Evan Green is a partner at Green and Spiegel LLP in Toronto. His undergraduate studies were at the University of Toronto and York University. After attending the University of Ottawa, where he graduated with an LL.B. cum laude, he was called to the Ontario Bar in 1990. Evan has extensive experience in all areas of Canadian immigration and U.S. immigration and is the firm’s lead in the area of U.S. immigration. Evan specializes in corporate immigration and, specifically, in the transfer of senior executives and workers into both Canada and the U.S. Evan is immigration counsel to leading corporations in all sectors and to major sports teams. A recent chair of the American Immigration Lawyers Association – Canada Chapter, Evan has been named as a leading Canadian Corporate Immigration Attorney in the Who’s Who Legal of Corporate Immigration, as well as selected by The Best Lawyers in Canada editions for the specialty of Immigration Law.
Evan is a much sought after expert in Canadian immigration and cross border issues who regularly lectures and frequently writes articles for a wide variety of audiences…
Evan is on The Board of Directors of Mount Sinai Hospital, he is the 2014 Incoming Chair of Lawyers 4 Wiesenthal (Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center), he is a Member of Executive Committee Beth Sholom Synagogue Brotherhood Humanitarian Award Dinner, a 2013 Participant in Maccabiah Games Israel…
Posted inCanada, Immigration, Simon Wiesenthal|Comments Off on Canadian Immigration Lawyer With Strong Ties To Simon Wiesenthal Center
In the following essay, a Canadian Jew calls out the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the organized Jewish community for using the Holocaust as a battering ram to force Canada to take in more Muslim immigrants.
How many Jews and non-Jews in the West will be raped and killed because of this massive importation of Muslims? Will those Jewish leaders who advocated Muslim immigration be held accountable for the slaughter that results?
Guilt-trip politics is rearing its ugly head this election season, as the searing trauma of the Holocaust is being used to try to turn Canadians – particularly, Canadian Jews – against Stephen Harper this election season.
Perhaps you are familiar with the phrase “None Is Too Many”. It was coined by Toronto History professors Hesh Troper and Irving Abella in their 1983 book, None is Too Many: Canada and the Jews of Europe 1933-1948 to describe the xenophobic attitude of the Canadian government in the William Lyon Mackenzie King era.
While Jews often attribute the quote to Mackenzie King himself, it is actually part of a second-hand anecdote reported to Troper and Abella, attributed to an anonymous immigration official in Ottawa. According to their unverified account of the incident, when asked how many Jews would be allowed to immigrate to Canada after the war, the unnamed immigration official apparently replied “None is too many”.
Led by the lawyers who operate the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre, an organization that fights antisemitism in the name of the now-deceased Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal, the Liberal Jewish community is using the loaded phrase and its emotional implications to turn the Syrian refugee crisis into a battering-ram against Stephen Harper.
Even before FSWC President Avi Benlolo released his statement last week calling on Canada to open the floodgates to Syrian refugees in the name of “Tikkun Olam” (repairing the world) during this High Holiday season for Jews, I saw several liberal Jews in my circles using “None is Too Many” in beating up the Prime Minister over refugees and immigration. It’s become the knee-jerk reaction to any defense of the Conservative government’s record and platform.
In the name of fairness, I’d like to take apart this meme, and set the record straight for my fellow Jews being misled by this guilt-trip.
1) “None is Too Many” had nothing to do with the MS St. Louis, and the MS St. Louis had little to do with the Holocaust. Many in the Jewish community and elsewhere falsely believe that “none is too many” was said in connection with Canada’s refusal to accept the 900 German Jews on the St. Louis in May 1939, who were turned away from landing in Havana after a sudden change of refugee policy by Cuban President Bru.
Both the US Democratic President Roosevelt, and Canada’s Liberal PM Mackenzie King, refused to let the boat dock at American or Canadian ports, and thus it was forced to return to Europe. Contrary to the mythological tale of the St. Louis that many repeat to this day, the passengers were not sent back across the sea to the German death camps. The St. Louis docked back at Antwerp, Belgium on June 17, 1939 – three months before World War II began.
