I think the problem is bigger in Holland than in Belgium, because most people in Belgium don't even know what a jew is. Let alone recognise one. In Holland, they're more prominent or labelled as being jewish. I bet most Belgians would think of a person with a jewish last name as being German (and therefor Christian/or a derivative)

Even grandfather C.G. Jung wrote an interesting essay about evil, WO 2 and more:
http://tinyurl.com/yq3ovm

Zirilla

Tel Aviv

Dens

I think you are making a mistake. I don't know from which region from Belgium you are, but in Belgium, I think we are quite familiar with Jews. You are overreacting you say, if we think Jewish last names are German. Take a look at Antwerp, although people there can have a more extreme idea because of the chasidic Jews, they are familiar with them. Even with the non orthodox. I'm not a specialist, but what you say is wrong. Come on, we live on this planet, and we know Jews. At school children learn about Judaism, about Israel etc.. For me it is not that odd, I have Jewish family and friends, and I never heard them complaining about Belgian people mistaken there last name for a German-christian one. In Antwerp the local Jews are also represented in business, and arts. But I think somehow less in the media. Also the University of Antwerp has an 'Institute for Jewish studies' ( http://www.ua.ac.be/main.aspx?c=*IJS ), where I took some courses under the direction of Vivian Liska, a talented professor and director of the institute. But on a lager scale there is still a long way to go.

Last week I googled "famous dutch, jewish personalities". What shocked me, was that my first hit was a neonazist website who gave lists of known dutch people with a jewish background. (Arnon you weren't amongst them)
If those people still keep those kind of lists, I don't think it is because they like the presence of jews in our society that much.

An other blog

I just heard on radio Klara, an interview with Gerrit Komrij. He strated a blog and the interviewer was surprised. 'het is toch een jong medium, is het niet moeilijk met al die technologie', on which Komrij said: 'Oh, het is zelfs even eenvoudig als een telraam'. Later he said that the 'comment function' is out, because there are to many idiots and 'histerische wijven'.

I will have a look on the blog called: lucifer in het hooi.

But the comment function is out, because there are to many idiots

Comments

Not allowing people to comment on a site so bloody old-school and typical of babyboomers. That generation believes in only one thing: their own voice. Which is to be imposed and not to be argued.

I think, monica, that living in Antwerp has clouded your view. I've lived in Antwerp amongst the chassidic jews, and yes I passed the Diamond-stores and what else, but I think to know that people outside of Antwerp only see the diamond-jews and don't think about the rest. In the media there are no jews (apart from those who get beaten up (in Antwerp) by muslims), there are very few temples (apart from Antwerp) known, etc.. I dare you to do a study in every province of Belgium about the knowledge of jews and how many they know (in person or from a store they saw) and I think you'll find some quite surprising results.

I think the only antsemitism that is still strong is the islamic antisemitism, but with the strength of the US and Israel these days that will no longer be a problem.
I personally never understood antisemitism. I think its something for very delusional people like the skins that believe in the concept of ZOG. It's paranoia.
The threat of genocide on the other hand is always there, but I dont think jews will ever be the victims again.

Mieke

Excuse me for asking but why on earth did you google “famous, Dutch personalities”?

Arnon

On the one hand you say that the Vergangenheitsbewältigung is impressive, on the other hand you say that there is reason to be skeptical. How does this fit togehter? And what are the reasons for being skeptical?

Manon

Compared to Austria “Vergangenheitsbewältigung” in Germany has been impressive. And maybe even without this comparison there a lot of good things to say about “Vergangenheitsbewältigung” in Germany. If it has always been effective is another question.
On the other hand when I was discussing this matter with Maxim Biller in New York last November he argued that ant-Semitism in Germany is rising again, and he pointed to a few incidents (I’m afraid I cannot recall these incidents) that showed anti-Semitism is being made fashionable again, sometimes under the disguise of irony.
I would say that the past is reason enough to be skeptical.
The “Vergangenheitsbewältigung” is a sign that Germany itself is skeptical, I’ll quote this rhetorical question from the article by Nicholas Kulish in yesterday’s Times: “Where in the world has one ever seen a nation that erects memorials to immortalize its own shame?”
If you erect memorials to immortalize your shame you remain skeptical about yourself, for good reasons.
Did this answer your question?

Dens

Are you trying to say that there are no prominent Jews in Belgium?

Mieke

In my question to you I forgot the adjective "Jewish" I guess this is Freudian.

