Speaking of the Holocaust...

[TXBeth]

 

I did not know of any other time this term was used this way. However, we now say "the Holocaust" to refer ONLY to the atrocities that are the focus of this thread. I feel like I'm stuck with the word but I really dislike it.

 

"Genocide" is a fairly well-known word. Maybe the Nazi genocide of the Jews/Romani/others would be a good way to refer to it.

 

I remember being very upset as a kid when the homosexual community appropriated the word "gay." I liked the word, and I resented not being able to use it for its original meaning anymore. But I don't put the word in quotes and talk about "gay" people, because I know that would be very offensive since it implies that somehow I don't think they are actually gay. It does not imply that I just don't appreciate that particular word being used to describe them. So in the interest of good communication and a desire not to cause unnecessary offense, I don't do that. I also don't go around telling people that I am feeling gay today. Insisting that a word has retained a meaning that the rest of the English speaking world no longer associates with that word only serves to confuse.

[Chelli]

Actually I was posting more broadly about America's involvement in WW2, not specifically about the Holocaust.

I am afraid to post them on an American board. I am sure I will be blasted to smithereens :leaving:

 

I was a history major in college and love learning about how different nations and groups of people view history through their lens. I understand your hesitation though. If you feel like it send me a pm, I really would like to hear what Australians think of our WWII involvement.

 

When I visited the Netherlands a few times, they were fall-all-over themselves grateful to the Americans (this was in the late '90's so I'm not sure what the reaction would be now.). They were especially excited when I told them that my grandfather had been in the Netherlands during the war. I'll never forget this Dutch lady grabbed my hand and said, "They saved us. They saved us from the Germans." It still makes me get a lump in my throat.

[nmoira]

 

Of course it has changed, but I don't have to appreciate the change. I wish I could think of a way to name that series of events without confusing people even more. So far I have not.

 

I dunno. If the choice is between using quotes and having people assume I was a Holocaust denier and swallowing my principle or picking any other word, I'd pick the latter. YMMV.

[happymomofboys]

I'm not posting this in defense of Justin Bieber, but I just wanted to point out that he was not homeschooled in the sense that we homeschooling parents usually mean. He attended a French Catholic school for elementary and he went to public school during middle school. Once he started his career he participated in an e-learning program through St. Michael's Catholic Secondary School in Ontario, CA and had a private tutor who traveled with him, as many celebrity kids do, until graduation. I doubt his mother had much, if anything, to do with the content of his formal education.

[SKL]

Insisting that a word has retained a meaning that the rest of the English speaking world no longer associates with that word only serves to confuse.

If I didn't know what the term actually meant (at the time it was chosen), obviously it would not bother me. But I'm not going to pretend that the term was innocently chosen without a thought of the religious significance. I don't believe that. Sorry. As for the use of quotation marks, they have many meanings, and most of the time do not imply disbelief. In fact, grammatically, it's more appropriate to use them the way I have been - to indicate a term used for convenience that doesn't actually define the thing it's labeling. ... In the future I will try very hard to think of some other way to refer to that series of atrocities. Though I don't understand why it's anyone's concern if I put a word in quotation marks. Nor do I like the fact that once again, the extreme PC reaction to this event has had an oppressive effect on innocent people.

[Melissa in Australia]

The traditional Australian view of the Americans during WW11 is summed up like this:

 

Over-paid, over-sexed and over here.

 

 

~

 

How the Holocaust can be called anything other than World History is beyond my ken.

plus coming in very late even when repeatedly begged for assistance and knowing full well what was happening re Nazi persecution of minority ethnic groups in Europe

waiting until they were sure of the winning side before joining in claiming all the glory for themselves ( a very unfair statement but one expressed by some older generation people)

 

plus many older Australians were pretty unimpressed with most of the Aussie men off fighting the war , American soldiers being here running around with all the Aussie girls, including wives of the Aussie soldiers who were " out doing the real fighting" (not my words but my grandmother's). That is probably the main root of the bitterness of the older generation.

[Melissa in Australia]

Yeah, you're a braver woman than I for explaining those views here :)

 

There is a pervasive sense that America can only be relied upon as an ally when its own interests are threatened, whilst expecting its allies to 'jump to it' on US command...see Vietnam, Iraq. Afghanistan etc...