Not a single passenger was returned to Germany, where the Wansee Conference was still nearly three years away from convening. From Antwerp, all the refugees were accepted by free countries. The United Kingdom took 288 passengers, France took 224, Belgium 214, and the Netherlands 181. It is estimated that up to 254 former passengers from this journey did not survive the war years, certainly a tragedy, but hardly the “Canada sent back Jews to the slaughter” narrative that is usually implied.
2) Canada’s refugee policy under Prime Minister Harper is anything but “None is Too Many”. According to the United Nations Refugee Agency, Canada was a world leader in refugee resettlement in 2014, ranking second only to the United States in admissions (12,300), and first in granting citizenship to former refugees (27,200). In contrast, the Liberal Mackenzie King administration admitted just 5,000 Jewish refugees during the entire period of 1933-48.
3) The Jews of Europe of the 1930s would have presented no national security risk to Canada. On the other hand, it is downright delusional to pretend the same about an immediate importation of tens of thousands of Syrians in 2015.
4) Sadly, there is no realistic way to pluck the truly desperate refugees out of harm’s way at present. Just as it was impossible to get Jewish refugees out of Europe during WWII, it is impossible to get large numbers of targeted minorities out of ISIS territory today without large numbers of boots on the ground in Syria and Iraq. Every conservative I know would be proud to airlift every Yazidi and Christian possible to safety starting now; however, in this age of Obamian leading-from-behind, the free world has no stomach for the only real solution to the enslavement and massacre of these innocents – a war of liberation.
5) Islamic refugees from Islamic civil wars are, frankly, not a Jewish problem. Aside from the aforementioned minority communities under targeted persecution, the vast majority of refugees in this crisis are Muslims from Muslim states in a Muslim-dominated part of the world. The Islamic world is completely hostile to Judaism and the Jewish people, and the concept of persecuted Jews in a similar situation being granted asylum in an Islamic country is laughable. While there are certainly moral imperatives in Judaism to help and welcome your neighbours, there is no admonition – “tikkun olam” notwithstanding – to aid your enemy. In fact, most rabbis would tell you that aiding your enemy is strictly prohibited. (Unfortunately, most liberal rabbis refuse to recognize that Islam’s holy books explicitly target Jews as enemies, but that’s for another day.) There are, however, huge Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Yemen, and Egypt, that would be logical lands for large-scale refugee resettlement.
There’s no doubt that the “None is too many” platitude is going to be seen more and more in the coming weeks, as liberal rabbis from the Reform and Conservative movements will be sermonizing on the topic at upcoming Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur services. Now that you know the historical inaccuracies and logical fallacies involved in applying it to the current situation in and around Syria, don’t be afraid to challenge the pushers of this meme, and let them know the truth.
Introductory Remarks by:
Rabbi Steven Burg, Eastern Director, Simon Wiesenthal Center
Rabbi Steven Burg is the Eastern Director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. A graduate of Yeshiva University, Rabbi Burg received his rabbinic ordination from Yeshiva University’s Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary (RIETS.) Following his ordination he embarked on a 22 year career at the Union of Orthodox Congregations of America (OU). In 2005, Rabbi Burg became the youngest International Director of NCSY, the youth movement of the OU, and spent the next years restructuring the organization, focusing on professional development, branding and marketing, and metrics and measurements. Through NCSY, Rabbi Burg became one of the foremost leaders in Jewish teen engagement and led an organization that serviced 35,000 Teens worldwide. Rabbi Burg also served as the Managing Director of the OU overseeing its array of religious, youth, social action, educational, public policy and community development services, programs and activities. Rabbi Burg serves on the board of directors of the Yeshiva University High Schools. He is also a member of the Board of Education for the Rosenbaum Yeshiva of North Jersey elementary school.
Moderator:
Errol Louis, NY1 Host of Inside City Hall
Errol Louis joined NY1 in November 2010 as political anchor and host of “Inside City Hall,” the city’s premiere news program covering New York politics and government. He regularly interviews top newsmakers, including Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Governor Andrew Cuomo, among many others. Prior to joining NY1, Louis was a columnist and editorial board member of the New York Daily News.