Arnon

I`m not sure if the fact that anti-Semitism is raising again is closely related to the Vergangenheitsbewältigung that has been made in the past and is presently being made.
But I do think that erecting one memorial after another is not the right way to deal with the past. Peolple somehow get bored of all the memorials and they don`t have the effect anymore which they probably should have because you get used to see a memorial at every corner in every city in Germany.
Erecting a memorial is a way of trying to get rid of your shame or of showing to the world that Germany is still dealing with it`s past.
I think this way of dealing with the past is not very effective . There already are enough memorials in Germany.
And I think that (german) people who are born after the 2nd world war don`t have to be ashamed for what had happend in that war.
I am german, and I don`t feel ashamed about that. I`ve never understood why I should do so. Not feeling ashamed doesn`t mean I am disinterested or don`t care.

Arnon

I don`t understand why erecting a memorial should mean that one remains skeptical about himself.

I am taking courses to become a travel leader. Since we had to choose a subject that is situated in Europe , I choose Amsterdam as my major. In April we have to give a lecture about one aspect of our speciality, mine is 'The Jewish history of Amsterdam'.
Now I feel awkward that I googled that. I think I'll stick to the mayor of Amsterdam as an example of a celebrity.

Manon

Once again it’s a memorial (or rather quite a few) to immortalize Germany’s own shame this does say something about the way Germany looks at itself, don’t you think? Or at least how the government wants Germany to look at itself. Or how the government wants others to think that Germany is looking at itself.
I really urge you to read the two articles I mentioned in case you have not done this.
Of course there is no moral obligation to equal German identity with being ashamed, I would even say that such a obligation has become counterproductive, nevertheless is it possible that you accept a certain responsibility, not only for what you current government is doing, but also for what past governments did in the name of Germany and the German people.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but your rejection of shame and/or guilt is less evident than you seem to think.
And your rejection of the memorials and in a way Germany’s past is a little bit frivolous and maybe not very thoughtful.
Do you prefer silence to memorials?

Manon

I think your attitude towards German history is sickening, to say the least. I think you are just a few steps away from revisionism. Maybe we should deny the whole shoah, so people wont confront you with the past anymore.

Joep

I repeat for you what I`ve said before: Not feeling ashamed of something doesn`t mean I am disinterested.

Arnon

I don`t prefer silence to memorials. I just think Germany has enough of them.
There are other ways of dealing with the past like supporting cultural exchange which can be very effective and future-oriented.
We do need memorials because they remind us of the past which is of course very important but I think we also need something that is future-oriented, like cultural exchange.
I refuse any responsibility for what the government has done when I wasn`t even born. But I do think I have the responsibility to deal with the past.
And there is nothing frivolous in my comment. One can overdo everything, even erecting memorials. That people disagree with erecting new memorials doesn`t mean they refuse to deal with the past. It can also mean that they disagree with the way the government is dealing with the past of Germany and that they would prefer another way of dealing with the past in public.
Sometimes you are very fast in judging other people`s comments or thoughts in a negative way. I don`t like that.

@Manon
what would you say at a fact: German kids read´Anna Frank dayboek´at school , they are quite aware what has been done in the past. I know it, i have a couple of German friends and we did have some disccussions about that particular subject. It is quite painfull to me because my grandpa rised me on the stories from the IIWW, and because i´m Polish and the people of my country who as well were Jewish suffered. But still you can´t simply say that Germany doesn´t get the responsibillty. I mean, look at you , what would you really like to see, to hear?

@Neria
you see! you did it! :)
thanks for Tel Aviv, soon i might be able to leave some comment at your blog , but till then ...
you have it in you!

Zirilla

I`ve never said that Germany has no responsibillty. You should read my comment much more carefully.

Joep

Victor Crebolder's comments were sickening, but he's just an ordinary repeat offender, hopefully not in real life.
To say that Manon's comment was 'sickening' didn't do justice to her comment I think.

@Manon
i should have indeed, but you know, i´ve got un impression that it was something else behind your arguments, some kind of, mind me saying that; frustration, i though i felt it because sometimes i feel quite frustrated about a fact that Germany got a Marshall plan help after IIWW and Poland hasn´t got any of that...yet i know all the arguments, the situation, i can´t help it, it still hurts.

Manon

I agree with you that there certainly is something gratuitous about erecting memorials, especially when it is done by later generations. I also see that it may serve to immortalize one's shame, while shame is actually something that one should try to overcome. Nevertheless, the Christian cross seems an artefact specifically designed to foster such shame. And while rememberering may be a valuable Jewish virtue, it's equally important to be able to forget if we want to move on.

