And then we come to genocide. Most really successful genocides are forgotten, of course, because the victim group is gone, and there's no one to complain. Carthaginians? Albigensians? But partially successful genocides, you'd think, would be regarded as equal, at least equal in malignancy and significance. You'd be wrong. In popular thinking, there is only one really important genocide, and the other victim groups had better learn their places and stay in them.
The most popular comparison these days is the Jewish genocide and the Armenian genocide — Most other genocides, like Holodomor, are ignored by the MAG. And many would like to ignore the Armenian genocide, but the Armenians won't sit down and shut up. The Irish Savant says this:
In a visit to Turkey some time ago Israeli foreign minister Shimon Peres announced that "We reject attempts to create a similarity between the Holocaust and the Armenian allegations. Nothing similar to the Holocaust occurred. What the Armenians went through is a tragedy, but not genocide." Armenians were understandably outraged. "We protest this assertive stance by the top diplomat of a nation whose sons and daughters themselves lived through the Holocaust." Peres' sentiments were then reiterated by Israel's ambassador to Armenia Georgia Rivka Cohen, who said the Genocide could not be compared with the Holocaust™. This resulted in further public outrage and a diplomatic row between Armenia and Israel. The Israeli Government not only validated Cohen's remarks, but went on to suggest that 'this issue requires extensive research and an academic dialogue based on testimonials and proof'.
At which point I collapsed. Awakened by the thud, Lady Savant found me on the floor, quivering uncontrollably, my finely chiseled lips flecked with foam, my eyes staring wildly into space. Only after the administration of copious quantities of Ritalin could I could finally be induced to approach my computer again. And there it was. It had not been a bad dream.
Yes, the Israelis are saying that claims of a genocide, before being accepted, must be supported by 'extensive research and an academic dialogue based on testimonials and proof'. OK, one more time: The Israelis are saying that claims of a genocide, before being accepted, must be supported by 'extensive research and an academic dialogue based on testimonials and proof'.
Meanwhile, as every schoolboy knows, for most European countries and in the Anglosphere generally, not only does theHolocaust™ claim not require 'extensive research and an academic dialogue based on testimonials and proof', but anyone looking for such a thing will find himself up before the courts in double quick time, probably jailed, and certainly have his career ruined.
I leave you with this from the judge at a recent Denial Trial in Germany. Judge Meinerzhagen summing up, said it was"completely irrelevant whether the holocaust really did happen or did not happen. It is illegal to deny it in Germany, and that is all that counts in court."
Remind me again, what language gives us the word chutzpah?
(The Irish Savant does a lot of provocative posts. I visit his site every day, and you should too. It's here: http://irishsavant.blogspot.com/)