Special Guest Moderators:
Sayu Bhojwani is the founder of The New American Leaders Project (NALP), the only national organization specifically focused on preparing first- and second-generation immigrants for civic leadership. For that work, she has been recognized by the Case Foundation as a Fearless Changemaker, honored by Citizens Union New York, and awarded the BMW Foundation’s Young Leaders Award in 2013. From 2002 to 2004, she was New York City’s first Commissioner of Immigrant Affairs, under Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, and in 1997 she founded South Asian Youth Action (SAYA!), the first and only organization working with South Asian youth.
Sayu is a frequent contributor to the Huffington Post, CNN In America, and other online publications and currently serves on the boards of the National Immigration Forum and The Afterschool Corporation. She is completing her dissertation on immigrant civic engagement, at Teachers College, Columbia University.
Sayu also holds an M. A. in English Education and a M.Ed. in Comparative Education from Columbia University. Sayu was born in India and grew up in Belize. She moved to New York City in 1984, and currently lives there with her husband and daughter.
Erica González, Executive Editor, El Diaro/La Prensa
Erica Gonzalez is the executive editor for El Diario-La Prensa, the oldest Spanish-language daily newspaper in the country. As the executive editor, Erica develops and writes the paper’s editorial position on local and national issues. She edits weekly columnists, recruits guest writers, and initiates editorial board meetings with candidates for elected office and an array of organizations and leaders. Gonzalez has received two awards from the National Association of Hispanic Publications. She regularly represents El Diario-la Prensa on media panels and has appeared on CNN and Fox 5’s Good Day Street Talk.
William E. Rapfogel, Chief Executive Officer, Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty
William E. Rapfogel has served as the Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty (Met Council) since 1992. During the past two decades, it has grown into one of New York City’s largest and most efficient non-profits. Mr. Rapfogel’s advocacy and expertise on the evolving issues surrounding Jewish poverty has won praise and recognition at national, state and city levels, including White House recognition. Through his leadership, Met Council continues to be on the cutting edge in its development of innovative comprehensive social services and community development to aid, sustain, and empower those in need.
Tod Sears, Founder, Out on the Street
Todd Sears is the founder of Out on the Street, the first LGBT leadership organization for Wall Street, by Wall Street. The mission of Out on the Street is to engage both gay and straight senior leaders in discussions around making the Street a destination for top talent, and to enhance the careers of LGBT senior leaders by creating connections to increase opportunities for business. Todd is one of the thought-leaders in next-generation diversity & inclusion. He is the founder and Principal of Coda Leadership Consulting LLC. A former investment banker at Schroders and DeSilva & Phillips, as well as a first-quintile financial advisor at Merrill Lynch, he brings an in-depth understanding of both the challenges facing senior leadership in corporations today, as well as how to leverage diversity initiatives to increase and retain market share.
Posted inImmigration, Simon Wiesenthal|Comments Off on New York City Mayoral Forum on Cultural Sensitivity andTolerance
…Buchanan at the time [1999] had been talking about criminals entering illegally from Mexico. He said other politicians were afraid that “if they speak out against illegal immigration and they speak out against the crimes that are being committed, suddenly they’ll be considered insensitive, or they say, ‘We might lose the Hispanic vote.’”
Trump back then issued a statement saying he hates intolerance because in New York, “a town with different races, religions and peoples, I have learned to work with my brother man.” I accompanied him as he underscored the point by touring the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles.
“He seems to be a racist,” Trump said of Buchanan.
Now Trump is the one talking about Mexico sending us drugs, crime and rapists. His shift is hardly surprising given his audience — and his competitors. Scott Walker talks about self-deportation, Graham talks about ending birthright citizenship, Ben Carson blames illegal immigrants in part for the measles outbreak, Rand Paul describes as lawbreakers those who were brought to the United States illegally as children, and even relatively moderate candidates such as Bush and Marco Rubio have hardened their immigration positions. Ted Cruz actually praised Trump.