 

Anti-Americanism was particularly high in my youth. It seems to have settled down a fair bit over the last decade or so, as we've undergone a process of cultural colonialism.

that about sums it up

[SKL]

Hmm, not sure whether it's worse to be discussed like the US military was (understandable and probably partly true, but not the whole story), or not remembered as a participant in WWII at all. I'd say none of the countries got it quite right then, and I hope at least we on this forum are trying to be more objective all around as we pass down history.

[WishboneDawn]

 

Okay, now I'm curious. What did we do?

 

Obviously dropping the bombs on Japan, but you posted this when quoting someone talking about the Holocaust.

 

Just curious, not trying to start an international incident. :001_smile:

 

 

I think there were a lot of mixed feeling about the US in many Commonwealth and Ally countries. So many of us we there fighting and dying before the Americans were there, our efforts helped decide the war but we often seem to hear a, "We saved your a$%," attitude from American media and the not-so-odd rude tourist. France gets insulted despite enduring the horrors of occupation and the movies often minimalize or even erase the efforts of other countries. Think of the movie U-571 where British history was co-opted and turned into an American story.

 

That said we often forget the tremendous support of the US even before its direct involvement and the many, many Americans who though the US should have been involved sooner and worked to promote that view during the early days of WWII.

 

There's balance in the middle, as always.

[Samiam]

It's being made a big deal out of nothing. As others have said, Anne Frank WAS a fan of stars, Hollywood stuff in general. I think he was acknowledging her personality, the fact that she was a 13 year old girl ( which is exactly his fan base), and making a personal connection on that level. Maybe not the same level that most of us would have went, but from the last five years I've been here on the forums, I don't think any of us are 20 year old men. So we wouldn't make that same connection. So he doesn't sound as deep as you and me...eh, he's 20.

[Kathryn]

 

I did not know of any other time this term was used this way. However, we now say "the Holocaust" to refer ONLY to the atrocities that are the focus of this thread. I feel like I'm stuck with the word but I really dislike it.

 

 

http://www.ushmm.org/research/library/faq/details.php?topic=01#02

The word holocaust comes from the ancient Greek, olos meaning "whole" and kaustos or kautos meaning "burnt." Appearing as early as the fifth century B.C.E., the term can mean a sacrifice wholly consumed by fire or a great destruction of life, especially by fire.

While the word holocaust, with a meaning of a burnt sacrificial offering, does not have a specifically religious connotation, it appeared widely in religious writings through the centuries, particularly for descriptions of "pagan" rituals involving burnt sacrifices. In secular writings, holocaust most commonly came to mean "a complete or wholesale destruction," a connotation particularly dominant from the late nineteenth century through the nuclear arms race of the mid-twentieth century. During this time, the word was applied to a variety of disastrous events ranging from pogroms against Jews in Russia, to the persecution and murder of Armenians by Turks during World War I, to the attack by Japan on Chinese cities, to large-scale fires where hundreds were killed.

Early references to the Nazi murder of the Jews of Europe continued this usage. As early as 1941, writers occasionally employed the term holocaust with regard to the Nazi crimes against the Jews, but in these early cases, they did not ascribe exclusivity to the term. Instead of "the holocaust," writers referred to "a holocaust," one of many through the centuries. Even when employed by Jewish writers, the term was not reserved to a single horrific event but retained its broader meaning of large-scale destruction. For example:

You are meeting at a time of great tragedy for our people. In our ... deep sense of mourning for those who have fallen ... we must steel our hearts to go on with our work ... that perhaps a better day will come for those who will survive this holocaust. (Chaim Weizmann, letter to Israel Goldstein, December 24, 1942)

What sheer folly to attempt to rebuild any kind of Jewish life [in Europe] after the holocaust of the last twelve years! (Zachariah Shuster, Commentary, December 1945, p.10)

By the late 1940s, however, a shift was underway. Holocaust (with either a lowercase or capital H) became a more specific term due to its use in Israeli translations of the word sho'ah. This Hebrew word had been used throughout Jewish history to refer to assaults upon Jews, but by the 1940s it was frequently being applied to the Nazis' murder of the Jews of Europe. (Yiddish-speaking Jews used the term churbn, a Yiddish translation of sho'ah.) The equation of holocaust with sho'ah was seen most prominently in the official English translation of the Israeli Declaration of Independence in 1948, in the translated publications of Yad Vashem throughout the 1950s, and in the journalistic coverage of the Adolf Eichmann trial in Israel in 1961.