However, I do not think that later generations are free of history, nor for the responsibility for that history. As social beings, as sons and daughters of the history of a locale, as speakers of a particular language, people are borne into a symbolic order, which existed before us, and which will still exist after we're gone again. One can't just say, "I didn't know anything about it", as though one has the option not to take part in it.

RH

There`s a difference between having the responsibility to deal with the past or the history and feeling responsible for what had happened in the past. If someone is not responsible for what has happened he doesn`t need to feel responsible for it or guilty or ashamed. Which doesn`t mean he has no responsibility of dealing with the past.
And there is also a difference between people who lived during the 2nd WW and say they didnt`t know what was going on and therefore don`t feel guilty and people who are born after that war and therefore don`t feel guilty.

To all

Feel free to blame me for not feeling responsible and guilty and ashamed for everything that happened in that damn war.
And feel free to attack me for disagreeing with erecting new memorials.
Make my day.

Manon

It seems that you are overcome with self-pity.
What makes you think you are the victim in this small and fairly benign discussion?
Maybe after all you feel ashamed, or at least you feel uncomfortable.
I agree, being German – in this discussion – is not a very desirable position. But self-pity is a bridge too far. If you are looking for self-pity, there are better reasons. I’m willing to feel pity for you, but not because you are German born after WW II. (Something that former Chancellor Kohl described as “Gnade der späten Geburt”) Come up with something better.

@Manon

Arnon

I don`t fell like a victim or self-pity. I was just annoyed about the reactions to my comment. That`s all.

@Manon
I understand why people say that Germans should remain sceptical about themselves, even if they erect monuments about their shame, maybe especially if they erect monuments about their past shame.
But I want to add: one day we all can suffer the fate of the Jews and another day a lot of us can become like most Germans during the war. Let us all be very sceptical about ourselves.

Manon

The time of wiedergutmachschnitzels is over Manon.

Joep

Your comments are annoying.

Arnon

Of Course there are prominent Jews in Belgium, but they don't profile them as such.

Manon

Maybe my comments are even a bit 'entartete' ,wouldnt you say?

Joep

No, I would say your comments are annoying and they`re getting more and more frivolous.

Manon

Usually a certain lack of sensitivity is a sign of ignorance. Sometimes this ignorance is undistinguishable from maliciousness.
Your position is hardly new and you are hardly the only one in Germany to think this way.
A lot has been said about this issue, in Germany, I think to give an example of Martin Walser’s famous or infamous Auschwitz-speech, and once again I really recommend reading Tony Judt’s article.
Your comments give the impression that you start from point 0, that you are the first one to think this way, which is of course not the case.
Sometimes it really helps to inform your self better, before making public statements. And once again it’s a small step from ignorance to maliciousness, especially while discussing this subject.

Arnon

There is neither ignorance nor maliciousness involved in my comment. And I am very well informed about this subject. I am not ignorant but a very sensitive person.

I was a bit surprised to read the following lines in the Tony Judt article: "Why is the Shoah so very distinctive? There is an answer to that question; but it is not self-evident to everyone east of the Oder-Neisse line. We in the US or Western Europe may not like that but we should remember it." The now dominant belief (in the US) that the Shoah is very distinctive and absolutely incomparable to all other crimes agains humanity, is relatively recent (from the 1980's on), and is not that broadly held in Western Europe, I believe. Personally, I think that it's a mistake to consider the Shoah as incomparable and totally unique.

Krista

What are the sources for the statements you are making? Or should we it all consider “personal opinion”?

arnon

I'm not claiming to be an expert on this (far from it), but my opinion is more or less based on my reading, quite a while ago, of a book by a Belgian (somewhat polemic) historian Guy van den Berghe. You can read his book online (in Dutch):
http://www.serendib.be/boeken/uitbuiting2.htm

Guy van den Berghe

He stepped on very sensitive feet everywhere. But a very accurate and well informed historian, if you ask me, far from being a revisionist, on the contrary.

Jan

I completely agree with your comment on Guy van den Berghe.

Quest for true

I like to add a small observation hereby.
In the quest for true, feelings will be hurt,
of course and first of all, the feelings of the perpetrators
and secondly, the feelings of the victims.
Sadly enough the victims will be hurt twice.

Jan T

Showing a certain amount of sensitivity does not mean that you have to turn yourself into a polite liar.