From ManhattanDA.org: Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., joined Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Associate Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and Richard Eaton, Simon Wiesenthal Center Senior Researcher, today to release the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s 2014 Report on Digital Terrorism and Hate. The annual report details websites, online forums, and social media users that use the internet to promulgate hateful ideologies and promote terrorism. The report collected information from websites around the world.
“Never before in history has it been so easy to spread hateful and dangerous ideologies throughout the world in an instant,” said District Attorney Vance. “The Simon Wiesenthal Center’s report serves as a reminder of the persistence of those who persecute groups of individuals and spread hate across borders, particularly targeting our youth for recruitment. Prosecutors in my Office’s Hate Crimes Unit will continue to aggressively prosecute hate crimes and work closely with the Wiesenthal Center to teach tolerance. I am very proud of our ongoing partnership.”
Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Associate Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, said: “The Simon Wiesenthal Center lauds DA Vance’s leadership in combating all forms of digital hate and terrorism. Our 2014 report confirms a shocking rise in the use of social networking by extremists for recruitment and to denigrate ‘the enemy.’ Twitter and other social networking companies must do more to help stop this dangerous trend. We look forward to continuing our partnership with DA Vance’s office.”
Included in the report on Digital Terrorism and Hate are examples of social media and websites targeting Jews, Muslims, and other religious communities, as well as sites that provide instructions for carrying out terror attacks. One such site mentioned in a previous report, Al-Qaeda’s Inspire Magazine, was used by Jose Pimentel, a lone-wolf terrorist convicted by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office for attempting to build a pipe bomb that he intended to use to target servicemen and women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Another terrorist convicted by District Attorney Vance, Ahmed Ferhani, was sentenced last year in New York State Supreme Court to a decade in prison for trying to obtain explosives and munitions with the intent to kill Jewish people in New York Synagogues.
In May 2010, District Attorney Vance formed the Manhattan District Attorney’s Hate Crimes Unit to strengthen the Office’s investigation and prosecution of hate and bias crimes. The Unit collaborates with the NYPD and community organizations to develop strategies that seek to prevent bias-motivated crimes, whether based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation.
Since the creation of the Hate Crimes Unit, the Office has had eight eligible defendants who had been charged with hate crimes successfully complete a unique Restorative Justice program that the DA’s Office launched in conjunction with the Museum of Tolerance New York, a Simon Wiesenthal Center Museum. Each session at the Museum included a tour of the Museum’s exhibits, interactive workshops, videos, guided discussions, and special instruction by Museum educators to explore issues of prejudice and tolerance. The Museum reports back to the District Attorney’s Office about the defendant’s participation.
Posted inSimon Wiesenthal|Comments Off on DA VANCE AND RABBI ABRAHAM COOPER ANNOUNCE THE SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER’S REPORT ON DIGITAL TERRORISM AND HATE
In November 1947, the United Nations voted to endorse the creation of the Jewish State. Today, some say that Israel should give up its unique Jewish character in order pursue peace. As President, would you continue America’s historic support of Israel as a democratic Jewish State?
Racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, and homophobia, fuelled in part by religious demagoguery and manipulation of the Internet, are a reality both here and abroad. What specific steps would your administration take to combat this rising scourge?
How would your administration deal with the immigration issue?
Tragically, the threat of genocide remains a fact of life in 2008. As President of the United States, would you ever consider
sending American troops to Darfur or other areas suffering humanitarian crises?
It is now seven years since 9/11. Are you committed to continue the war on terrorism? What would your administration do to hunt
down the top Al-Qaeda leadership?
This gives a good taste of the Simon Wiesenthal Center’s political agenda. It wants Israel to retain its strongly Jewish character. It wants censorship of hate speech. It wants America to intervene abroad to alleviate suffering. It wants massive non-white immigration into the West.
Posted inSimon Wiesenthal|Comments Off on Simon Wiesenthal Center’s 2008 Presidential Questionaire
This pro-migrant site writes: After being named one of the nine scariest parties to be elected to the European parliament by Huffington Post, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the global Jewish human rights organization that challenges anti-Semitism, issued a statement where it names the Perussuomalaiset (PS) as one of ten parties it will monitor closely for spreading xenophobia, nativist nationalism, anti-immigration rhetoric and anti-Semitism.
