Humour and Genocide

What events in history are okay to laugh about?
What does it mean to laugh at history?
When we laugh at something does that mean we now have power over it?
It is okay to laugh at something like genocide?

I found this video on youtube. I won't tell you what to think about it but I want to hear your responses.

Armin Wegner - Ultimate Upstander

I thought I would follow-up on the story of Armin Wegner, the German writer/photographer and anti-genocide activist who dedicated his life to protesting both the Armenian genocide and the Holocaust. After documenting the horrific realities of the genocide in Armenia, Wegner was arrested by the Germans at the request of the Turkish Command. In their efforts to erase all evidence of the killings, German officials confiscated and destroyed most of Wegner's film, though he was able to smuggle a few images.

He then went on to be the only writer in Nazi Germany to publicly and forcefully protest Hitler's plan to exterminate the Jewish people. Shortly after writing a letter to Hitler, Wegner was arrested, tortured, and sent to a Nazi concentration camp. Before finally escaping to Italy, Wegner was imprisoned in seven different concentration camps.

Wegner's story an incredibly inspiring example of the extent to which select people are willing to go in the name of social justice and consciousness.

Adalian's "Armenian Genocide"

Happy Friday everyone!

Thanks Casey for a great “blog duty” the past rotation. Our genocide classes have been so enriching and thought-provoking these past few weeks, I always look forward to this class to get me through the rest of the week.

Our assignment last night was to read the first 8 pages of Rouben Paul Adalian’s “Armenian Genocide” summary from "A Century of Genocide," in order to give those of who are not as familiar with this less-publicized genocide a quick synopsis of the Whos, Hows, and Whys of this atrocity. One thing that surprised and interested me, among other things, was the earlier history on the early origins of this genocide. The Young Turks, described to be Enver, Talaat and Jemel, had the opportunity to reform and recreate the declining situation of their country because of their governmental positions and instruments of power. Adalian said that “…the Young Turks originally advocated a platform of constitutionalism, egalitarianism, and liberalism” (54). And then gradually, the Ottoman Empire became influenced and “brainwashed” by Germany, and soon, “by 1913, the advocates of liberalism had lost out to radicals in the party who promoted a program of forcible Turkification” (54), using German-made weapons and military education.

It is so fascinating to me that the evil Young Turk dictators started their reign with an intent on having a democracy, and became so easily swayed by the pressure of a greater European country. How would circumstances have been different if Germany had not stepped into the picture? Would the CUP still have made its plan to extinguish the entire Armenian race, using “deportation, execution and starvation”?

This also brings to mind whether or not other genocides or cruel acts by the government started out as good intentions? Why do countries feel the need to mimic the other (as the Turkish government mimicked the German government)? Can one prevent such cruel events from happening if these problems are addressed from the beginning? What current day events relate to this problem of minority and more powerful governments?

If there any other comments about the reading, I know I only focused on one aspect that stood out the most to me. Please respond to any part of the reading. Did the reading help clarify any confusions or misunderstandings about the beginning of the genocide? Are there still any other questions?

Looking forward to another good week!

Bystanders, upstanders, tasers: oh my!

Just to continue the dialogue about the roles of bystanders, upstanders, and perpetrators, I saw this clip on the news and then Associated Press about a University of Florida student, Andrew Meyer, who was asking some very provocative questions at a forum that featured John Kerry. He wound up being tasered and then arrested for resisting an officer and disturbing the peace, but hasn't yet been tried. The police are considering formally charging Meyer with resisting arrest with violence, which is a felony, and disturbing the peace and interfering with school administrative functions, a misdemeanor crime. There are numerous perspectives that we could address about this issue but one of my first reactions was to the fact that no one from the audience got up to help Meyer. Then again, is Meyer considered to be an upstander or a perpetrator? I wondered what Florida University had to say about the actions of the police in an academic setting; does tasering promote free speech and learning?
From the youtube.com site, there are links to some reputable (and some not) sites that have more background information on the situation.

