6 ms·

Auschwitz museum criticizes use of death camp in politics

53 points by jruohonen 3y ago

jruohonen 3y ago
“It is a sad, painful and unacceptable manifestation of the moral and intellectual corruption of the public debate, the state museum said." EDIT: Many downvotes for a direct quotation...
monopolyofpain 3y ago
[flagged]
gumby 3y ago
I understand the museum's position. However IMHO they missed an important teaching moment. The holocaust was very much a political event, and to treat it otherwise is to excuse the broad public support that political movement had, and the widespread public participation involved. Yes, the use in mass political* advertising can trivialize the crime by repetitive imagery, and I presume this is the origin of the stance of the museum. But it can also call out the rising risk of such a movement gaining power again. If the memory souls who perished can be salved at all, it is to ensure that people understand the dynamics that led to what happened and ensure that it will happen nie wieder. So far the record since the end of WWII has not been encouraging in this regard. * I do think the use of these images in non-political, non-historical contexts should be considered beyond the pale.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  I think the point is that shallow references and use of Nazi images in ad hominem attacks does does not contribute meaningfully to any discussion. If you want to use the Holocaust to draw a comparison, it should have substance. Without substance, anyone can make shallow comparisons.
  - CodeWriter23 3y ago
    I think the point is to make it not ok to call powers practicing racism and genocide out for being nazi-like.
    - cubefox 3y ago
      The Auschwitz museum would probably not have complained about death camp analogies when the comparison was an actual genocide. But that was very far from the case.
      - giraffe_lady 3y ago
        Are we expecting the auschwitz museum to universally and perfectly predict and oppose fomenting genocides? Is that a role they're willing and competent to perform for us? Is that where we want that responsibility to solely reside?
        cubefox 3y ago
        The situation here was pretty clear cut.
  - autokad 3y ago
    who decides what is substance?
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      What I meant by substance is that there is some effort to actually explain a comparison and thought. Not just a statement of fact or reference. Essentially making a case. What I mean is different than accuracy. You could write an essay or book comparing something to Nazism, and be right or wrong, but at least you're making a case. If you're just claiming a comparison without presenting a case, you can also be right or wrong, but you're not doing anything more than throwing a name around and making an ad hominem attack.
- that_guy_iain 3y ago
  > The holocaust was very much a political event, and to treat it otherwise is to excuse the broad public support that political movement had, and the widespread public participation involved. Was it a political event tho? It wasn't something the Nazis were openly announcing they were doing. Sending them to camps was one thing, pretty much every country ended up creating camps to keep people during that time. If they were humanly treated in the camps there wouldn't be so much of an issue. It's that they went to extents that the German masses weren't aware of is what makes the holocaust a wtf. Lots of people use it for political purposes, but was it actually a political event when it was happening or did we just politicise it? The holocaust to me was something they did in secret to their own population. Otherwise we need to group in all interment camps at the time.
  - bushbaba 3y ago
    The nazi desire to exterminate all Jews was known. Jews were killed in the streets of towns. Some even involved mass killings. Towns bragged about being Jew free. Ignorance does not fly. Yes there was some uncertainty of what happened at the camps. But it was well known even at the time that nazi’s camps meant death.
    - john008 3y ago
      [dead]
    - that_guy_iain 3y ago
      Actually, there was only ever a mention of a final solution. No real understanding of what that meant. This resulted in allied forces, who had spies throughout the Third Reich, being completely shocked by the camps when they found them. The fact, Allied Forces who were better informed than the average German Ciziten had no idea what was happening is a major sign that they didn't know. Furthermore, if you read any of the books written by Germans who lived through that time they'll often say they didn't know what was happening and in one book about a kid who went through the ranks of the Hitler youth, I believe he thought they were fine in the camps and thought people just moved away. Now, in other countries such as the Netherlands the story was different but victims often know the full truth instead of getting told a story. Rewriting history isn't that cool. Furthermore, the majority of victims of the holocaust weren't Jewish, they were civilians. [1] [1] https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/documenting-numbers-of-victims-of-the-holocaust-and-nazi-persecution https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/documentin...
- zeteo 3y ago
  Comparing your political opponents with Nazis is a very violent form of public discourse that should be reserved for actual perpetrators of mass atrocities. If people actually believe it, then it makes physical violence against your opponents seem acceptable or even desirable ("punch a Nazi"). Basically, when you're saying someone is a Nazi then it means you want to treat them like the Nazis were treated after WW2. This implies at least removing their political rights, and possibly imprisoning and executing them as well.
  - breakingrules 3y ago
    [dead]
  - cubefox 3y ago
    Additionally, comparisons are always statements of similarity, and this is a symmetric relation. If someone says group X is similar to the Nazis, then that, in all likelihood, makes X look worse and the Nazis look better. After all, the person is saying the Nazis were similar in badness to group X, and X might not be very bad.
  - NoraCodes 3y ago
    > should be reserved for actual perpetrators of mass atrocities. Ideally, we would prevent such people from perpetrating such atrocities in the first place. The Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions, and they said they would do it before they did. When people, especially politicians, come out and say, "we must eliminate [demographic group]," we need to believe them and understand that genocide is their goal.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - giraffe_lady 3y ago
    I am pretty sure the people who are making this comparison have the intent of not allowing them to perpetrate mass atrocities. Reserving the comparison only for the successful genocides is maybe rhetorically ideal but missing the point a bit.
