The Holocaust is that one event that everyone learns about. You'll start learning about it in elementary school. By second grade you've probably already heard of this term. By fifth grade you'll have learned that it was a horrible event in which millions of Jewish people died. You'll probably have read Anne Frank's Diary by 7th grade, and probably some Elie Wiesel. In fact, Wiesel's name has such high regard that my spell-check did not underline "Wiesel" in red but would underline "wiesel" in red. Because of this, Hitler is the most famous person in history next to Jesus, assuming he existed.

But the question is why?

Most would answer that it is because the Holocaust is the single worst event in human history.

But they are wrong. I mean, the focus on Jewish deaths should be the first tip off that something is up here. Three million Polish people were exterminated, as well as three million other assorted minorities. Why do they not have a voice? When you talk about the Holocaust, you'd probably immediately think Jewish people.

And the Holocaust was in no way the worst event in history. In fact, at the same time, the atrocities committed by the Japanese in Asia were in my opinion much worse than the events of the Holocaust. And what is weird is that nobody's ever heard of the atrocities in Asia! I mean, it doesn't even have a name for god's sake. So I am gonna refer to it as the AiA. I mean Emperor Hirohito's name is almost unheard of compared to Hitler, but he oversaw the barbaric raping and murdering of an entire continent!

Since the Meiji Restoration, the Japanese schools bred a sense of superiority in its students, on the basis that the Emperor was divine and that they were the Emperor's people, so therefore their purpose was divine. They were taught that other peoples were inherently inferior to them. Then in 1937 they began their invasion of Asia in China, and so much horrible stuff happened. For example, Unit 731 (look it up) was one of many facilities in which human experimentation occurred. PoWs and kidnapped locals would be exposed to certain diseases such as plague and then vivisected just before death to see the effects of the disease on their organs. A lot of other really sick experiments were undertaken, I don't want to get into it, you can look it up. Basically in the end, about 3000 to 10000 people died at Unit 731 in the hands of Dr. Shiro Ishii, who was never charged of any war crimes and died at the age of 67 of throat cancer.

The Japanese raped and pillaged their way through China, killing off whole villages, as they believed other peoples to be equivalent to animals. Almost all women were raped, young and old. Hundreds of thousands (I think, I'm not sure about that number) Korean women were kidnapped and forced into sex slavery at "Service Stations" for Japanese soldiers. They killed so many people that Japanese soldiers began to describe it as "monotonous" and "boring" and began to make games out of killing people. The epitome of the brutality was seen during the Nanjing Massacre, in which 300,000 civilians were sadistically killed. Women were raped repeatedly and were subject to having objects thrust up their vaginas, including beer bottles, sticks, and even grenades. They would make amulets out of the pubic hair of virgins that they raped because they believed it would bring good fortune. The killing for the soldiers were too boring so they decided to make it fun by torturing their victims. One of the "fun" methods was to bury you halfway in the ground and let dogs tear you apart while you are helpless. Another is forcing people onto the roof of a building and then setting it on fire. I mean if you want to know more just look it up, basically it was ridiculous. Estimates of Chinese civilian deaths go up to 20 million! The worst is not the number of killed but in the way they met their deaths, as they were all made to suffer.

Hold on for part 2 of post

And that was only China. The Philippines suffered greatly as well, and so did the Koreans. Ever heard of the Bataan Death March? Or the fact that you are more than twice as likely to die in a Japanese PoW camp than in a Nazi one?

It is just too messed up and too many innocent people died in too horrible of ways. At least being gassed you are spared the humiliation and torment and rape. And what really pissed me off was that I remember in my 10th grade AP World History book it had a whole section on the Holocaust but TWO SENTENCES about the AiA.

I think this downplaying of history is to make Jewish people seem like the only ones who were wronged during the Second World War. Sure, they suffered, but they do not deserve the immunity to criticism that they now have. I mean, the Holocaust is illegal to question in some countries for god's sake. Doesn't that sound sketchy? I'm not saying that it didn't happen or anything, but everything should be subject to questioning and skepticism, because that's the only way to ensure truth. I think they (they, being those in power) purposefully exemplified the suffering of the Jews in order to establish the Jewish State of Israel, which by the way, was created without the consent of the Arab states, and you wonder why they hate us, and Israel, of course. Notice I did not say they hated Jews. Just Israel. And the western powers, especially the US because of how much we've messed with them while at the same time supporting Israel.

But my point is, there is an obvious downplaying of history. Why has nobody heard of what happened to Asia, and why is the Holocaust taught so early on and then reinforced throughout the years? My speculation is that the Holocaust is used favorably for Israel like 9/11 works for the US. But what do you think?

I'm not hating on Jews, by the way.

Reply to italkyoulisten

Most would answer that it is because the Holocaust is the single worst event in human history.

But they are wrong. I mean, the focus on Jewish deaths should be the first tip off that something is up here. Three million Polish people were exterminated, as well as three million other assorted minorities. Why do they not have a voice? When you talk about the Holocaust, you'd probably immediately think Jewish people.