Placing the PS in the political company of France’s National Front, the neo-Nazi and far-right NPD of Germany, Greece’s Golden Dawn and Jobbik of Hungary, shouldn’t come to a surprise. What is, however, surprising how uncritically the Finnish media has treated the PS, especially when it comes to its anti-immigration and anti-Islam views.
Concerned by the rise of xenophobia and anti-Semitism in Europe, the Simon Wiesenthal Center called on in early May EU Vice President Catherine Ashton to condemn the entry of “hatemongers into the European Parliament, launch an investigation into their source of funding” and “urge the parliamentary faction blocs to ostracize them.”
Posted inImmigration, Simon Wiesenthal|Comments Off on Simon Wiesenthal Center will monitor the PS as one of ten parties for spreading xenophobia and anti-Semitism
Max Blumenthal, a journalist of the left who opposes all ethno-nationalisms including the Israel expression, writes:
AlterNet has learned that an amendment to the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would have forbidden US assistance, training and weapons to neo-Nazis and other extremists in Ukraine was kept out of the final bill by the Republican-led House Rules Committee. Introduced by Democratic Representative John Conyers, the amendment was intended to help tamp down on violent confrontations between Ukrainian forces and Russian separatists. (Full text of the amendment embedded at the end of this article).
A USA Today/Pew poll conducted in April while the NDAA was being debated found that Americans opposed by more than 2 to 1 providing the Ukrainian government with arms or other forms of military assistance.
If passed, Conyers’ amendment would have explicitly barred those found to have offered “praise or glorification of Nazism or its collaborators, including through the use of white supremacist, neo-Nazi, or other similar symbols” from receiving any form of support from the US Department of Defense.
The amendment was presented by congressional staffers to lobbyists from Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, two of the country’s largest established Jewish pressure groups. Despite their stated mission to combat anti-Semitism and violent extremism, the ADL and Wiesenthal Center refused to support Jeffries and Conyers’ proposal.
According to Democratic sources in Congress, staffers from the ADL’s Washington office and the Simon Wiesenthal Center rejected the amendment on the grounds that right-wing Ukrainian parties like Svoboda with documented records of racist extremism had “moderated their rhetoric.” An ADL lobbyist insisted that “the focus should be on Russia,” while the Wiesenthal Center pointed to meetings between far-right political leaders in Ukraine and the Israeli embassy as evidence that groups like Svoboda and Right Sector had shed their extremism.
Posted inADL, Nationalism, Simon Wiesenthal|Comments Off on Max Blumenthal: How the Israel Lobby Protected Ukrainian Neo-Nazis
From Mondoweiss in 2010: Why does the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC) have nothing to say about the rabbinical edict circulating in Israel—currently signed by more than four dozen rabbis—forbidding the sale or rental of homes to non-Jews?
Or, why has the Center not applauded the dissenting view of Israel’s leading Haredi rabbi, Aaron Leib Steinman, who said, “there are things that should not be done; what if there would be a similar call in Berlin against renting properties to Jews? Where is the public conscience?”
Israel is lurching toward ever-more extreme expressions of religious-nationalism, electing leaders who publicly profess anti-Arab and anti-immigrant views—and legislate accordingly. Israelis increasingly favor gagging their own country’s human rights organizations, journalists, and activists. This swelling anti-democratic impulse is directed toward non-Jews—whose status is necessarily ambiguous in the “Jewish state”—but even toward some who self-identify as Jews.
Meanwhile, the Simon Wiesenthal Center is in “business-as-usual” mode, issuing stern rebukes to those it deems anti-Semites—i.e., those who criticize Israeli policy and advocate equality for all who inhabit the borderless space of Israel/Palestine.
Last week, SWC Rabbis Marvin Hier and Abraham Cooper took the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to task in an over-the-top op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. A sharp correction to Rabbis Hier and Cooper came in a statement issued by the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the PC(USA), which noted that “this is not the first time [SWC rabbis] have wrongly accused Christian traditions that are committed to overcoming injustice in the Holy Land of demonizing the Jewish people.”
