Genocide Denial

[4588686]

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3Hg-Y7MugU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3Hg-Y7MugU[/url]

[Anastasia13]

MissMaro
“But I do know that Israelis are often unwilling to equate the Armenian genocide with the Holocaust. That bothers me a little- considering what happened- but not nearly as much as someone actively approving of a genocide and talking about it as if it were an absolute necessity.”

Jews often hold to the idea that the Holocaust was unique, unlike the others. In some way, the Rwandan genocide was closer to the Holocaust than the Armenian genocide, however the distinguishing factor I have found between the Armenian and the Holocaust was the use of technology-relatively modern gas chambers and the like. Also, they would make household goods from skin rather than gut pregnant woman to win a bet or speed up the death march.

MissMaro
“I'd never be friends with a Holocaust denier.”

I think you may have your answer about being friends with an Armenian genocide denier.

MissMaro
“I have trouble understanding how anyone could not care.”

Political implications over acknowledgement (loss of US Turkish naval bases, etc.), need to focus efforts on the US and be less concerned with the outside world (see Ron Paul), the belief that we need to address what is currently going on and that the past should be left there (while failing to see the implications thereof), the belief that those actually killed as a result of being Armenian were few and of little consequence in light of the war going on around them…

[quote name='MissMaro' timestamp='1327416417' post='2374411']
I think I've already shared his views on the subject. He doesn't think the Armenian genocide counted as a genocide. He thinks that it was not premeditated and that the Turks were justified in doing what they had to do to the "rebellious" Armenians and so it wasn't a crime against humanity. They just did what they had to do and they had some misfortunes along the way, misfortunes that included killing people. (And yes he knows who killed the Armenians.) Whether he realizes the full implications of his thinking is beyond me. He has a denialist advisor, so it's easy to see where his beliefs come from.

As for the idea that differing points of view are possible on the subject, I'd have to disagree, and that you are willing to accept that idea is proof of the kind of damage genocide denial does. There are not two sides to this event. There is the truth of what happened which has a mountain of evidence in its favor- including evidence from foreign missionaries, ambassadors, turkish soldiers, etc, and there is the genocide denial which, as Deborah Lipstadt says, "sows confusion by appearing to be a genuine scholarly effort" and which "strives to reshape history in order to demonize the victims and rehabilitate the perpetrators."[/QUOTE]

I see where you said that before. Please forgive me my carelessness in overlooking that. There I several lies to explain that it never happened. These the “other sides.” The two sides are also the Turkish files on it and the real, more fully documented historical files of the times, the cover-up and the truth. Some say the Armenians died from the war. Some say nationalism. I am sure you know these are not true.

[quote name='MissMaro' timestamp='1327416417' post='2374411']Whether it come up in the relationship or not, his chosen career path is to become a expert in genocide studies who espouses denialist views. If he were just some guy who believed these things because he was mislead by a professor and terribly ignorant, it would be one thing. But he studies genocide all. day. long. and I consider what he's trying to do very immoral. You don't have to agree with me, but I have to say that I agree with Elie Wiesel that it's a "double-killing" because first they murdered two-thirds of the Armenians who were in Turkey and now they are trying to destroy and distort the memory of what happened in order to mislead people. It's disgusting, and I'm not okay with it in any way, shape, or form for any genocide from the Armenian one to the Rwandan one.
[/quote]
It is often said that the last stage of genocide is denial.

If I were to know someone who was regularly belittling the Armenian genocide as though it was nothing, I would be very, very angry. To stay friends with them would be to give them the power to upset me. If someone wants to argue with me when I do something in memory of my family who died in the genocide, then they are not worth talking to in order to argue-thus they could not be close friends. I would try not to be mean or unkind to the person, just respectfully let them make a fool of themselves. There are better ways to spend my time-which yes, includes working for justice among other things.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Light and Truth

[MissMaro]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1327425880' post='2374475']
I wonder what he thinks of the Irish holocaust...
[/quote]

I know almost nothing about it, but I do remember him giving it as an example of something that clearly wasn't a genocide...

[MissMaro]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1327429548' post='2374504']
[url="http://articles.latimes.com/2001/may/20/books/bk-144"]http://articles.lati...20/books/bk-144[/url]

I dislike genocide laws. But I'm also not entirely comfortable with saying that the state can never step in to mute free speech in the case of a man like Hitler.
[/quote]

I'm in favor of free speech, but there have always been exceptions. No one has the right to defame another person, for example.

