Entry details

Curzon
Author

Curzon

Date

May 11th, 2005

Tags

,

Comments

18 Comments so far.
Add yours.

Curzon’s Living Will

After years of debate, the Holocaust memorial in Berlin finally opened yesterday amid much fanfare. Hardly a dry eye could be seen among the throngs of politicians present for the opening ceremony. The monument, located in the center of the city, is a drab field of acre upon acre of concrete slabs—2,711 in total—tightly woven together. The purpose is to make an area that would “resonant with both the terror of German history and the vibrancy of today’s reunited Berlin.” I heard the architect speak on BBC World Radio this morning, where he said he hoped denizens would walk through the memorial on their way to work. That’s just what I need on my daily commute—a morbid reminder of the Nazi holocaust, what a cheery way to start my morning. Can you think of anything more dire in a modern urban landscape?

I’m appalled by this memorial on three levels. First, it is not healthy for Germans to be bombarded by a constant reminder of their Nazi past. It dehabilitates the national psyche, inviting self-loathing and doubt. Second, it’s ugly beyond belief. Why put a drab memorial like that in the middle of a city? It looks like an industrial graveyard. Don’t be surprised if Berlin’s suicide rate goes up with this thing keeping genocide on the brain. Third, the sheer ignorance of the people who dwell on this history boggles the mind. Statesman and public figures solemnly declare “never again,” apparently trying to convince themselves that their grave tone of voice alone is enough to stop future war crimes. When I question the incessant focus on the holocaust, I’m admonished that “those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it!” But it’s all a sick joke. Genocide in Darfur, civil war in the Congo, impending collapse in Nepal, the slow eradication of native culture in Tibet and Xinjiang, not to mention the disasters in Chechnya, Aceh, Burma, North Korea, Colombia, Uganda—and these are happening now. And yet no one feels the need to do anything. How do these people take themselves seriously?

If you’ve been to a modern funeral in the US or Britain, you have probably noticed that it’s common to ask friends of the deceased to not send flowers. Although it’s customary to show remorse with roses, we’re more progressive nowadays. The petals wilt in days, so why not put the money to better use? Today, the custom is to ask that a donation be made to a charity or cause in the name of the deceased. That, we believe, is a more constructive use of our money and it does more net good.

Those lessons can be applied on a larger scale, and I now make all my readers witness to my living will. If in the future I am the victim of a war crime, if I am collectivizated and starved to death, killed in a race riot, or ethnically cleansed from where I live, bring the perpetrators to justice and kill them. Then, remember me wisely. Don’t send flowers —and by that I mean don’t build an expensive, imposing stone memorial or teach the great great grandchildren of the people who killed me how bad their descendants were. Instead, make a donation —be proactive about killing bad guys. There would be no better justice than for the world to realize the only way to stop genocide and war crimes is to do something about it before, not after, and take out evil regimes with extreme prejudice. Make “never again” a reality.

Comments to this entry

Chirol
May 11, 2005
7:46 am
Amen Brother Curzon! Nothing annoys me (and most Germans whom I ask) more than this constant holocaust nonsense. Everyone here is tired of talking about, tired of hearing about it and tired of the war in general. There are enough damn memorials here and everywhere else in the world. 86 the memorial and send peacekeepers somewhere if you want to make a difference, or at least donate the money to something.

Gabriel Mihalache
May 11, 2005
9:23 am
Firstly, who should care what's best for the Germans, if not the Germans themselves? The fact that some others (maybe the French? Probably not.) see them as some sort of sleeping monster shouldn't mean that much to them, either way.

Secondly, life always finds a way. I'm sure that if not this summer then the next, children will be spray-painting and climbing and skating all over those cement blocks.
Chirol
May 11, 2005
10:00 am
The point is that Germans do care and many don't want garbage like this erected in Berlin but they are afraid to speak out because the second a German says "I'm tired of being blamed for something I didn't do. Let it go" the media would be in an uproar. The Germans are backed into a corner by international opinion, Jews and the far left. Read the German news, if you so much as mention the holocaust or WWII in a way that rubs someone wrong you're out of office. It's happened a few times.
Eddie Beaver
May 11, 2005
10:24 am
Germany spends millions on this abomination of a memorial but says nothing about the genocide happening in Darfur.

"Never again" is an epithet now, a tasteless lie mouthed by leaders who are full of it.