Attacks on Aid Workers in Darfur

I just read this article from the UN News Service about the most recent attacks on humanitarian aid workers in Southern Darfur. (I would have posted it in links, but I'm not qutie sure how to do that.) According to the article, "attacks against the relief community have increased by 150 per cent in the past year". This was especially frightening to read not just because of the attacks themselves, but because such attacks might discourage organizations from sending further aid. What are people's thoughts on this?

http://allafrica.com/stories/200709271236.html

H Block Rotation Summary (sorry to be a bit repetitive)

Hello fellow H Blockers:

As my "blog rotation" is coming to an end I wanted to give you guys a quick synopsis of what we have done this past rotation:

We began the rotation with our guest speaker, Milton, who spoke to us about eugenics and race science and how the idea of race has come to be as a result of the past. He emphasized the role that thinking critically plays in his study of eugenics how we can learn a lot about ourselves through studying the events and ideas of the past. We discussed the three articles that we read in class, which all highlighted a specific aspect of eugenics and its origins (science, race improvement, and ranking according to race). Although our discussion ended somewhat abruptly we were able to uncover some deep ideas that left us asking more and more questions.

Our next class we discussed the idea of denial and related it to the very timely visit of Iranian President Ahmadinejad to Columbia University who is an active denier of the Holocaust and whose visit to the US brought about a great deal of controversy on whether or not he should be allowed to speak at the University. In the writing lab we explored different aspects/figures related to genocide denial and for homework wrote a "Letter to the Editor" regarding our stance (if we had one) one whether or not the President of Iran should be allowed to speak at Columbia. (Congrats to Leo who was published in the San Francisco Chronicle!)

In our most recent class we began our study of the Armenian genocide. After going over the basic facts of when and where the genocide took place we discussed in depth many questions that arose about the genocide itself to the Turkish government's denial of such an event. W also found ourselves trying to answer the question of "Why is it that so many people are familiar with the Holocaust and not the Armenian genocide?" Our discussion went down many paths from foreign policy to the idea of Euro-centrism.

I hope that this was not too lengthy for you guys...
Looking forward to many more exciting and engaging classes in the future!

F Block: Rotation Summary (9/19 - 9/26)

Hey F-Blockers,
I think it's fair to say this past rotation was pretty packed with activity. From guest speakers to debates to lots of questions, we explored controversial topics like genocide denial and freedom of speech. Hopefully, this short summary will refresh your memories and keep you thinking about it all as we move forward...

Thursday (9/20) - S.T.A.N.D. founder and recent Stanford alum, Nikki, came in to give us a bit more context and perspective on the current genocide in Darfur. He broke his presentation into three chunks: History, International Community's response, and Activism. Due to lack of time, the "activism" portion was extremely short and we didn't have any time to respond or ask questions.

Monday (9/24) - For homework, we read about and responded to an article on the Armenian Genocide. We were asked to think about how the Turks justified their actions against the Christian minority, as well as how the press responded or should have responded to all that was happening. Then, as the perfect reinforcement for these responses, we had a speaker, Roxanne, come in to give us further context for the Armenian genocide. Her presentation had a very palpable emotional component because her grandparents were Armenians who had been forced to escape the Turkish government's plot. After a moving introduction and lots of facts, Roxanne discussed the effect that denial had and still has on the survivors/witnesses of the genocide. She emphasized how much energy the Turkish government continues to put into erasing the Armenian genocide from history.

Wednesday (9/26) - Today we further discussed the idea of genocide denial, and the strategies the deniers use to bolster their standpoints ("Revisionist" history, logical fallacies, F.U.D.). We read an article from 2006 about a Holocaust denier convention that President Ahmadinejad held in Tehran. This was particularly interesting as it contributed to the close watch we've been conducting on the Iranian President's speech at Columbia. Then, we went to the writing lab and broke into four groups, each group taking on a specific task related to genocide denial. Our homework for Friday is to write a letter to the editor of either the SF Chronicle, the NY Times, or the Oakland Tribune giving our opinion on whether or not we think Mr. Ahmedinejad should have been invited to speak. Congratulations to Leo for having his letter published!