[MissMaro]

Light and Truth
"Jews often hold to the idea that the Holocaust was unique, unlike the others. In some way, the Rwandan genocide was closer to the Holocaust than the Armenian genocide, however the distinguishing factor I have found between the Armenian and the Holocaust was the use of technology-relatively modern gas chambers and the like. Also, they would make household goods from skin rather than gut pregnant woman to win a bet or speed up the death march."

Well, genocides are different from one another because the cultures and technology differ from genocide to genocide, but to me an atrocity is an atrocity. They are all sickening in their own way, and it's really hard to compare horrors and say that one is worse than another when they're all extremely terrifying and similar in their cruelty.

MissMaro
“I'd never be friends with a Holocaust denier.”

Light and truth,
"I think you may have your answer about being friends with an Armenian genocide denier."

Yes, I think you're right.

MissMaro
“I have trouble understanding how anyone could not care.”

Light and truth,
"Political implications over acknowledgement (loss of US Turkish naval bases, etc.), need to focus efforts on the US and be less concerned with the outside world (see Ron Paul), the belief that we need to address what is currently going on and that the past should be left there (while failing to see the implications thereof), the belief that those actually killed as a result of being Armenian were few and of little consequence in light of the war going on around them…"

Hmmm, if they're were a "sad nod" emoticon, I would have used it.

Light and Truth
"I see where you said that before. Please forgive me my carelessness in overlooking that. There I several lies to explain that it never happened. These the “other sides.” The two sides are also the Turkish files on it and the real, more fully documented historical files of the times, the cover-up and the truth. Some say the Armenians died from the war. Some say nationalism. I am sure you know these are not true."

For sure.

Light and Truth
"If I were to know someone who was regularly belittling the Armenian genocide as though it was nothing, I would be very, very angry. To stay friends with them would be to give them the power to upset me. If someone wants to argue with me when I do something in memory of my family who died in the genocide, then they are not worth talking to in order to argue-thus they could not be close friends. I would try not to be mean or unkind to the person, just respectfully let them make a fool of themselves. There are better ways to spend my time-which yes, includes working for justice among other things."

I think you're right. Some people are called to argue with genocide deniers, but it seems like those kind of arguments mostly benefit people who just don't know what happened. People who are set on denying the genocide already deny the genocide in the face of all the evidence and so evidence that they have already disregarded isn't likely to convince them of anything.

Wow, I've agreed with you a lot.

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='MissMaro' timestamp='1327455802' post='2374757']
Wow, I've agreed with you a lot.
[/quote]
Great minds think alike.

If it ever comes up in conversation, this has some great facts, imo. [url="http://www.voelkermord.at/docs/Scholars_Denying_IAGS.pdf"]http://www.voelkermo...enying_IAGS.pdf[/url]

Edited January 25, 2012 by Light and Truth

[Aloysius]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1327425880' post='2374475']
I wonder what he thinks of the Irish holocaust...
[/quote]
It's very common for people not to think of the Irish Famine as having been a genocide... and it's not something that particularly offends me if they refuse to call it a genocide and place the blame on the British where it rightly belongs. that's something that directly relates back to my own ancestors, so that's more close to home to me, which is perhaps part of what colors my perception of things... since I don't go around demanding that everyone must admit that the British committed genocide against the Irish, but am used to a plurality of opinions on that subject (or else general ignorance of it), I kind of look at other similar situations the way I do.

of course, that's not to say that my previous argument about not basing friendships off idealogies is not important to me, regardless of how my own perception of the Irish genocide colors my opinion on other genocides, I also believe fully in friendship with a plurality of opinions, no matter how crazy (I have friends who are 9/11 truthers for instance, it doesn't bother me, I think they're wrong and have fallen into a few logical fallacies and don't mind arguing with them if they want to. my friend and roommate I have dubbed a "George Soros truther" because he basically blames every bad event in America from the last decade on some huge influence of George Soros who is trying to topple our society, based on Glenn Beck's arguments.) It all comes back to the GK Chesterton quote I used earlier.

ah well, such is our divergence of opinion, MissMaro, have you decided regarding your Hebrew studies with this gentleman? in the very least I would advise that you not cut him off in that regard if he is truly helpful to you for your classes, his opinion on the Armenians should not have any bearing on whether you allow him to teach you Hebrew, I don't think. I say just make it clear you don't want to hear his theories on the Armenian genocide if he brings it up at all.