Closer to home, the champion of freedom himself ignores the genocide in Darfur, choosing to align himself with the regime in Sudan. Anybody who thinks the wiser than he's depicted Pres. Bush doesn't hold sway over his party in Congress should know he at least has power in the House. He got the House Republicans to kill the Darfur Accountability Act in committee last week.

If even the politicans who "get it" (what the world is like, what must be done to the bad guys, etc etc) on a more than regular basis like Bush ignore a genocide like Darfur, we're screwed. "Never again" is and will continue to happen "over and over again".
Dan
May 11, 2005
1:38 pm
Except there is no genocide in Darfur.

Genocide is an attempt to destroy a race. In Darfur we see massacres designed to end political unrest (similar to Ottomon massacres in Bulgaria, etc).
Saru
May 11, 2005
3:55 pm
1) "Secondly, life always finds a way. I'm sure that if not this summer then the next, children will be spray-painting..."

Actually, I read in Monday's NYT that in spite of the designer's protests, the government had all the stones coated with some type of anti-spray paint paint (Remember that scene from _The Naked Gun_?)


2) "Although it's customary to show remorse with roses, we're more progressive nowadays."

Yeah, we build monstrosities like "this.":http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/12/19/wtc.plan/.
Chief Wiggum
May 11, 2005
4:00 pm
The U.N. worked very hard to parse the issue of genocide in Sudan so they wouldn't have to take any action. If genocide is identified, action is required by the U.N. charter.

Genocide is defined as intent to destroy a group on national, ethnical, racial or religious grounds.

If my understanding is correct, the Sudanese government, which is Arab and muslim, is trying (and succeeding) to drive black African muslims (mainly) out of Darfur. The Sudanese government provides air cover and support. Their proxies on the ground, the Janjaweed, do the actual raping, burning and killing.

The U.N. commission studying the Darfur situation reported that the Sudanese government "has not pursued a policy of genocide", but added that it had committed "crimes against humanity" and "ethnic cleansing".

The report added that some individuals - may have committed "acts with genocidal intent". The commission also found evidence that rebel forces were responsible for serious human rights violations "which may amount to war crimes". When both sides behave badly, it's always easier to throw up one's hands.

Curzon is correct. It is in fact, "all a sick joke." It will always be easier to wait until there are more facts available, further studies are completed, and the vexing problem is passed around among agencies while waiting for someone else to take responsibility.

Hand-wringing usually trumps action.
Nathan
May 11, 2005
4:53 pm
More than anything, this just confirms that modern architecture is by and large utter crap.

Really though, I do wish the Holocaust, as horrible as it was, become history. When I was in Germany, my host family sat me down for an evening of "we're not bad people, really" that simply didn't need to happen. I held nothing against them, but obviously the organizers of the program (partially funded by the German government) felt that it was important enough to encourage all the families to tell their students that Germans weren't monsters and that Nazis are bad. I may not be a huge fan of Germans, but they don't deserve the stigma.

And on the flip-side, well, let it be known that it was a Roma, and not me, who accused some Jewish organizations of playing "victimization olympics." I always found it refreshing that my best friend, who is Jewish, was raised to never use his heritage to gain sympathy or advantage.
Saru
May 11, 2005
5:06 pm
"Never again" refers more to places like Vietnam or Mogadishu than to Cambodia, Rwanda, Sudan, etc...
IJ
May 11, 2005
5:35 pm
A couple of questions about invading Sudan:

1. Who would volunteer to intervene militarily in Darfur, if the UNSC somehow approved the action but Sudan opposed? With no standing army, the UN couldn't go in.
2. Who should oversee the intervention if it takes place, to ensure it's orderly? Military campaigns tend to be ill-disciplined affairs. See 'British and US mythology about the second world war ignores our own crimes and legitimises Anglo-American warmaking' http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1480178,00.html

It is easy to see the attraction of UN backed non-military action against a nation, leaving aside the desperate need to make sanctions effective. ('Sanctions suck', May 6)
Alfred Russel Wallace
May 11, 2005
5:38 pm
The ugly political truth remains that our leaders reflect us; there is no pressure from the populace of any "first world" country to send "our" boys to die in Sudan, Congo, Somalia, etc..... So no politician leads the way...

It's hard to imagine a stronger case for intervention than Iraq, and we all know how popular that is......
Plunge
May 11, 2005
11:36 pm
Okay, first off, your link is broken, the, " dehabilitates the national psyche," so I'm not sure what that was linking to.