Yeh why are we made to learn and know about Holocaust?
I am sure there are other events in history that are much worser than the holocaust but STILL they decide to teach us about Holocaust.

Of course it’s a tip off that there is something up there.

Sympathize for Jews which will kinda give them a reason to take Palestine which they claim (where WE Jews have truly originated from).

You hear about Holocaust soo much that when you tend to listen to media about Israeli EXTENSION plans WHICH makes you THINK Ahhh its OK for the Jews to take Palestine because they don’t really have anywhere else to live (As we get taught they were thrown out of Europe and sent to ME).


[edit on 17-1-2008 by kangjia57]

Reply to Crakeur

When one group of people systematically kills another for no reason, other than being different, it is inhuman. black, white, jew, muslim etc, it's wrong. to try and downplay any one of these atrocities is only opening to door for acceptance to these things and once that door is open, another atrocity can occur.

Yeh but whats so Special about Holocaust? Why is it taught soo much without the recognition of other horrific atrocities that have taken place in history?
Is Jew blood more special than black,white,muslim Etc…

There are other events that have taken place which has led to thousands and millions killed.They should be brought into the syllabus and taught aswel.

Originally posted by kangjia57

Yeh but whats so Special about Holocaust? Why is it taught soo much without the recognition of other horrific atrocities that have taken place in history?
Is Jew blood more special than black,white,muslim Etc…

Well, there are obvious reasons why the Holocaust is elevated to a central position in our history. It was part of a wider, bigger story, the second World War, which involved the US and a large part of the whole globe. It was reported on widely at the time and evidence of it was documented thoroughly. Consequently there is a huge amount of historical source material, which apart from anything else makes it an extremely practical part of history to teach in schools.

Sadly, one of the problems of studying, for example, Pol Pot's mass-murdering tendancies is that actually not a great deal of evidence of it survives, and it wasn't as widely reported at the time.

That doesn't make those other atrocities any less important, or the study of them any less worthwhile. But the title of the OP is absurd. If your concern is to raise awareness of those other atrocities, why would you seek to devalue the single most widely-known of the catalogue of horrors man has enacted on man?

Rather than post this offensively-toned idiot-speak - "the holocaust is overrated", "jew blood" - your cause would be furthered more practically by starting a debate on the horrors of the other atrocities you mention and doing your bit to increase awareness of them, rather than suggesting we downgrade the unspeakable horrors of the Nazi regime to the level of the unreported crimes that litter our history.

Holocaust history is not taught "without recognition of other atrocities". What nonsense.

LW

Originally posted by Crakeur
Well, the easy answer is the holocause was a big part of a world war whereas these other atrocities were and are atrocities contained within a nation or region not resulting in a global conflict.

Sorry Crakeur, but there is little sense or logic in that statement. Holocaust was a big part of war? Was extermination of millions of Belorussians a lesser event? Who in the United States even knows where Belarus is?

Do you know what was the percentage of Russian males, born 1920-1922, still alive on May 8, 1945? I would like to know what your guess it.

Reply to LoneWeasel

Holocaust history is not taught "without recognition of other atrocities". What nonsense.

Its not nonsense,Its a Fact.

your cause would be furthered more practically by starting a debate on the horrors of the other atrocities you mention and doing your bit to increase awareness of them

No I didn’t say start a debate on ATS about other atrocities.

I said ‘There are other events that have taken place which has led to thousands and millions killed.They should be brought into the syllabus and taught aswel’

rather than suggesting we downgrade the unspeakable horrors of the Nazi regime to the level of the unreported crimes that litter our history.

I am not Downgrading Holocaust. I am trying to say is SCRAP At least half of the Holocaust material that is being taught is schools and colleges and bring in other Atrocities that have taken place in history.

FOR EXAMPLE: How The US Indiscriminately Bombed The Hell Out Of Vietnam Leading To Millions Of Civilian Deaths.

Understand?

Reply to benign.psychosis

'You hear about the Holocaust all of the time simply because of Jewish Zionist Propaganda and because Jews/Zionists own most major media outlets.'

Yup that’s exactly right.

All is question of proportions, and of intentions. Barbary is almost inherent to war. Holocaust as you say was an intent to eradicate an entire people. And this through mekanikally teknologikal tekniks - of which Heidegger-The-Nazi knew the cultural background.

Originally posted by kangjia57
Reply to LoneWeasel

Holocaust history is not taught "without recognition of other atrocities". What nonsense.

Its not nonsense,Its a Fact.

Awesome - colour me "persuaded by the strength of your argument".

No I didn’t say start a debate on ATS about other atrocities.

I said ‘There are other events that have taken place which has led to thousands and millions killed.They should be brought into the syllabus and taught aswel’

I know what you said. I suggested you do your bit by promoting awareness of those other events, rather than suggest we lessen the awareness of the holocaust.

I am not Downgrading Holocaust. I am trying to say is SCRAP At least half of the Holocaust material that is being taught is schools and colleges and bring in other Atrocities that have taken place in history.

