Confusion
I cannot say much about this news, except for that the head of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham Foxman, seems to be a bit confused… to say the least. Where he first refused to call the killings of Armenians during World War I ‘genocide,’ he now has changed his mind due to public pressure:
In a dramatic reversal, the Anti-Defamation League�s national director has issued a statement describing the massacres perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians as “tantamount to genocide.”
The ADL and its national director, Abraham Foxman, have faced mounting criticism in recent weeks for refusing to use the genocide label and for firing Andrew Tarsy, the head of the organization’s Boston office, who publicly challenged that policy.
Tarsy’s dismissal sparked a furious backlash from local community leaders; including critical statements from prominent Boston Jews, a “community statement” calling for the ADL to change its position, and the resignation of two members of the ADL’s regional board.
Ok – so it is so clear to Foxman that it was a genocide that he refused to call it as such, until people basically forced him to do so. That makes sense. Well, it does not of course.
I criticize Foxman not for calling it a genocide – the material from other than Turkish sources that I have read on this imply this as well. What I do criticize, however, is that this was a political game of sorts. This was not anymore about a condemnation of what happened in the past, but about politics and pleasing certain groups. Initially he tried to please Turks and the leaders of Turkey, now he wants to please Armenians and people who believe that it was a genocide. All in all, the decision was not based on principles, but on political grounds.
And that should never be the case when we talk about matters as serious as genocide.
6 Responses to “Confusion”
Genocide is a troubling thing, not only for the mass murder, but how such are used.
Instead of the WW2 genocide in Europe being called The Nazi Genocide, or some such, it was given a place above all other sufferings- The Holocaust, which started a sort of PR arms race amongst people with agendas. Why are only 6 million mentioned, and not the others killed in the deathc amps? Why aren’t the Armenians talked about, or the thousands of Turks they killed? Or the million or two Germans who died after WW2 when forced out of Poland and Russia? How about Stalin’s dead- 3-6X that of Hitler’s? Or Mao, who topped all comers, with 60-120 million dead? How about King Leopold and the 4-20 million dead in the Belgian Congo, or the Middle Passage millions fed to the sharks? Or the Native Americans- 60 million killed in 4 centuries after Columbus.
Then, there come the claims of jiggering the numbers. 6 million, say the Holocaust deniers. there were not even 6 million Jews in Europe. There’s no proof Mao ever killed more than ‘a few million.’ And Chiang Kai-shek was worse! You’re not a real patriot if you think the US Cavalry committed Genocide in the 19th C wars w Indians. And let’s not forget the Japanese bodycount in WW2- more people died in Asia than in all of Europe, mostly due to Tojo.
Only time can do the sorting.
One does wonder when people will start calling the way the americans treated the native americans genocide, that as a beside.
That was, in my opinion, tantamount to genocide as well. At least cultural, and probably even in regards of people that were killed.
Cosmo brings up an excellent point. There seems to be a conpetition going about which is the ‘worst’ genocide and how many dead it takes to constitute a genuine genocide, etc. The chatter seems to be diluting the whole concept of condemning outrageous killing sprees.
RE Foxman and the JDL, though, the change of politica came largely in reaction to pressure from within the Jewish community, as I understand it.
RE Native Ameticans, I often wonder what US history books would be saying now, if all the tribes had been able to unite under a common and fanatical belief system.
I meant to say ADL (not JDL).
But calling the treatment of Indians a genocide will affect the myths(and challege Western exceptionalism) of Manifest Destiny, Protestant Work Ethic and Hollywood Westerns. It doesn’t fit into the noble explorer/settler if we talk about near cannibalism(Lewis and Clark) or buffalo chips as fuel. All cultures have ups and downs, but denying mistakes with myths is common through out the history of man.
Besides, the “noble Indian savage” is another myth.
“Besides, the “noble Indian savage†is another myth.”
How true.
Besides, we continue to deal with life in terms of myths. Either a people are all beasts or they are all innocent vicitms.
I notice how victims are always innocent and pure. ‘Scumbag’ and ‘victim’ just don’t go together.