Next, let's go through what you said.

First, it is not healthy for Germans to be bombarded by a constant reminder of their Nazi past. It dehabilitates the national psyche, inviting self-loathing and doubt.

I agree with this to a point. It shouldn't be a daily, beat you in the head with it thing. I don't agree with the why though. More than it being dehabilitating, I see it more becoming numb to it. People will walk by the memorial and it will mean nothing to them. A memorial needs to be at the appropriate place, a place where you specifically go to learn and meditate on what happened.

Second, it's ugly beyond belief. Why put a drab memorial like that in the middle of a city? It looks like an industrial graveyard.

I agree. Looks ugly as hell. I saw the picture you posted before even reading the title and wondered why all the blocks were lying around and what they were planning on building. The overcast weather doesn't help either.

Third, the sheer ignorance of the people who dwell on this history boggles the mind. Statesman and public figures solemnly declare "never again,"Â? apparently trying to convince themselves that their grave tone of voice alone is enough to stop future war crimes.

I agree that most politicians are just playing to the cameras with something like this. Their statements mean little if their actions haven't shown a consistent record of trying to deal with war and human rights abuses.

When I question the incessant focus on the holocaust, I'm admonished that "those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it!"Â? But it's all a sick joke. Genocide in Darfur, civil war in the Congo, impending collapse in Nepal, the slow eradication of native culture in Tibet and Xinjiang, not to mention the disasters in Chechnya, Aceh, Burma, North Korea, Colombia, Uganda"”?and these are happening now. And yet no one feels the need to do anything. How do these people take themselves seriously?

This is where I disagree. You have a country that is part of modern Europe that tried to commit genocide against the Jews. It was done on a large scale, horrific fashion. It was a systematic, deliberate attempt to destroy, eliminate, exterminate the Jews. It should never, ever be forgotten. These were modern, educated people committing one of the most horrific crimes imaginable. It should be remembered to show that no matter how educated and sophisticated we become, horrors can happen in our society.

Does this mean that people shouldn't be doing something in the places you mentioned? Of course not. Something should be done. But you don't berate someone for not doing what you consider is enough. For some, just remembering the holocaust and in their personal lives, not being a bigot or a racist is all they can do. For others, they are compelled to do more and that is great. They will remember the holocaust and it will compel them to write a letter to their senator or to the president asking them to help with these other issues. Maybe they will get involved in a group that pushes for freedom in Tibet or give money to an organization that helps North Korean refugees.

This is a similar argument to the one I get from many that oppose the war in Iraq. "What about these other countries, why just Saddam?"Â? they say. Well, you have to start somewhere don't you? Whether it be "Ëœjust' remembering the holocaust or joining the army to fight against terrorists, it isn't for us to judge.

I get similar comments all the time from people. If you didn't know, I'm one of the founders of Operation Give. I get emails all the time asking why I would want to help Iraqi children when there are American children in need. Or, why do we want to build hospitals and schools in Iraq when there are still hurricane victims in Florida living in tents. I get sick of that. Who are they to judge what I do?

Do I think the monument is a good thing? Not really. Again, looks ugly as hell and doesn't seem to be an appropriate place for it. Do I question people wanting to focus on the holocaust? No. It is a modern, horrific crime. People living today lived through the horror. This isn't some "˜ancient' history. It isn't something people should just get over already. But, we've discussed that issue before"¦

Sorry Curzon, I think you are wrong on this one.

But, if for some reason you die an early death, I'll take the money I would have spent on flowers and buy some bullets for a military sniper. I'll see if they'll etch your name on them for free.
Curzon
May 12, 2005
12:27 am
Sir Ignatius Valentine -- Thanks for the comment from the frontlines.

Gabriel -- Sure, Germans can do what they like. I'm just a humble blogger...

Eddie -- I think you're overexaggerating Mr. Bush's role in the lack of action in Darfur. But I appreciate your point, especially coming from you as an active soldier.

Dan -- and similar to the Ottoman massacres of the Armenians, right? (Crap, I am so not getting into that conversation today.) In the case of Sudan, the militias/tribes are guilty of ethnic cleansing. The government is guilty of complicity/negligence.

Saru -- no, that is a modern-day rose. And you're right about our perversion of what "never again" has become.

Chief -- that's an excellent point, and if I may say so, very well put! (i.e. "we agree!")