[fides' Jack]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1327357854' post='2374036']
How was he significantly involved? By advocating the extermination of Jews? By using his rhetorical flourishes to whip up xenophobia and antisemitism in the German masses? Goebbels didn't actually do any killing. He simply encouraged the regime that did. By the criteria you have laid out here I think it would be quite immature to defriend a swell and sophisticated man like Goebbels, with a doctorate in 19th century romantic drama, over a silly disagreement of opinion on the moral acceptability of slaughtering some Jews.
[/quote]

Like I said, I read about him for 7 seconds. But still, he lived during that time, which means his argument was more like "I support the murder of women and children." This other guy is saying something more like, "I don't believe what actually happened so long ago could be construed as murder of women and children."

Not the same thing.

[quote name='MissMaro' timestamp='1327378122' post='2374263']
fides Jack,

I don't recall saying anything about a crusader or my feelings about forming a friendship with one...

The kind of indifference towards immoral ideas you argue for is exactly the kind of indifference to ideas that allowed millions of people to be murdered by their governments in the twentieth century. Ideas matter because people act on ideas. Hasan basically made this point with Goebbels, but I thought I'd try to put it into my own words.

I don't know that I could be friends with someone who continually lied and advocated murder, and contrary to what you seem to think, not everyone on here is a liar. Lying is actually a sin, and it can be avoided. As I mentioned before, "Do not be deceived: Bad company ruins good morals." (1 Corinthians 15:33) If someone who speaks in favor mass murder under any circumstances isn't bad company, I'm not sure what would be.

I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt (maybe he doesn't realize the full implications of the things he's said and written), but I don't regard it as necessarily immature to avoid someone who holds immoral views. I could certainly find a certain amount of support for the idea that it's important to choose your friend carefully, and maybe I will later, but I really ought to go read some more Greek, or I will get behind in my class.

God bless!
[/quote]

The comment about the crusader was not pointed at you. Someone said it, and that comment was meant for that person.

I do believe that most people lie. If that's true, then most people are liars. PM is a forum for people. Therefore, if most people lie, then there's a good chance that most of the people on PM are liars. There are different degrees of lies, and I do believe that a lie could even potentially be a mortal sin. But not a lie about something that happened a century ago.

You didn't say "avoid", you said "ostracize". Not exactly the same thing. But let's not get into semantics. I definitely agree that people should choose their friends carefully. I also agree that genocide is wrong, and I agree that what happened a century ago was genocide. I think we have more in common than not.

[4588686]

[quote name='fides' Jack' timestamp='1327513881' post='2375087']
Like I said, I read about him for 7 seconds. But still, he lived during that time, which means his argument was more like "I support the murder of women and children." This other guy is saying something more like, "I don't believe what actually happened so long ago could be construed as murder of women and children."

Not the same thing.

[/quote]

No. He's saying that the murder of women and children was justified. And it is still significant. Turkey is still denying what happened, although the PM is making progress on this, individuals like this guy give cover to those who want to deny and justify what happened. If you don't think justifying genocide has real and serious consequences for the world, particularly that part of the world, then you are severely mistaken. Genocide is not something that exists in the past. It has happened in the recent pass and almost certainly will happen, or at least be attempted, again.

[fides' Jack]

I agree that genocide still exists today and is part of the world. But I doubt that he's saying that the murder of women and children is justified. It sounds more like he's [i]justifying[/i] that what happened [i]in one event[/i] in the distant past doesn't constitute murder, or at least doesn't constitute genocide. Which is more of a denial than a statement. Still different than saying, "I support the murder of women and children".

I still want to know how he's "making it his life's work" to debunk the idea that it's genocide. Because that fact can change things. What is his position (in hierarchy)? What kind of influence does he have?