ck2 3y ago
I'm more horrified by the discovery there are endless selfies taken there: https://metro.co.uk/2017/01/19/powerful-images-that-show-why-holocaust-selfies-are-so-disrespectful-6391091/ https://metro.co.uk/2017/01/19/powerful-images-that-show-why...
- discordianfish 3y ago
  To be clear, this is not the Auschwitz museum. Point still stands.
  - te_chris 3y ago
    I’ve been. It’s a truly harrowing place. People took selfies
  - ck2 3y ago
    Ah you are correct, I posted the wrong link. Someone actually wrote a paper on it with examples https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/17506980221101111 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/17506980221101111 The real problem is vast majority of society has long forgotten and doesn't want to remember the final horror of fascism "othering" minorities, anti-diversity, etc. and that's why it appears in politics.
    - bogantech 3y ago
      There's just something wrong with people who have to take selfies all the time. I did a tour of Auschwitz recently and even after half a day of a tour that showed the horrors that occurred there people were taking selfies.
photochemsyn 3y ago
The Polish law in question that sparked the controversy is very 1930s Germany in nature, as can be seen if we replace "Russian" with "Jewish" in the description (and "Poland" with "Germany"): > "(AP) The law would establish a state commission for investigating Russian influence in Poland and on national security with the powers of prosecutor and judge." Given that the adoption of totalitarian powers is more-or-less required for the initiation of genocidal programs by a state (i.e. elimination of separation of powers between executive, legislative, and judicial branches, implementation of secret decision-making, removal of citizen's rights to a fair trial, etc.), pointing out the similarities isn't some crime against the memory of the Holocaust. Nipping such behavior in the bud is what prevents it from happening again.
- Invictus0 3y ago
  Judaism is a largely unorganized religion with no military. Russia is a large hostile state with a history of attacking Poland and possessor of, at one point, a strong military.
  - gersg 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - pphysch 3y ago
    The Nazi belief at the time was that Judaism was an integral component of "Judeo-Bolshevism" i.e. the USSR so it is not correct to assert that there was "no military" -- the USSR had a rapidly growing industrial military. German fascists thought that all Jewish people were in cahoots with the USSR, which was Definitely trying to conquer all of Europa. Polish fascists think all ethnically Russian people are in cahoots with the RF MoD, which is Definitely trying to conquer all of Europa. It is a similar situation and we shouldn't succumb to historical revisionism.
    - Timon3 3y ago
      > German fascists thought that all Jewish people were in cahoots with the USSR, which was Definitely trying to conquer all of Europa. This is easily proven false on the grounds that not all Jewish people had any connection to the USSR. You have to accept a falsehood for this conclusion. > Polish fascists think all ethnically Russian people are in cahoots with the RF MoD, which is Definitely trying to conquer all of Europa. All ethnically Russian people could have a connection to Russia, many are likely to. This means you don't have to accept a falsehood for this conclusion. Let's not try to equate completely disparate situations, or we'll have to treat the Flat Earth movement with the same level of comparability.
_lnwk 3y ago
after ruling party uses it in political ad. Why that important part of title was left of? Also this is a few after the ruling party introduced a law that essentially recreates Stalinist cangaroo courts
breakingrules 3y ago
[dead]
plorg 3y ago
The title here is in line with HN guidelines but does a disservice to the actual article as it suggests the criticism is far more abstract than it actually is. It rises in direct response to specific use by Polish political actors.
- jruohonen 3y ago
  The one and only reason for the title is the length limit.
  - jakelazaroff 3y ago
    Is "Auschwitz museum criticizes use of death camp in Polish political ad" too long?
    - jruohonen 3y ago
      I just cut the title from around the middle. I think it is better to steer away from trying to edit other people's titles.
AtlasBarfed 3y ago
I think it is more of a commentary that fascism / totalitarianism is a still a far too plausible political risk in the modern world, even in the most "advanced" countries. The US has engaged in concentration camps and separation of families in immigration in the last decade, under both Democratic and Republican administrations. Trump was a totalitarian leader in everything except competence. Propaganda is becoming shockingly effective when married to social media, and the next election cycle will likely see frightening AI-powered media "weaponry". I find it more scary that the statement has traction rather than anything about what they are actually trying to say. The post and it being upvoted is a reflection of the plausibility of fascism.
DoreenMichele 3y ago
Very public arguments are often a trainwreck waiting to happen. You say something to a specific person and there can be a huge audience and it can be tough to figure out real intent. Also, this was in Polish. I imagine if you don't speak Polish, a lot will be lost in translation. Context and subtext both get largely lost in attempts to explain what went down in some other language to people who weren't there.
raadore 3y ago
Hold a moment. A politician called out publicly the following phrase: “Gas chamber for President Duda and Premier Kaczynski.” This, by any measure, is considered Hate Speech as it calls for extreme violence, ask any Jew or Pole who stayed or visited Auschwitz. I think the fact that there had been no outrage reaction to his public demonstration of extreme violence and a call for his resignation means that people no longer remember what a great technological bathroom invention the German people developed in the early 1940s called “The Shower Chamber” which was provided free of charge to travellers exiting the trains upon arrival at Auschwitz. Therefore, it is my opinion that this spot is a great way to reboot and restart the holocaust education of young and old people everywhere to ensure no person utters such Hateful words to another human being on earth.
- maratc 3y ago
  > A politician called out publicly Not a politician but a journalist... > the following phrase: “Gas chamber for President Duda and Premier Kaczynski.” ... except he wrote it in Polish, not English, using the word "komora" that means both a [prison] cell and a [gas] chamber. He also clarified later that he meant a [prison] cell, deleted his tweet, and apologized. All of this is clearly outlined in TLA, which unfortunately you didn't bother to read.