It's been a hectic and thought-provoking week, and I have confidence that as the semester continues, our conversations and ideas are only going to get more complex and interesting...

Ahmadinejad on the Holocaust at Columbia

This blog seems to have been following the news story of Ahmadinejad's visit to Columbia, and since we're focusing on Holocaust denial in class, I thought I'd post this segment from his talk at Columbia in which he talks about the Holocaust. Similarly to what Elias said a few posts ago, I am not posting this to lend any support to Ahmadinejad's statements, but to look at some of the statements he is making and how they follow or don't follow typical claims made by deniers.
The part that angered me the most, as I stated in an earlier comment, was the statement that the Holocaust has nothing to do with Iran, and the fact that this should change the way they viewed it. Or at least that's my interpretation of the statment, it's not a direct quote. He said something similar in his interview. What were your reactions to that?

A NOTE FROM MS. FINN

Hello.

At this point in the life of the blog, you should have your own log in name. Coe and Tal (as well as others who have logged in) know how to do this and can show you. You can also read the instructions on the side of the blog.

Please do not log in as "Ms. Finn" from this point on. I want it to be clear who is speaking and writing and I don't want your opinions confused with mine from the reader's perspective.

Keep up the active communication and discussion.

Happy blogging!

Ms. Finn

Free Speech (in France)

France recently moved to make the denial of the Armenian genocide a punishable offense under law. Of course this raises a plethora of questions. Although this happened a little while ago, its really pertinent to what we are discussing, so I want to know what you guys think. Here the link to an Article on it from the Herald tribune:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/12/news/france.php?page=1

Can passing such a law be considered just?

Can not passing such a law be considered just?


Could a law like this ever get passed in America?

A Denier

This is Thomas Mallon—

When our class was researching Holocaust denial the other day I stumbled upon somthing facinating and of acute historical significance to our class. One of the fist denier of the Holocaust was not a white supremisist, nor a Nazi sympathizer—he was a french resistance fighter that had spent the war helping jews escape from Nazi persecution. Yet this same man wrote a book essentially claiming that the gas chambers had not existed. Why? He was worried that anti-German sentiment would give strength to communists and that it could turn into another war, leading to a communist take-over of Europe. This is so interesting because our perception of what a "denier" is is utterly differant. This shows that there can be many motives for altering history, not just to spread hate, but sometimes in an effort for peace.

SO I want to ask this question: if erasing the Holocaust from history would prevent a war right here, right now, would it be justified?

Armenian Genocide Guest Speaker

Although it's not my blog week, I still really wanted to post this topic.
Our guest on the Armenian genocide, Roxanne, was very informative and engaging. What I really like about her was that she was able to add a personal story to her presentation. Because she had family who lived during the genocide, and since she's been back there since, her story seemed tangible and clear. What most surprised me was how she described the denial of the Turkish government. I know we're going to be talking about denial in class, so feel free to add to this once we study more about it.
So for F blockers....
Here are some questions:
-What were your first impressions of Roxanne's story?
-Since there wasn't enough time at the end of class, what questions would you have liked her to respond to?
-How did this presentation enhance or affect your perception of denial?
-How is hearing about a genocide from a person who has an experience that directly relates to it (Roxanne) different from hearing about a genocide from a person who is simply an activist to stop it (Nikki)?

And also one more thing that isn't directly related to the presentation, but I've been thinking about it for a while now:
(EVERYONE RESPOND!)
Why is it that when we study World War I that we don’t hear about the Armenian genocide? I don’t remember it even being mentioned in 10th or 11th grade history classes (although this may just be my inability to recollect something like this….). Why is it that the Holocaust is given so much more attention and is known around the world when a similar thing happened to the Armenian Christians? This question really confounded me because it made absolutely no sense. (answers anyone?)

I know this was part of a previous comment of mine like a week or two ago, but nobody responded and I still think that it's really interesting.