[MissMaro]

[quote name='Aloysius' timestamp='1327490564' post='2374926']
ah well, such is our divergence of opinion, MissMaro, have you decided regarding your Hebrew studies with this gentleman? in the very least I would advise that you not cut him off in that regard if he is truly helpful to you for your classes, his opinion on the Armenians should not have any bearing on whether you allow him to teach you Hebrew, I don't think. I say just make it clear you don't want to hear his theories on the Armenian genocide if he brings it up at all.
[/quote]

Well, I don't mind agreeing to differ on this kind of thing. I haven't decided if I'm still going to study with him. I'm taking some time to think about it. There are other Hebrew teachers in this city, and I could certainly take it from someone else now or in the future. The main issue for me at the moment is that a friend of mine who is studying with him also really wants me to stay and finish the book. I sort of want to do it because she really wants me to, and she's been so kind. We'll see. I'm still thinking about it and praying, and I'd appreciate anyone on here's prayers. The answer is looking like 'no,' though I told myself I'd wait till Sunday to tell this friend for sure one way or the other.

[4588686]

[quote name='MissMaro' timestamp='1327525643' post='2375280']
Well, I don't mind agreeing to differ on this kind of thing. I haven't decided if I'm still going to study with him. I'm taking some time to think about it. There are other Hebrew teachers in this city, and I could certainly take it from someone else now or in the future. The main issue for me at the moment is that a friend of mine who is studying with him also really wants me to stay and finish the book. I sort of want to do it because she really wants me to, and she's been so kind. We'll see. I'm still thinking about it and praying, and I'd appreciate anyone on here's prayers. The answer is looking like 'no,' though I told myself I'd wait till Sunday to tell this friend for sure one way or the other.
[/quote]

You could always debate with him or just continue the teaching relationship. Or continue to be friends but make it clear that you don't support what he's saying.

[MissMaro]

[quote name='fides' Jack' timestamp='1327513881' post='2375087']
I do believe that most people lie. If that's true, then most people are liars. PM is a forum for people. Therefore, if most people lie, then there's a good chance that most of the people on PM are liars. There are different degrees of lies, and I do believe that a lie could even potentially be a mortal sin. But not a lie about something that happened a century ago.

You didn't say "avoid", you said "ostracize". Not exactly the same thing. But let's not get into semantics. I definitely agree that people should choose their friends carefully. I also agree that genocide is wrong, and I agree that what happened a century ago was genocide. I think we have more in common than not.
[/quote]

I would define a liar as someone who perpetually lies, not someone who has ever lied. I'd agree that most people have probably lied at some point in their lives, but I wouldn't agree that it's something people necessarily make a habit of. It's certainly not something a Christian should do regularly. God wouldn't have forbidden lying in the Ten Commandments if it were impossible not to lie, and I can testify to the fact that people can and do choose not to deceive other people. You do know that lying is intentionally deceiving someone, not saying something that isn't true because you happen to be mistaken, right? Because everybody is wrong sometimes, but that doesn't automatically make them liars. It just means they're human.

Ostracize can be used loosely to mean avoid. Avoiding someone is one way- probably the main way in a friendship- of excluding someone, and there doesn't seem to be any real reason to split hairs on an on-line forum. You seem, at any rate, to have understood what I meant.

Edited January 25, 2012 by MissMaro

[MissMaro]

[quote name='fides' Jack' timestamp='1327525249' post='2375273']
I agree that genocide still exists today and is part of the world. But I doubt that he's saying that the murder of women and children is justified. It sounds more like he's [i]justifying[/i] that what happened [i]in one event[/i] in the distant past doesn't constitute murder, or at least doesn't constitute genocide. Which is more of a denial than a statement. Still different than saying, "I support the murder of women and children".

I still want to know how he's "making it his life's work" to debunk the idea that it's genocide. Because that fact can change things. What is his position (in hierarchy)? What kind of influence does he have?
[/quote]

It means he's going to get a Ph.D in genocide studies, and that he plans to teach these kinds of falsehoods for a living. That's certainly the track he's on at the moment, though it may not be where he ends up.

[MissMaro]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1327525805' post='2375283']
You could always debate with him or just continue the teaching relationship. Or continue to be friends but make it clear that you don't support what he's saying.
[/quote]

I'm not very good at debating things in person, unfortunately, and I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable continuing the friendship unless he recants his views and apologizes. (I don't mean he should apologize to me. I mean he should do it publicly in a newspaper or magazine article of some kind.)

I probably could continue studying with him, but I don't feel very comfortable with that, and there are a lot of other Hebrew teachers in town, so I don't know what would be best.

Edited January 25, 2012 by MissMaro