it is the worst of all genocides in history. How do you measure the horror of human cruelty and suffering? Do you count the dead? In this case Mao is probably the worst killer in history, closely followed by Stalin, with Hitler coming in 'only' third. Do you measure the means, the organization, the hatred, the irrationality and the sheer inhumanity?
While the Nazi Holocaust certainly has unique features, I do not think that this should be a moral or political argument for or against anything, including the existence of the State of Israel. That nowadays is simply a fact that even most Arab states are acknowledging.
I believe that it is the commemoration of the Holocaust that is unique. The Jewish people, after a period of initial shock, have turned remembering of the Holocaust and its victim into a moral duty. Historians, novelists, psychologists and filmmakers have invested huge energies simply in remembering; museums have been built around the world, simply to make sure that those murdered will not vanish without a trace, and that humanity should never forget what it is capable of.
Here is the question that I would like to pose to Mr. Ahmadinejad - without expecting a response, of course. Could it be that the main problem he has with the Holocaust of the Jews is that we adhere to a very strict ethics of memory, to use Israeli philosopher Avishai Margalit's felicitous phrase? That we try not to allow any of the victims to have died without a trace? That we try to mourn the horrors that our families have endured, without turning these horrors into mythical heroism?...