Polish-Jewish Relations: 1,300 Keyword-Phrase-Indexed Book Reviews (by Jan Peczkis)

The Problems of Genocide, by A. Dirk Moses. 2021. Cambridge University Press, U. K.

Holocaust Grandstanding Rules Over Comparative Genocide Studies. Role of Jewish Influence

This work focuses on how Third World genocides have tried to earn the label of genocide. With the exception of the Rwandan genocide, they have generally not been successful.

NOT “PARANOIA”: JEWS THEMSELVES BELIEVED IN MASSIVE JEWISH INFLUENCE

Nowadays, the PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION is made into a bogeyman that is supposed to scare us out of asking questions about Jewish power. Let us move beyond it.

Moses makes these eye-opening comments, “The Nazis’ belief in the unified political agent, ‘international Jewry’, reflected widespread belief in its existence and power among Europeans, Americans and many others at the time. So did Jews.” (p. 304. Emphasis added).

He adds that, “It is immaterial that Zionists were in no position to deliver on their promise of Jewish support in the US and Russia. What is relevant is that they played on this fascination by exaggerating their influence and the significance of Jewish influence in those countries. Everyone played the game of the international Jewish simulacra.” (p. 307).

This “everyone played the game” claim needs to be examined. In politics, perception is reality. It is not a game.

For an example of how the American government seriously took international Jewish influence, see:

https://www.jewsandpolesdatabase.org/2021/03/28/pogroms-1918-fake-news-confronted-by-the-us-government-jewish-disloyalty-1918-draft-dodging-united-states-government/

Fast forward to the present. We must neither underrate Jewish influence nor overrate it. One of the most obvious manifestations of contemporary Jewish influence is the way that the Holocaust has been enthroned in western thinking, and the multitudes of other genocides have all been minimized. Let us focus on this.

HOLOCAUST SUPREMACY EXPOSED AND CLARIFIED. ZERO SUM GAME

Moses writes, “Given the status of genocide as the crime of crimes, and of the Holocaust as the archetypal genocide, the image of the largely agentless and innocent–that is, unpolitical–Jewish victim represents the ‘ideal’ of ‘exemplary’ victim: that socially constructed status by which sympathy and legitimacy are conferred on certain objects of violence and not on others.” (p. 486). Exactly! It is a zero-sum game.

I appreciate the author’s frankness about “sympathy and legitimacy are conferred on certain objects of violence and not on others”. Clearly, this zero sum game has enthroned the Holocaust. How much clearer does it have to be? In actuality, there are no valid “exemplary genocides” or “ideal victims” just as there are no valid master races.

Moses continues laying on the bull, “The Holocaust is not only archetypical and universal genocide, then, a figure of ‘global memory’. Jews represent the archetypical and universal form of victimhood.” (p. 486). Really? Says who? Who gave the Holocaust the “right” to usurp and subsume other genocides? So much for the farce of the universalization of the Holocaust. Furthermore, if there is such a thing as a “universal form of victimhood” at all, why cannot it be the Gypsies, Poles, or Armenians? To ask this question is to answer it. Only the Jews’ Holocaust has these expansive, self-appointed, and racist properties. When all is said and done, the death of a goy is not as significant as the death of a Jew.

HOLOCAUST GRANDSTANDING MARGINALIZES ALL NON-JEWISH GENOCIDES

The Holocaust has so permeated modern western societies that other victims of genocide have to “ride the coattails” of the Holocaust if they hope to get any sort of attention and recognition. Moses recognizes the harmfulness of this, as he comments, “Any atrocity now must analogize with the Holocaust to be registered as shocking, thereby limiting the capacity of trauma to be legible as supreme emergencies.” (p. 53). He adds, “As we see in Section III, a consequence of this ‘global Holocaust culture’ is that genocide claimants also feel compelled to depict mass violence as Holocaustal to get attention.” (p. 238).

This takes Holocaust supremacism to another level. If the non-Jewish genocide does not resemble the sacrosanct Holocaust in a significant way, then it was not really a genocide.

The drift is unambiguous. Even when mentioned at all, the non-Jewish genocides are decidedly secondary to the Jews’ Holocaust. There is a clear and present victim hierarchy, with the Jews’ Holocaust at the apex. There may be no Master Race, but there surely is a Master Genocide–the Holocaust.