Such usage strongly influenced the adoption of holocaust as the primary English-language referent to the Nazi slaughter of European Jewry, but the word's connection to the "Final Solution" did not firmly take hold for another two decades. The April 1978 broadcast of the TV movie, Holocaust, based on Gerald Green's book of the same name, and the very prominent use of the term in President Carter's creation of the President's Commission on the Holocaust later that same year, cemented its meaning in the English-speaking world. These events, coupled with the development and creation of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum through the 1980s and 1990s, established the term Holocaust (with a capital H) as the standard referent to the systematic annihilation of European Jewry by Germany's Nazi regime.

[QuirkyKapers]

We just went through the Holocaust muesum and watched the footage of the U.S. response/lack of response. People wanted U.S. to boycott the 1936 Olyympics. Many people wanted us to go. People in the government were divided on this. We went because it was decided that we didn't want to the Olympics become about politics. There were people who thought that if we didn't go, other countries wouldn't go and it would impact Hitler's regime. People in the U.S. and other countries did not want to open up their immigration laws because they were afraid of the impact of more people on the economy. Many people wanted U.S. and their countries to allow people safety in their country. Many people did not. This also played out at the higher political level.

 

 

At one point someome referred to the book burnings as bibliocaust. In the footage it says they were (media) trying to come up with a name for what was going on and chose refer to it as the Holocaust. I really have only thought of it in my mind as referring to the systematic annihilation of European Jews (as well as Gypsies, people with disabilites and anyone who didn't fit their version of what a perfect person would be) by the Nazi's.

[TXMary2]

Not defending Justin Bieber, but given that Anne was a 13 yo girl, she may very well have liked him. I don't see the big deal about that. I am more disturbed by the hundreds of tweets/comments by his fans asking, "Who is Anne Frank?"

[Word Nerd]

Interesting perspective, and I mostly agree: World Reaction to Justin Bieber's Anne Frank Comment Says More About Us Than Him (language warning).

[unsinkable]

Interesting perspective, and I mostly agree: World Reaction to Justin Bieber's Anne Frank Comment Says More About Us Than Him (language warning).

 

 

Huh. It says Bieber's entry was prompted by one of the guides who said Frank was a pop culture fan and might have been a fan of his.

 

The guide also wondered if Canadians studied the Netherlands in World History, but not in a pedantic way.*

 

 

 

 

 

*I made that part up. The guide didn't say that. LOL

[SKL]

I dunno. If the choice is between using quotes and having people assume I was a Holocaust denier and swallowing my principle or picking any other word, I'd pick the latter. YMMV.

 

Holocaust denier? How many Holocaust deniers could there be in this community? The likelihood is pretty near zero. I find it really surprising that several people, including some who have read many of my posts, tentatively jumped to that conclusion. I would like someone to point me to the stylebook that says quotation marks are predominantly used to indicate disbelief. If I had said: Harriet Tubman led people along the "Underground Railroad," would that imply I am a denier of what that term commonly refers to? Why are Americans wired to assume the worst of people when it comes to selected atrocities during WWII?

[nmoira]

Holocaust denier? How many Holocaust deniers could there be in this community? The likelihood is pretty near zero. I find it really surprising that several people, including some who have read many of my posts, tentatively jumped to that conclusion. I would like someone to point me to the stylebook that says quotation marks are predominantly used to indicate disbelief. If I had said: Harriet Tubman led people along the "Underground Railroad," would that imply I am a denier of what that term commonly refers to? Why are Americans wired to assume the worst of people when it comes to selected atrocities during WWII?

 

I don't think you are. But when I see quotes around the word "Holocaust," that is the first thing that pops to mind. It just is, and I don't think I'm the only one. I'm only saying that if it were *me*, regardless of my reservations about the word, that isn't an association I'd want people to make with me on any level, conscious or subconscious.

[kewb]

Holocaust denier? How many Holocaust deniers could there be in this community? The likelihood is pretty near zero. I find it really surprising that several people, including some who have read many of my posts, tentatively jumped to that conclusion. I would like someone to point me to the stylebook that says quotation marks are predominantly used to indicate disbelief. If I had said: Harriet Tubman led people along the "Underground Railroad," would that imply I am a denier of what that term commonly refers to? Why are Americans wired to assume the worst of people when it comes to selected atrocities during WWII?