So, while ignoring the fact that many of Israel’s religious and secular leaders are fomenting rabid, tribal attitudes, what does the Simon Wiesenthal Center deem worth of attention in its quest for “tolerance”? A visit to the organization’s website lists their current preoccupations:
• Slamming UNESCO for its declaration that the “Haram al-Ibrahim/the Cave of the Patriarchs and Bilal bin Rabah Mosque/Rachel’s Tomb” are “an integral part of the occupied Palestinian territories” and “that any unilateral action by the Israeli authorities is to be considered a violation of international law.” Despite the location of these sites in Hebron/Al Khalil, deep within the Palestinian occupied territories, the Simon Wiesenthal Center characterizes UNESCO’s statement as a move to “steal from the Jewish people one of its most sacred religious sites.” [No mention on the Center’s site of Israel’s state-sponsored stealing from the Palestinian people in establishing settlements for half a million Israelis on occupied and expropriated Palestinian land, in Hebron and elsewhere, in violation of international law.]
• Calling on the Japanese discount retail chain, Don Quixote, to remove a “Nazi” uniform adult costume from its stores throughout Japan and Hawaii.
• Slamming as “anti-Semitic scapegoating” an event in Dublin, Ireland, featuring David Cronin, author of a new book titled Europe’s Alliance with Israel: Aiding the Occupation.
Meanwhile, the Simon Wiesenthal Center is moving ahead on the planning phase of a “Museum of Tolerance” in Jerusalem, incredibly situated atop a Muslim cemetery. The project, a “partnership with the Jerusalem municipality and the Israeli government,” has been condemned by numerous entities, including an Israeli Jewish-Muslim initiative, Americans for Peace Now, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and, of course, descendents of the Palestinians buried there.
In its scorched-earth campaign to deflect appropriate criticism of Israeli policy by smearing advocates of equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians, the Simon Wiesenthal Center fails abjectly in key elements of its stated agenda: to “promote human rights and dignity” and “confront bigotry and racism.” It’s a patent double standard: the Wiesenthal Center’s misguided notion of what it means to “stand with Israel” trumps universal human rights regardless of religion and ethnicity.
The Simon Wiesenthal Center has amassed a substantial track-record of self-righteous finger-pointing. It’s time to point the finger back.
Posted inIsrael, Simon Wiesenthal|Comments Off on Mondoweiss: The Simon Wiesenthal Center’s perverted stance on ‘tolerance’
* Prize-winning historian Peter Novick illuminates the reasons Americans ignored the Holocaust for so long — how dwelling on German crimes interfered with Cold War mobilization; how American Jews, not wanting to be thought of as victims, avoided the subject. He explores in absorbing detail the decisions that later moved the Holocaust to the center of American life: Jewish leaders invoking its memory to muster support for Israel and to come out on top in a sordid competition over what group had suffered most; politicians using it to score points with Jewish voters. With insight and sensitivity, Novick raises searching questions about these developments. Have American Jews, by making the Holocaust the emblematic Jewish experience, given Hitler a posthumous victory, tacitly endorsing his definition of Jews as despised pariahs? Does the Holocaust really teach useful lessons and sensitize us to atrocities, or, by making the Holocaust the measure, does it make lesser crimes seem “not so bad”? What are we to make of the fact that while Americans spend hundreds of millions of dollars for museums recording a European crime, there is no museum of American slavery?
* In the first decades following World War II, Americans rarely discussed the Holocaust. Now, remembering the Holocaust has become a fundamental part of Jewish identity; gentiles, too, view the Holocaust as a touchstone of moral solemnity. In The Holocaust and American Life, Peter Novick asks why, and his answers are both sensible and shocking. He explains the immediate postwar silence about the Holocaust by reviewing the basics of cold war politics: just after the liberation of the concentration camps, Americans were called upon to sympathize with “gallant Berliners” who resisted the Soviets and built a wall against Communism–an “enormous shift from one set of alignments to another,” Novick notes. Novick then leads readers through the series of events that brought the Holocaust to the forefront of American consciousness–the trial of Adolph Eichmann, the Six-Day War, the Carter administration’s Israel policy, and the construction of the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C.