53 points by jruohonen 3y ago

“It is a sad, painful and unacceptable manifestation of the moral and intellectual corruption of the public debate, the state museum said." EDIT: Many downvotes for a direct quotation...

monopolyofpain 3y ago

[flagged]

gumby 3y ago

I understand the museum's position. However IMHO they missed an important teaching moment. The holocaust was very much a political event, and to treat it otherwise is to excuse the broad public support that political movement had, and the widespread public participation involved. Yes, the use in mass political* advertising can trivialize the crime by repetitive imagery, and I presume this is the origin of the stance of the museum. But it can also call out the rising risk of such a movement gaining power again. If the memory souls who perished can be salved at all, it is to ensure that people understand the dynamics that led to what happened and ensure that it will happen nie wieder. So far the record since the end of WWII has not been encouraging in this regard. * I do think the use of these images in non-political, non-historical contexts should be considered beyond the pale.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
I think the point is that shallow references and use of Nazi images in ad hominem attacks does does not contribute meaningfully to any discussion. If you want to use the Holocaust to draw a comparison, it should have substance. Without substance, anyone can make shallow comparisons.
- CodeWriter23 3y ago
  I think the point is to make it not ok to call powers practicing racism and genocide out for being nazi-like.
  - cubefox 3y ago
    The Auschwitz museum would probably not have complained about death camp analogies when the comparison was an actual genocide. But that was very far from the case.
    - giraffe_lady 3y ago
      Are we expecting the auschwitz museum to universally and perfectly predict and oppose fomenting genocides? Is that a role they're willing and competent to perform for us? Is that where we want that responsibility to solely reside?
      - cubefox 3y ago
        The situation here was pretty clear cut.
- autokad 3y ago
  who decides what is substance?
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    What I meant by substance is that there is some effort to actually explain a comparison and thought. Not just a statement of fact or reference. Essentially making a case. What I mean is different than accuracy. You could write an essay or book comparing something to Nazism, and be right or wrong, but at least you're making a case. If you're just claiming a comparison without presenting a case, you can also be right or wrong, but you're not doing anything more than throwing a name around and making an ad hominem attack.
that_guy_iain 3y ago
> The holocaust was very much a political event, and to treat it otherwise is to excuse the broad public support that political movement had, and the widespread public participation involved. Was it a political event tho? It wasn't something the Nazis were openly announcing they were doing. Sending them to camps was one thing, pretty much every country ended up creating camps to keep people during that time. If they were humanly treated in the camps there wouldn't be so much of an issue. It's that they went to extents that the German masses weren't aware of is what makes the holocaust a wtf. Lots of people use it for political purposes, but was it actually a political event when it was happening or did we just politicise it? The holocaust to me was something they did in secret to their own population. Otherwise we need to group in all interment camps at the time.
- bushbaba 3y ago
  The nazi desire to exterminate all Jews was known. Jews were killed in the streets of towns. Some even involved mass killings. Towns bragged about being Jew free. Ignorance does not fly. Yes there was some uncertainty of what happened at the camps. But it was well known even at the time that nazi’s camps meant death.
  - john008 3y ago
    [dead]
  - that_guy_iain 3y ago