Nathan -- Amen to that. The holocaust should not be forgotten, but it should be history already.

IJ -- A UN force in the Sudan? Forget it. Start with major pressure, not sanctions. We could accomplish 90% of our goals in Darfur with the threat of force. If necessary, a US-led AU force -- made up of, say, Libyan, Niger, Nigerian, and Rwandan troops -- would be desirable. As for your link, "don't get me started on the Guardian!":http://www.cominganarchy.com/2004/11/16/earth-to-the-european-leftpolicymakers/

Dr. A. R. Wallace: I reluctantly conceed your point -- but Americans often support our military's adventures abroad to go kick some evildoer's asses if it's explained/framed the right way, and many in the military are willing to put themselves in harm's way. The above hawk Eddie Beaver is in the navy, for example.

Plunge -- sorry for the broken link (it is indeed broken, and I forget where I meant to link to). And your points are great, too bad we disagree on the big picture. And thank you especially for your final paragraph. I was truly touched.
Eddie Beaver
May 12, 2005
2:09 am
Ethnic cleansing/genocide, its all unacceptable.

Curzon,

Why else would the House Republicans kill a bill that had massive bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate unless the White House noted its opposition? (they sent a letter to the House GOP leadership)

Considering we now value Sudan's regime and intelligence services for our WOT efforts, what else explains the US backing down from confronting Sudan?

Consider what was in that bill, it contains everything you just said we needed to do in Sudan. Here's the now dead Darfur Accountability Act: (its hr 1424 if you want to look it up on the Congress search engine)

SEC. 4. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

It is the sense of Congress that--

(3) the African Union must amend the mandate of the African Union Mission in the Sudan to focus directly on protecting civilians from attacks and to neutralize the Janjaweed militia and other militia groups engaged in attacks against civilians;

(4) the United Nations or NATO should deploy at least 10,000 troops to the Darfur region to augment the African Union Mission in the Sudan;

(8) the President of the United States shall instruct the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations to demand--

(A) the extension of the military embargo to the Government of Sudan, as called for in paragraphs 7 through 9 of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1556;

(B) the freezing of property and assets of government and military officials and their family members; Janjaweed leaders; and individuals engaged in planning, directing, and implementing of the atrocities in Darfur;

(C) that member states significantly reduce the number and the level of the staff at Sudanese diplomatic missions and consular posts and restrict or control the movement within their territory of all such staff who remain;

(D) steps to restrict the entry into or transit through their territory of members of the Government of Sudan, military officials of that Government, militia leaders, and other individuals involved in the planning, directing, and enforcing measures against civilians; and

(E) steps to discourage international and regional organizations from convening any conference in Sudan
Fabian
May 12, 2005
5:11 am
Who cares if what is occurring in Darfur constitutes "genocide" or not? Why do we have to quibble over fluid, contested concepts like ethnicity, race, culture? Shouldn't the fact that there are systematic attempts to kills people be enough justification for international action?

To Alfred Russel Wallace: I'm a big fan of your work! Especially "Travels through the Malay Archipelago".
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » European Jurisprudence is INSANE
July 19, 2005
11:16 am
[...] Third: the morality imbalance here is galling beyond belief. Europe has been infected by the Left-wing virus. They feel that getting the real bad guys like Kim Jong Il and Saddam Hussein, i.e. stopping crimes against humanity while they’re actually happening is a distant concern to exerting jurisdiction over what has already happened. While Europeans preach “never again,” in truth they only want to get preachy and feel good about the past: Afghan warlords, Chilean thugs, and Bosnian war criminals are no longer issues, so they feel they can now do something. The same goes for their view of North Korea and Sudan, which they will only care about when they’re over. [...]
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » On War Crimes; or, "What makes it immoral if you lose but not if you win?"Â?
October 31, 2005
4:10 pm
[...] McNamara never comes to grip with the answer: nothing—war is war. Victors judge right and wrong, decide who is a war criminal, and write the history books (mentioned here and here; or see Marmot on the subject here and here). As horrible as the firebombing was, as horrible as Japan’s war in East Asia was, when it comes to war, the victors must fight total war until surrender. Ceasefires and conditional surrenders frequently perpetuate conflict. That is the result of war between great powers. [...]
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » Tally Ho! Curzon is off to Saigon
December 12, 2005
5:26 am
[...] In case I don’t make it back, see my living will. What say you? [...]