Originally posted by kangjia57
Reply to italkyoulisten
Than you get the same reply again ‘Ohh because it’s only taught to remember the worst ever single event and its also linked to WW2’
Kangjia, I've enjoyed debating this issue with you. I think you have an extremely valid point regarding the marginalising of other atrocities, and
the imbalance relative to coverage of the holocaust.
I repeat the point I made near the beginning of the thread, because I think it is distinct from your own somewhat simplistic summary.
Holocaust memory is an extremely practical topic for school education, because there is a huge amount of source material from the incident available
that can be understood at a quite basic level. I don't argue with those that say "but there is a substantial amount of source material regarding the
Russian front in WWII, in which millions died". There may in fact be more statistical information from which we can learn about the actual numbers
But what there doesn't seem to be is emotive, "humanized" documentation like Anne Frank's diary - a schoolgirl herself, importantly - that there
is for the holocaust. And even if there is - there cannot be many texts that have been read by as many people across the globe. It's really not hard
to see why that sort of material is regarded as appropriate for study by school children. On a very simple level, you give a 15 year old a
schoolgirl's diary of life and death under Nazi occupation, or a list of figures and statistics from the Russian scorched earth policy on the Eastern
Front - which one would you expect to get the 15 year old interested in history?
I wonder (and I've really no idea) what proportion of senior level research papers at University are done on holocaust-related subjects, as opposed
to any other topic of history? Surely that's where one would really see any unfair weight demonstrated?
Yes but we bloomin heck Know That but why fail to address other Horiffic Events?
Than you get the same reply again.
I don't think this question is being ignored, at least not in my posts. I agree not enough weight is given to other atrocities. I don't see that
reducing the amount of study of the holocaust would help address that fact. I think at schooling age the important thing is to engage the adolescent
mind. The fact is that at 15 I was more interested in the topic of world war 2 and the holocaust because there was more to "capture my imagination"
(I hate that phrase) in the source material I was studying than there was in other topics. I studied the Chinese cultural revolution as a teenager -
it had all the necessary components - slaughter, prejudice, idiocy and suffering - but half the interest, because I couldn't engage, sadly, with the
source material from the time. Partly because there's relatively little of it, I suppose. Now my interests have changed. And of course I regret not
concentrating more in history class...
Other things that interested me at school were the famine in Ethiopia because of Bob Geldof and comic relief. No one did Live Aid or told any jokes
for for Cambodia....
You probably also notice in schools we also tend to have those little ‘1 minute’ silent sessions to remember the Holocaust.
I am not saying that we shouldn’t.
But why don’t we also have a ‘1 minute’ silent session to remember the
genocide that took place in Bosnia?
I'll end on a minor quibble - but my suspicion is that this particular phenomenon is dependent on the school you went to, not any national policy.
Certainly not in the UK, anyway - we had rememberance services for soldiers killed in conflict, with the emphasis on the two world wars. But nothing
specific to the Holocaust.