 

Well, for starters, I have never heard of an underground railroad denier. The evidence is all there that the underground railroad did exist. Perhaps at the time there were deniers but we are all fairly certain it did exist. Plus, the underground railroad was a road to freedom. A good thing that occurred during the blight of slavery in US history. Who wants to deny a good thing? By the same token, there is plenty of evidence that the holocaust did indeed happen and yet there are people who deny it occurred. They look at the survivors, the camps, the evidence and can still look at the world and say the Jews made it up and it didn't happen. Perhaps americans are wired to assume the worst because of the cultural guilt we feel for the lack of response and indifference towards people we didn't care about. We didn't get into WW II to save the Jews. We sent back the boat full of Jews to their certain deaths because we wouldn't let them dock here. The US didn't give a d**n about what was happening over in Europe. Perhaps we are so hardwired to assume the worst when it comes to all the atrocities of WW II because they deserve to have the worst assumed. The atrocities were beyond comprehension and vile and too many people wish to sweep it all under the rug. Ancient history. No need to worry about that stuff now. What do you think "Never Forget" means? It means that you shine the full light on the darkness and remind people that this was horrific and needs to be remembered. In your face remember so that it does not happen again.

 

As for the original question of Justin Beiber, I really think people got their knickers in a twist over nothing. Anne loved all things hollywood and she was a typical teen and probably would have been a fan.

[SKL]

kewb, I don't agree with everything you said, but you raise an interesting point. The US didn't do all it could - in fact, the US had its own eugenics movement and its own concentration camps in those days! But national pride must win at all costs. So in the twisted way that minds work, we somehow manipulated the memories / history books to make it look like we were and are heroes. The "never forget" message seems more likely to be read as "never forget what THEY did over THERE" as opposed to "never forget how low humanity can stoop if we aren't all careful." I really kind of wish we focused more on the wrongs that happened over HERE, but this is largely influenced by who is lobbying for what. ... I would just add that I agree the US didn't go over there to save the Jews, but at the same time, other Allies weren't motivated purely by compassion for others either. This is a global problem but also local one.

[SKL]

 

Yes, and Anne Frank didn't even come from Holland; she came from Germany.

I know, and I could have gotten into all that, but I opted for brevity. :) Hopefully most people got my point.

[Spy Car]

The traditional Australian view of the Americans during WW11 is summed up like this:

 

Over-paid, over-sexed and over here.

 

Sounds like we must have been popular with the Sheilas :D

 

Bill

[aggieamy]

I'm trying to say this gently but many of us had grandparents and friends of our grandparents over there fighting for the US. I understand that there were autrocities on all sides but we also had some fine men and women fighting on foreign soil for others. It's easy to look back and think about all the jerks there were but I also don't think we can discount the heroes also. Germany's actions were horrible and there were horrible people taking part in it BUT there were some German heroes working to hide Jews and combat the NAZI in anyway they could.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Sounds like we must have been popular with the Sheilas :D

 

Bill

 

As the kids say these days, I believe the Aussies may have been jelly. :laugh:

[SKL]

I'm trying to say this gently but many of us had grandparents and friends of our grandparents over there fighting for the US. I understand that there were autrocities on all sides but we also had some fine men and women fighting on foreign soil for others. It's easy to look back and think about all the jerks there were but I also don't think we can discount the heroes also. Germany's actions were horrible and there were horrible people taking part in it BUT there were some German heroes working to hide Jews and combat the NAZI in anyway they could.

True - I don't mean to imply an all or nothing analysis. That's why I was trying to avoid saying "we" (vs. the US) didn't get it right. "We" on a personal level are pretty nice people, and most of us would do / have done a lot to help others.

[SKL]

Over-paid, over-sexed and over here.

 

You talking about Bieber or some other 19-year-old men? ;)

[SKL]

This thread is very interesting, despite Bieber's stupid comment. This is giving me a whole new perspective. I spent part of my childhood in Holland, and attended high school there for a few years too. During that time, we studied WW2 in a lot of detail. Only a small portion of those studies were spent on the role of Americans during the liberation. I distinctly remember hearing that US soldiers handed chocolate to kids, and being shown footage of allied soldiers and local celebrations after the liberation. But more time was spent on the British droppings, and on the Dutch royal family, than on the US role.