Krista

One source is a little bit meager isn’t it? Especially for somebody who not too long ago could not stop speaking about science and the scientific approach. Do you like to expose yourself this way?
Anyhow: At least one third of what you were saying has been said by Tony Judt in his article. Although he didn’t put the frontier at the eighties, but a little bit earlier I think.
The uniqueness of Auschwitz has been the subject of debates for decades. An intense and sometimes ugly “Historikerstreit” has been fought about this in Germany.
You seem to be unaware about this.
Combined with your other comments your comments on this issue leave me with a bad taste in my mouth.

Arnon

"The uniqueness of Auschwitz has been the subject of debates for decades.". Well, one more reason why Tony Judt's assertion -- "Why is the Shoah so very distinctive? There is an answer to that question; but it is not self-evident to everyone east of the Oder-Neisse line." -- is somewhat puzzling.
Relying on only one source? Well, what sources are you relying on? Did you read the scientist I was referring to?
What's your answer to Tony Judt's (apperently self-evident, at least for all males living west of the Oder Neisse line) question "Why is the Shoah so very distinctive?"
If you suffer from bad breath, I recommend the use of mouth water.

Krista

I can recommend a few books about the question whether the destruction of European Jewry was unique or not. You seem to be capable of finding these books yourself.
Anyhow, your point seems to be that it was not unique.
As I said before this point is not very new, maybe it’s new for you, but that’s another matter.
I’m just wondering what you are trying to say, in the context of this entry and Tony Judt’s article, what’s the implication of your point?
Maybe you are aware that a lot of people who argue against the uniqueness of the destruction of European Jewry happen to have an agenda, not always the most pleasant agenda.
If you would like to debate Tony Judt I recommend writing a letter to the New York Review of Books.
Have you ever been told before that you are not very good at being funny?

arnon

Have you ever been told that you are not a benevolent discussion partner?
The point I want to make is that, in order to prevent (little or large scale, if one can use such terms) future holocausts, it's problably wiser to study and to focus on the wrong doers (mostly ordinary people like you and me), than on the victims, where one is tempted -- understandably -- to overemphasize the unique and incomprehensible aspects of their suffering. In this respect I agree with Manon, namely that building yet another Jewish museum or memorial that focusses only on the Holocaust (why not on other, similar genocides?) , doesn't seem to make much sense.

Anyway, I'm still mad about the way you treated Manon. It seems to me that you are not able to interact with women in a normal way. But I'm sure you have been told this before.

Krista

Nowhere have I said, or for that mater has Tony Judt said, that we should focus only on the victims.
The uniqueness of Auschwitz does not imply at all that we should focus only on the victims, if for no other reason that a victim in this case needs a perpetrator to become a victim.
You seem not to realize that my dear Manon’s opinions come very close to the opinions of the NPD, a right-wing party in Germany.
You cannot help your own ignorance probably.
Your suggestion that I treated Manon unfairly or that I have a tendency to be misogynistic is a sign of your own malevolence.
I expect you not to comment on this site anymore.

Arnon

Are you crazy?My opinion on the discussed topic is very far away from anything that is connected to the NPD.If you really think so you totally didn´t get the point of what I was saying. I´ve never said I am against memorials-like the NPD. So could you please stop saying things that are just not true.

By the way, if you ask me, the Nazi attempt to exterminate all the Jews was quite unique in its purpose and its methods. This time there was really no escape by converting, nor adaptation, nor emigration for the victims.

Arnon

I apologize for my rudeness and insensitivity, and for apperently not being able to make a nuanciated claim. To my defense, I want to stress that I have no sympathy whatsoever for extreme right or for any revisionist party. You're right that, in matters as sensitive as this one certainly is-- and rightly so -- , one should be extra careful, as ignorance comes dangerously close to rudeness, brutality and much worse. I apologize.
I will respect your wish, and hence, this is my last comment. Adieu.

Manon

I'm not sure, you have moved well into NPD-territory I would say.

Arnon

You are offending me. Just stop doing this. Don`t you get it?

Manon

You should take responsibility for the comments you made in public instead of whining about being hurt.

It obviously isn`t possible to have a discussion with you if someone is critical about something because of your stereotyped thinking. (Someone says something and you know what he wants to say-no matter what he himself wanted to express with his words). I`ve been very clear about my opinion but you seem to ignore this and see everything the way you want it to see-no matter if it`s right or not. You don`t always know what is right. If you are critizised you sometimes behave like a sullen child-you stop argueing but start offending your discussion partner. That really sucks.

Manon

You seem to have no clue what the position of the NPD actually is on this matter; probably you have no clue what your own position is.
Anyhow you don’t offer arguments, you offer a variety of non sequiturs.