FSEM History of Genocide

One of the most intriguing and disturbing aspects of Bloxham’s book is how he articulates the callousness revolving around the politics of the Armenian Genocide.  Many countries, including the United States, Russia, Germany, and Great Britain, displayed a certain amount of complacency.  Those that vocally condemned the killings failed to substantiate their condemnation with tangible action.  For example, the tribunals of Great Britain largely failed to translate prosecutions into any form of long-term punishment for those responsible for the killings.  Many of these failings were the result of politics. Each country’s actions revolved around their own self-interest, which often did not include seeking retribution and recompense from those who perpetrated the genocide.

Politics continues to surround the memory of the Armenian genocide, trickling into modern-day interactions.  The New York Times reported, in the wake of the 100th anniversary of the genocide, that Italy and the United States have avoided officially using the term genocide in regards to the atrocities committed against the Armenians due to “the importance they place on Turkey as an ally.”  Repercussions have arisen from antagonizing Turkey on the matter.  Pope Francis recently referred to the tragedy as “the first genocide of the 20th century”.  In response, Turkey recalled their ambassador to the Holy See, with their Foreign Minister stating, “The Pope’s statement, which is far from historic and legal truths, is unacceptable.  Religious positions are not places where unfounded claims are made and hatred is stirred.”

These current events illustrate the profound sensitivity and impact that is still associated with the Armenian Genocide, and the continued importance of political maneuvering in nation-state interactions.  In many cases, it appears that the “practical” trumps the just.  Perhaps the sad reality of many officials’ modern practicality is best described by the quote from the 5th chapter of Bloxham’s book.  “What we are doing today is counterproductive… It is not in our best interests.  it is not either strategically, militarily, or any other way… To singe out one segment of NATO, going back to an incident that occurred 70 years ago, what good does it do?” -Congressman James M. Leath.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/04/12/world/europe/ap-eu-rel-vatican-armenians.html?_r=0

The main power behind the Holocaust Memorial Museum was its ability to present tangible artifacts from the early 20th century to attest to the validity and truth behind the attempted genocide of the European Jews.  Some of the most impactful items I saw were a striped concentration camp uniform, pieces of railroad that had led to a concentration camp, and cobblestones that had been traveled by concentration camp prisoners.  But perhaps the most impactful scene was the piles of shoes left from those who entered the camps.  While the exhibit was in the process of being renovated, and thus had only about half of the exhibit displayed, what remained was an incredibly powerful testament to the many individuals who suffered under the “Final Solution”.  Most of the shoes were grey or brown in color, but one in particular stood out to me.  It still retained some of its reddish color, and appeared to be a woman’s dress shoe.  It reminded me that it once belonged to an everyday individual, who just happened to be targeted because of ancestry and religion.

I enjoyed getting to hear from individuals who graduated from UMW and are now embarking on great careers.  I loved their enthusiasm for their work, and their emphasis on how working with history often involves “detective work”.  Getting to see simply a peek of the huge collection of volumes available to the public at the museum was also a great treat.  It definitely emphasized that the museum is a wonderful resource for research.

Finally, I felt incredibly blessed to have the opportunity to hear from a survivor, especially considering that they will most likely be gone in another 10-20 years.  I was struck by the fact that he alternated humor with dark truths, most especially the fact that it was not a pleasure for him to be up on stage reliving some of the most horrific moments of his life.  He also seemed to try to steer the conversation away from himself, emphasizing that his story is just one of many thousands which have already been recorded in books and interviews.  As such, it was incredibly intriguing to hear more about his opinions and what happened to him following the war.  The Holocaust, while an event limited in duration, clearly continues to have impacts to the present day in the lives of the individuals who survived it.

Judgment at Nuremberg posed many questions and delved into numerous themes, constantly reminding viewers of the incredible amounts of gray a world that attempts to define itself in terms of black and white.

One of the foremost areas of question is the usage of nationalism as justification.  One’s country is, in perspective, an accident of birth.  So how far should allegiance go?  For me, nationalistic pride is tied to the values that one’s country stands for.  To betray those values for the sake of nationalism is to undermine its very source.

Another topic is the question of will.  Three of the four men on the dock clearly embraced Nazi ideology.  But the fourth, Ernst Janning, was a much more reluctant and tragic figure, representing those who lacked the will to fight evil, who ultimately shared the same guilt as those who embraced it.  Many attempt to paint those who do evil as monsters, inhuman in the true sense of the world.  But this is a façade that covers the true reality of the fallibility of human beings.  Judge Hayward himself stated, “under the stress of a national crisis, men – even able and extraordinary men – can delude themselves into the commission of crimes and atrocities so vast and heinous as to stagger the imagination.”  Oftentimes individuals label these acts as inhuman because they are afraid of the implications if they are not; that all have the potential to commit such horrors.  I felt this point was further illuminated by the usage of compare shots.  Scenes that followed one another would often be tied together by some common element, such as tea being poured or a pounding noise.  In a similar fashion, contrast shots were also used, with heightened emotional courtroom scenes being cut to party scenes taking place in the evening.  These two techniques helped show how different the ordinary is from the extreme, while hinting that the two are linked.