    Actually, there was only ever a mention of a final solution. No real understanding of what that meant. This resulted in allied forces, who had spies throughout the Third Reich, being completely shocked by the camps when they found them. The fact, Allied Forces who were better informed than the average German Ciziten had no idea what was happening is a major sign that they didn't know. Furthermore, if you read any of the books written by Germans who lived through that time they'll often say they didn't know what was happening and in one book about a kid who went through the ranks of the Hitler youth, I believe he thought they were fine in the camps and thought people just moved away. Now, in other countries such as the Netherlands the story was different but victims often know the full truth instead of getting told a story. Rewriting history isn't that cool. Furthermore, the majority of victims of the holocaust weren't Jewish, they were civilians. [1] [1] https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/documenting-numbers-of-victims-of-the-holocaust-and-nazi-persecution https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/documentin...
zeteo 3y ago
Comparing your political opponents with Nazis is a very violent form of public discourse that should be reserved for actual perpetrators of mass atrocities. If people actually believe it, then it makes physical violence against your opponents seem acceptable or even desirable ("punch a Nazi"). Basically, when you're saying someone is a Nazi then it means you want to treat them like the Nazis were treated after WW2. This implies at least removing their political rights, and possibly imprisoning and executing them as well.
- breakingrules 3y ago
  [dead]
- cubefox 3y ago
  Additionally, comparisons are always statements of similarity, and this is a symmetric relation. If someone says group X is similar to the Nazis, then that, in all likelihood, makes X look worse and the Nazis look better. After all, the person is saying the Nazis were similar in badness to group X, and X might not be very bad.
- NoraCodes 3y ago
  > should be reserved for actual perpetrators of mass atrocities. Ideally, we would prevent such people from perpetrating such atrocities in the first place. The Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions, and they said they would do it before they did. When people, especially politicians, come out and say, "we must eliminate [demographic group]," we need to believe them and understand that genocide is their goal.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  I am pretty sure the people who are making this comparison have the intent of not allowing them to perpetrate mass atrocities. Reserving the comparison only for the successful genocides is maybe rhetorically ideal but missing the point a bit.

ck2 3y ago

I'm more horrified by the discovery there are endless selfies taken there: https://metro.co.uk/2017/01/19/powerful-images-that-show-why-holocaust-selfies-are-so-disrespectful-6391091/ https://metro.co.uk/2017/01/19/powerful-images-that-show-why...

discordianfish 3y ago
To be clear, this is not the Auschwitz museum. Point still stands.
- te_chris 3y ago
  I’ve been. It’s a truly harrowing place. People took selfies
- ck2 3y ago
  Ah you are correct, I posted the wrong link. Someone actually wrote a paper on it with examples https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/17506980221101111 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/17506980221101111 The real problem is vast majority of society has long forgotten and doesn't want to remember the final horror of fascism "othering" minorities, anti-diversity, etc. and that's why it appears in politics.
  - bogantech 3y ago
    There's just something wrong with people who have to take selfies all the time. I did a tour of Auschwitz recently and even after half a day of a tour that showed the horrors that occurred there people were taking selfies.

photochemsyn 3y ago

The Polish law in question that sparked the controversy is very 1930s Germany in nature, as can be seen if we replace "Russian" with "Jewish" in the description (and "Poland" with "Germany"): > "(AP) The law would establish a state commission for investigating Russian influence in Poland and on national security with the powers of prosecutor and judge." Given that the adoption of totalitarian powers is more-or-less required for the initiation of genocidal programs by a state (i.e. elimination of separation of powers between executive, legislative, and judicial branches, implementation of secret decision-making, removal of citizen's rights to a fair trial, etc.), pointing out the similarities isn't some crime against the memory of the Holocaust. Nipping such behavior in the bud is what prevents it from happening again.