 

Most time was spent on Hitler's rise to power, how the persecution of Jews built up over time, and on the concentration camps. This included a LOT of talk about how WW2 should always be remembered and held up as an example of ordinary people tolerating atrocities. All so that the same will never happen again. Sure, we discussed the bravery of certain individuals (in the resistance, as well as Allied soldiers), but it was very much focused on "how could we have allowed this to take place, and let's make very sure there is no space in this society for any racial hatred and discrimination".

 

Thanks for this interesting post. Jus a question. Do you think the bolded has made people grow up less likely to jump on bandwagons that hurt others, or, more likely to stand up against authority for those who are persecuted? I am genuinely curious.

[SKL]

 

If "we" means humanity, WW2 is probably just about the best example that this statement is not true. Most people stood by and did nothing, and if that did not happen, the holocaust could not have occurred.

 

Fear is powerful, and ignorance is even worse.

[SKL]

I learned a tiny bit about Australia in school, and more outside of school. I recall something about prison colonies, LOL. ... When I was in grad school, I was in a circle of friends that were mostly Indian. They loved to talk about the ignorance of Americans - it was apparently a favorite topic over there, notwithstanding that at the time, literacy in India was about 36%. Anyhoo, they complained about the fact that they knew more about the US than Americans knew about India. ("Knowledge" was largely whatever they saw on the silver screen, e.g., there are no virgins here over the age of 13 and women like being pawed by strange men. LOL. And they also thought it was the US who had ruled/raped India for hundreds of years, and from whom India had won independence in the 20th century.) So most Indians could name more US cities than Americans could name Indian cities. One day my Indian friend pointed out that people around the world are relatively familiar with the US because it's relatively relevant to them. Most of these students had relatives and friends living in the cities whose names they knew, or they had researched universities there. The local news talked about the US-India trade and arms talks etc. For whatever reason, American products, music, etc. were very popular there. India doesn't play such a prominent role in Americans' everyday lives. I don't have any relatives who have lived in India or even visited there. My friend then asked, "how much do you know about Zimbabwe?" Umm. That shut them up. I don't mean to sound arrogant, but there are a handful countries that get more press around the world, and the US is one of them. Of course we should learn about other countries, but on average, others are going to know more about the US. (That said, I have taught some Indians a few things about their homeland, LOL. That kind of study was a hobby of mine.)

[Spy Car]

What do we know about Australia?

 

It is the home of the only soft-drink worth consuming: Bundaberg Ginger Beer.

 

It is the home of the the greatest Cricket batsman in history: Sir Donald Bradman (sorry Sachin Tendulkar fans)

 

The lawn bowl greens in the North run faster than in the South.

 

The girls from Waga Waga are as strong as men.

 

Vegemite (not Marmite)

 

The Dingos ate my baby.

 

Transvestites travel the outback in RVs.

 

People are shark food.

 

If you ask what sport "footie" refers to you'll set off regional wars between those who say "Association Football" (Soccer), those who say "Rugby League," and those who insist it means "Aussie Rules" (and will punch you in the nose if you say otherwise).

 

Other than that, we know next to nothing about Australia :D

 

Bill

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Vegemite for sure :)

 

Other than that, yep, just a penal colony...

 

Luckily Australians don't tend to get riled about these things...although if I was an American, especially of the patriotic variety, I'd be making damn sure my kids knew about the history and significance of her traditional allies. Just saying :)

 

 

We do...for the significant ones. ;)

 

All kidding aside, the US is connected to so many countries that it is not possible to have more than a passing knowledge of many of them.

[Slartibartfast]

 

Vegemite

 

 

 

It's people!!!!

 

People!!!

[kewb]

kewb, I don't agree with everything you said, but you raise an interesting point. The US didn't do all it could - in fact, the US had its own eugenics movement and its own concentration camps in those days! But national pride must win at all costs. So in the twisted way that minds work, we somehow manipulated the memories / history books to make it look like we were and are heroes. The "never forget" message seems more likely to be read as "never forget what THEY did over THERE" as opposed to "never forget how low humanity can stoop if we aren't all careful." I really kind of wish we focused more on the wrongs that happened over HERE, but this is largely influenced by who is lobbying for what. ... I would just add that I agree the US didn't go over there to save the Jews, but at the same time, other Allies weren't motivated purely by compassion for others either. This is a global problem but also local one.

 

 

Ok, now I want to know what I said that you do not agree with.