The question of guilt and responsibility is another crucial topic the film addresses.  The defense argues that prosecuting the defendants essentially condemns the world.  But such a claim is not so absurd.  It is true that many German citizens were complacent and chose to ignore the situation rather than confront it.  The same can be said of many countries.  Many instances are recorded of news of Nazi atrocities being ignored, where world leaders chose not to believe that such actions could be occurring.  Furthermore, a deeper guilt could also be implied.  If the Nazi rise to power was facilitated by the conditions of hardship found in Germany at the time, guilt could be laid upon the victors of WWI, who chose to humiliate Germany through strict measures that robbed it of national dignity and economic supremacy.

“But to be logical is not to be right”.  I was struck by this quote, because it mirrors something I have long thought an important point.  Many argue under the presumption that fairness is the basis of moral decisions.  But fairness does not equate with “rightness”.  Machiavellian measures may be fair, but not moral.  In the same vein, such measures may be logical, but again, lack morality.

I was also amazed by the actors who participated in the film.  I personally felt that the acting was some of the best I have ever had the privilege to witness.  In many instances, the movie felt more like a piece of theater than a film, relying almost entirely on the actors themselves to bring emotion to light.  The best technical evidence for this is the lack of music during the trial scenes.  Instead, the actors’ performances are allowed to stand completely independently.

The usage of actual wartime footage from the liberation of concentration camps was also particularly novel for the time, especially considering their graphic nature.  I myself immediately recognized one scene of a woman’s body being tossed into a pit as one that can be found on the Holocaust Museum’s online film archive.  The recognition was jarring and highlighted that the movie is based in reality.

However, I also feel obliged to point out that while the movie did an excellent job of displaying many perspectives on this difficult period in history, the film did not escape without hints of bias.  While the majority case at the conclusion of the movie was presented in full, the dissenting opinion was cut off, indicating a favorability to the former opinion as opposed to the latter.

This particular book appeared to be a reprinted collection of 16th century writings, largely dealing with the Reformation, which the author indicated were specifically left unedited so as to speak for themselves.  The book seems to be a wonderful resource of period thought regarding religion and many of the mounting tensions of the time.

Wright, Thomas.  Three Chapters of Letters Relating to the Suppression of Monasteries.  London: London Society, 1843.  Print

A Memory of Sulferino is full of passages describing acts of what could be best understood as traditional or idealized heroism.  Men are described passing a battle flag from one to the other as each in turn succumbs to grievous wounds or death.  Many work to secure positions with little to no concern for their personal safety, and are illustrated amongst scenes of profound carnage.  This created a sense of futility that left me questioning the significance of these individual acts.  I had never heard of the battle of Sulferino before.  And yet so many gave their lives in an effort to secure this small area of land.  Was it worth it to die for individual glory if no one remembered the act?  Was it worth it to sacrifice oneself for one’s country, if the battle had no bearing a century later?

This sense of futility reminded me greatly of Erich Remarque’s work All Quiet on the Western Front.  Taking place roughly 50 years later during WWI, this novel follows a group of students who join the German army in hopes of achieving honor and protecting the Fatherland.  Yet what they find instead is brutality and horror.  The story’s main protagonist descends into cynicism and despair, watching helplessly as his former classmates fall one by one.  The book illustrates the utter destruction that war brings to all participants.  One of the characters reflects: “I am young, I am twenty years old; yet I know nothing of life but despair, death, fear, and fatuous superficiality cast over an abyss of sorrow.  I see how peoples are set against one another, and in silence, unknowingly, foolishly, obediently, innocently slay one another.”

These reflections mirrored my own thoughts as I read of the destruction and pain following the battle of Sulferino.  Many suffered a torturous death or else left the field of battle a cripple, a far cry from the glorified images of triumph and self-sacrifice.  The sacrifices made were not glorious.  Indeed, they were painful and often prolonged.  And the question remains, why?  Individuals have asked that question for many long years, and perhaps no one will ever truly define the answer.  Perhaps, instead, we would be better served to define what it is not.  In the cases of both the men Sulferino and the characters of All Quiet on the Western Front, it is clear that the explanations of glory and honor are facades that, juxtaposed next to the carnage, fail to justify it.

This was a trailer I created several years back for the 1930 film adaptation of All Quiet on the Western Front, which I felt was a particularly fitting companion for this reading.

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!