Rwanda Synopsis

I found this really terrifyingly detailed article on the Rwandan genocide, written by Samantha Powers. It's kind of long, but I felt like it was definitely worth the read.

In the course of a hundred days in 1994 the Hutu government of Rwanda and its extremist allies very nearly succeeded in exterminating the country's Tutsi minority. Using firearms, machetes, and a variety of garden implements, Hutu militiamen, soldiers, and ordinary citizens murdered some 800,000 Tutsi and politically moderate Hutu. It was the fastest, most efficient killing spree of the twentieth century.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200109/power-genocide/1

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Holocaust

Since the Iranian president has been in the news, I thought it would be interesting to try and unpack his thoughts on the Holocaust and his reasoning for denying that it ever happened. I post this video to stimulate questions, not to give Mr. Ahmadinejad a platform to discuss his ideas. I am quite against his denial of what I believe is one of the most atrocious, horrific events in history and there is enough evidence to prove that it happened. But after watching this video I was struck at some of the points he makes and am interested in responses from others in both sections of the class.

Full CBS Interview with Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Race Science, Eugenics+ Guest Speaker

Hey guys, so after our guest speaker on Thursday (H Block) I thought that I would do a little bit of recapping of our class/discussion and see what your reactions were to what we learned and discussed during the class. Although our discussion ended somewhat abruptly, feel free to respond about your reactions, thoughts, or whatever you feel is missing from my brief summary.

Our guest speaker, Milton, came to talk to us about the subject of race science and eugenics and how they have influenced how we interpret the idea of race today. Milton began by addressing the importance of thinking critically when studying eugenics and answering the question of "How does the past frame the way we think of things today?" After some introduction to the subject of eugenics, we broke up into groups of three and each read one of three different articles pertaining to eugenics. Together the articles explored the science behind the study of eugenics, the idea of "race improvement", as well as the idea of ranking humans according to race. From these articles we learned that eugenics is basically the term used to describe "race betterment". In the late 1800's the idea of "race betterment" implied finding a way to breed Europeans with Europeans to create more of the "superior race " and slowly weed out the "lesser races (Africans, Asians, Native Americans)". From our short discussion of the articles we came up with questions such as "Can science be totally objective?", "What is normal?", and "What does the environment have to do with how the data is interpreted (i.e. homogeneity vs. heterogeneity)?" We were just scraping the surface of some of these questions when class ended so hopefully Milton will be able to come to our class again so that we can continue exploring these ideas!

Feel free to respond in any way but here are some questions you can use to guide your responses:

• How has our study of eugenics influenced your interpretation of race? Has it changed?
  
• How is the idea of eugenics related to genocide in general?
• Are any, if at all, of the key assumptions in eugenics valid or true? How so?
  
• What were your reactions to Milton and the study of eugenics?
  

We'd Invite Hitler to speak, says Columbia's Dean

This video relates to a discussion we had in class.

Would you provide a platform for Hitler, or a denier of the Holocaust to speak in public? Why or why not? If not, how is this any different from other forms of free speech?

What if that speaking event was paid for by taxes? What if that speech was instead a a debate with many sides of the issue presented?

White Supremacist websites in the Jena 6 Case

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/09/23/national/a050117D98.DTL&hw=jena&sn=001&sc=275

This is an article from the SF Chronicle on Sunday, September 23; it states that some white supremacist websites recently posted the addresses and phone numbers of the African American kids involved in the case. The FBI is investigating whether or not the site is breaking any laws.

I thought this was interesting because it relates directly to the HATE.COM film we watched in class, and it further proves that those websites do exist and they are very much active today.

After reading the article, think about these questions:
-Do you think an FBI investigation of these websites is enough? or do you agree with Rev. Jesse Jackson that these families need protection?
-What do you think should be done to the moderators of the website? Where does the line end between their right to free speech and the harassment of the families, seeing as they did not directly harm them?
Comment on any of these questions, or anything you have to say!