In an ironic op-ed at Asharq Al Awsat called "The Crocodile Tears of the Holocaust Industry," Hamad Al-Majid writes: A young Jewish American woman approached the prominent Jewish professor; she had been attending the lecture he was conducting [at the University of Waterloo] when she asked a question before breaking down in tears. In a trembling voice, the student asked "During your speech, you made reference to Jewish people – some of whom are in this audience – describing them as Nazis, how can you do this? I find that extremely offensive." This young woman was talking to Jewish American professor, academic, and writer, Dr. Norman G. Finkelstein. Finkelstein's mother survived the Majdanek concentration camp, while his father survived the Auschwitz concentration camp; every single member of his family on both sides was killed by the Nazis. Dr. Finkelstein is one of the bitter opponents of Israel, and he has harshly criticized the Israeli criminal actions and brutality against the Palestinian people. The young woman's tears did not move the professor, and instead he fiercely criticized her with the vigour of a wounded Palestinian whose home, wife, and children had all been taken away from him by the Zionists. Frowning at the young student, Dr. Finkelstein reacted angrily saying, "I don't respect that…I don't like and I don't respect your crocodile tears. I don't like to play the Holocaust card before an audience, but my late father was in Auschwitz and my late mother was in Majdanek, every single member of my family on both sides was exterminated, and it is precisely and exactly because of the lessons that my parents taught me that I will not be silent while Israel commits crimes against the Palestinians. There is nothing more despicable than to use their suffering and martyrdom to try to justify the torture and brutalization and the demolition of homes committed by Israel against the Palestinians. If you had a heart, you would be crying for the Palestinians."
The lesson that Majid learns from this sickening episode? This is a positive way of dealing with the Holocaust, and this is something that wise Jews and Westerners should promote in order to prevent such injustice occurring again. In my opinion, this is better than entering bitter controversy over the veracity of the Holocaust, and casting doubts and denying it. If we compare the French Muslim intellectual Roger Garaudy's denial of the Holocaust with Dr. Norman G Finkelstein's condemnation of the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews, as well as the Israeli Holocaust against the Palestinians, and how – in his view – the former is being used to justify the latter, we find that Finkelstein's controversial view is far more influential in the West than Garaudy's.
This writer is saying that he prefers using the Holocaust as a political weapon against Israel than denying the Holocaust altogether, because the former is more effective.
Holocaust denial isn't wrong - it is just not effective.
The corollary to this argument is that if, at some time, Holocaust denial becomes a more effective argument, then that would be the preferred weapon. The only thing missing from his argument is any reference to the truth. Truth, he believes, is completely irrelevant - absurd Holocaust analogies must be used as a club to beat Jews with, because that hurts them more than denying the Holocaust does, and the goal, of course, is to hurt the Jews.
The ironic part is that the same people who accuse Jews of politicizing the Holocaust to justify Zionism are now politicizing the Holocaust to denounce Zionism. Somehow, to them, this is not a problem.
And the reason is, as mentioned, that the truth is not a factor in this battle. |
No comments:
Post a Comment