Among Novick’s most controversial ideas is his assertion that American Jews spoke softly of the Holocaust at first because they didn’t want to be seen as victims; later, Jews decided that victim status would work in their best political interest. Or, as Novick puts it, “Jews were intent on permanent possession of the gold medal in the Victimization Olympics.” The Holocaust in American Life is as carefully researched and argued as it is polemical and probing. Novick does not suffer Holocaust deniers lightly, and he is empathic toward victims and survivors, but he has no tolerance for false sentiment. One wishes that more people would ask, as Novick does, what kind of a country would spend millions of dollars on a museum honoring European Jewish Holocaust victims instead of a monument to its own shameful history of black slavery.
* Why has the Holocaust, five decades after its conclusion, remained such a burning issue in the consciousness of Americans, both Jews and Gentiles? After all, most historical events fade from memory with the passage of time and the deaths of those who directly experienced the events. Yet, despite the occurrence of more recent and certainly quite horrific mass atrocities, from Cambodia to Rowanda, the Holocaust continues to play a central role in American public discourse. In this unsettling and fascinating work, Novick, a Jew and a professor of history at the University of Chicago, examines how a variety of domestic and foreign events have moved Holocaust consciousness to the center of American life and kept it there. The author unhesitatingly probes touchy subjects, including the role of Holocaust consciousness in cold war politics, the “uniqueness” of the Holocaust, and even the supposed “obsession” of American Jews (few of whom are Holocaust survivors) with the Holocaust. This is an important work that is bound to irritate, even outrage, many readers.
* This is one of the most intellectually stimulating books I have ever encountered. While few people with probably agree with everything the author has to say, he has written a thoughtful, thoroughly researched examination of how the idea of the Holocaust–and popular thinking about that tragedy among both Jewish and Gentile Americans–has evolved over the 60 years since the outbreak of World War II. He also has the courage to challenge conventional thinking as well as the beliefs of generally revered leaders like David Ben Gurion and Elie Wiesel.
The book does an excellent job of linking popular thinking about the Holocaust with concurrent historical trends and developments, including the more intense American focus on the Pacific as opposed to the European theatre for much of the war, the lack of appreciation during and immediately after the war for the immensity of the Jewish genocide, the emergence of the Cold War (together with the “discovery” of common totalitarian threads between Nazism and Stalinism), the “rehabilitation” of Germany after Stalin took over Eastern Europe, changing views about “victimization” in American popular culture, the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem and Hannah Arendt’s controversial analysis of it, the Arab-Israeli Wars of 1967 and 1973, as well as the decline in American anti-semitism in general at the same time that radical black activists were employing anti-Jewish rhetoric.
One of the most important contributions of the book is its discussion of the alleged “uniqueness” of the Holocaust, which the author shows to be both historically inaccurate and dangerous in leading down the slippery slope where any other more recent catastrophes and disasters are minimized in comparison. Rich with example and documentation–the footnotes and endnotes should be read, too–the book is one I expect to return to in the future. Broad in its scope and well-written, it is generally quite persuasive in the arguments it advances.
* Professor Novick has written a superb critique of the extent to which an preoccupation with the Holocaust dominates American-Jewish organizational agendas and priorities, along with a rigorous historical account of how we got here. This is really a book which should be read by all Jews who care at all about the activities of those organizations that purport to speak for the American Jewish community–and indeed, by all Jews who are concerned about American Jewish culture and society.
I’m afraid that Jew haters will find a certain amount here that will be useful to their cause.
A determination not to write anything that might potentially provide ammunition to Jew haters would only lead to a paralysis that prevented one from writing anything about Jews. Rest assured that Novick, a secularist Jew and University of Chicago historian, is the farthest thing one could imagine from a Holocaust denier. He quite properly dismisses them as “a tiny band of cranks, kooks, and misfits”. Historians do not need to concern themselves with refuting Holocaust deniers any more than they would need to concern themselves with refuting Civil War deniers, slavery deniers, Roman Empire deniers, or flat-earthers.
Posted inAmerica, Holocaust|Comments Off on The Holocaust in American Life by Peter Novick
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)