FOR EXAMPLE: How The US Indiscriminately Bombed The Hell Out Of Vietnam Leading To Millions Of Civilian Deaths.

Understand?

Uh huh. I think we've both made our points of view clear.

Ah, benign psychosis, I wondered when you'd turn up. So it's your contention that modern history curricula in schools in the west is founded on a 1917 diplomatic memo, is that right? Or a 1947 CIA report - similar reports from 20 years later from the CIA condemned ballet as "Communist" - is ballet still banned from your theatres?

Your zionist conspiracy idea does not seem to me to have any merit, though - it's my view that benign psychosis and even Buddha System are missing the practical fact of Crakeur's post and my own.

The reason the holocaust is so much easier to teach is because there is more written about it, more evidence from the time (including until recently many survivors with first-hand testimony), and far from that information being manipulated by some sort of zionist media authority, the information is almost all completely disseminated, making individual opinion and conclusions far easier to sustain.

You are correct, kangjia, to suggest that the American carpet bombing runs in Vietnam should be more widely reported. That they aren't is shameful. But that's got absolutely nothing to do with the Holocaust.

LW

Originally posted by LoneWeasel
The reason the holocaust is so much easier to teach is because there is more written about it, more evidence from the time

LoneWeasel, with all due respect to you and with a mournful nod to the Jewish victims of Nazi criminals, I think there is more evidence of the slaughter in Belarus than of the number 6 million dead often quoted in teh context of Holocaust.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Probably. The sheer scale fof destruction was unimaginable. Roughly 50% villages were burned to the ground, some with their inhabitants.

Speaking for myself, I was actually taught about the Russian story in the Second World War quite thoroughly. Sorry, Buddha, don't know where you're based - I'm a UK grammar school boy, and did history to A-Level (to the age of 18). Memory is a little sketchy, but as I recall I studied Russia at advanced level and the holocaust as part of a wider, more basic study of the second World War at GCSE level (aged about 14-16).

I didn't know the statistic, either, though for me the extraordinary element of the horror on the Eastern Front was the level of sacrifice - the scorched earth strategy taken to such extremes as to become, as you rightly observe, unimaginable.

There are those that would say, I think with some justification, that the word "unimaginable" is quite important to this topic - I cannot get my head to comprehend the scale of sufffering and loss even now. I dread to think how immaturely I regarded those facts and figures at the age of 15.

LW

Originally posted by buddhasystem
LoneWeasel, with all due respect to you and with a mournful nod to the Jewish victims of Nazi criminals, I think there is more evidence of the slaughter in Belarus than of the number 6 million dead often quoted in teh context of Holocaust.

My apologies for the double post - I take your point in the case of evidence in Russia, Buddha - and see what I say above about how I was taught it. I've seen the specific debate regarding the accuracy of the 6 million figure on these boards very regularly, and rarely satisfyingly.

To my mind, the argument that the holocaust dead numbered nearer 4 million, and therefore we somehow should not be so concerned (I appreciate this isn't at all the point you're making) is a nonsense. And I repeat what I stated earlier in the thread, placing comparative value on acts of genocide is completely pointless. The only sensible thing to do, it seems to me, is to do everything possible to raise awareness of all such horrors, be they contempary or in the relatively distant past. I don't think seeking to regulate the amount of awareness for specific acts of barbarism to let in the others has any merit at all.

Overrated.

o·ver·rate (vr-rt)
- tr.v. o·ver·rat·ed, o·ver·rat·ing, o·ver·rates
- To overestimate the merits of; rate too highly.

The systematic extermination of 6 million people.

Think about it.

Let me put it into context for you, its roughly the equivalent of removing London off the map completely.

See...I don't know how you can overrate the reporting of that.

Poor choice of word.

There were many atrocities carried out in WW2, on all sides, and I agree that they should ALL be taught in schools, from the Holocaust through the Allied bombing of Dresden, the Nazi's in Stalingrad, Warsaw, Belarus, the Japanese in China and the sheer destruction carried out by the Soviets as they forced the Nazi's back.

But if they were all taught then there would be no time to teach anything else.

The Holocaust is accessible for a number of reasons

- The documented actions of the Nazi's prior to the outbreak of war that set the stage
- The physical evidence of the death camps
- The surving witness testimony
- The records compiled by the Nazi's of their actions.

What you have is clearly documented evidence of the degeneration of a political system and society based on the seriously misguided personality cult of "National Socialism" with Hitler as the guiding figurehead that turned into a systematic extermination of a race of people because they "did not conform" to the sterotypical Arayan fantasy.

As atrocities go its a poster child for the lowest depths of depravity that human beings can stoop too.

Thats why its taught as prominently as it is.

But yes, Pol Pot in Cambodia, Mugabe in Zimbabwe, the Tutsi in Rwanda, the Chinese in Mongolia, the ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia... the list goes on. They all deserve to be highlighted.

But extermination of any people anywhere....you can't describe any of it as "overrated".

[edit on 17/0108/08 by neformore] - for spelling

[edit on 17/0108/08 by neformore]