Invictus0 3y ago
Judaism is a largely unorganized religion with no military. Russia is a large hostile state with a history of attacking Poland and possessor of, at one point, a strong military.
- gersg 3y ago
  [flagged]
- pphysch 3y ago
  The Nazi belief at the time was that Judaism was an integral component of "Judeo-Bolshevism" i.e. the USSR so it is not correct to assert that there was "no military" -- the USSR had a rapidly growing industrial military. German fascists thought that all Jewish people were in cahoots with the USSR, which was Definitely trying to conquer all of Europa. Polish fascists think all ethnically Russian people are in cahoots with the RF MoD, which is Definitely trying to conquer all of Europa. It is a similar situation and we shouldn't succumb to historical revisionism.
  - Timon3 3y ago
    > German fascists thought that all Jewish people were in cahoots with the USSR, which was Definitely trying to conquer all of Europa. This is easily proven false on the grounds that not all Jewish people had any connection to the USSR. You have to accept a falsehood for this conclusion. > Polish fascists think all ethnically Russian people are in cahoots with the RF MoD, which is Definitely trying to conquer all of Europa. All ethnically Russian people could have a connection to Russia, many are likely to. This means you don't have to accept a falsehood for this conclusion. Let's not try to equate completely disparate situations, or we'll have to treat the Flat Earth movement with the same level of comparability.

_lnwk 3y ago

after ruling party uses it in political ad. Why that important part of title was left of? Also this is a few after the ruling party introduced a law that essentially recreates Stalinist cangaroo courts

breakingrules 3y ago

[dead]

plorg 3y ago

The title here is in line with HN guidelines but does a disservice to the actual article as it suggests the criticism is far more abstract than it actually is. It rises in direct response to specific use by Polish political actors.

jruohonen 3y ago
The one and only reason for the title is the length limit.
- jakelazaroff 3y ago
  Is "Auschwitz museum criticizes use of death camp in Polish political ad" too long?
  - jruohonen 3y ago
    I just cut the title from around the middle. I think it is better to steer away from trying to edit other people's titles.

AtlasBarfed 3y ago

I think it is more of a commentary that fascism / totalitarianism is a still a far too plausible political risk in the modern world, even in the most "advanced" countries. The US has engaged in concentration camps and separation of families in immigration in the last decade, under both Democratic and Republican administrations. Trump was a totalitarian leader in everything except competence. Propaganda is becoming shockingly effective when married to social media, and the next election cycle will likely see frightening AI-powered media "weaponry". I find it more scary that the statement has traction rather than anything about what they are actually trying to say. The post and it being upvoted is a reflection of the plausibility of fascism.

DoreenMichele 3y ago

Very public arguments are often a trainwreck waiting to happen. You say something to a specific person and there can be a huge audience and it can be tough to figure out real intent. Also, this was in Polish. I imagine if you don't speak Polish, a lot will be lost in translation. Context and subtext both get largely lost in attempts to explain what went down in some other language to people who weren't there.

raadore 3y ago

Hold a moment. A politician called out publicly the following phrase: “Gas chamber for President Duda and Premier Kaczynski.” This, by any measure, is considered Hate Speech as it calls for extreme violence, ask any Jew or Pole who stayed or visited Auschwitz. I think the fact that there had been no outrage reaction to his public demonstration of extreme violence and a call for his resignation means that people no longer remember what a great technological bathroom invention the German people developed in the early 1940s called “The Shower Chamber” which was provided free of charge to travellers exiting the trains upon arrival at Auschwitz. Therefore, it is my opinion that this spot is a great way to reboot and restart the holocaust education of young and old people everywhere to ensure no person utters such Hateful words to another human being on earth.

maratc 3y ago
> A politician called out publicly Not a politician but a journalist... > the following phrase: “Gas chamber for President Duda and Premier Kaczynski.” ... except he wrote it in Polish, not English, using the word "komora" that means both a [prison] cell and a [gas] chamber. He also clarified later that he meant a [prison] cell, deleted his tweet, and apologized. All of this is clearly outlined in TLA, which unfortunately you didn't bother to read.