never forget

yes I agree. Something like 45 million people were killed in the second World War, half of them Russian, but the movies industry does not seem interested in this much. Does the Holocaust mean that the only stories that can be told are of jewish suffering?

And there have been plenty of other wars since then, but I guess they are not box office material. I just think they are overdoing the Never Forget theme of the Holocaust and making sure we are kept ignorant of most atrocities that occured since then, particularly as those atrocities were abetted or carried out by the countries that won the war. I really would like to see a film that would clarify what is going on in Darfur at the moment, for instance.

I agree with what you say, but you might want to remove the "only six million Jews" were killed. That is a fairly large number and you can add another six million in others killed by the Nazis. Of course, Stalin did murder more. Hell, look at how many Chinese dies during the Great Leap Forward or all the people killed by the Turks or Pol Pot or the American Indians, etc..

damn..stop trying to divide people in little groups. how many jews where killed, how many gypses, communists....STOP THINKING IN RACES. people where killed, and anywhere that innocent people get killed is wrong. there are many reasons why jews are the most sympathized people out of the holocaust, the nuremberg laws, the ghettos, hollywood, but its all air. the ONLY thing that matters is to live in the present in peace, and to love each other. thats it. as easy as it sounds, it seems to be the most difficult thing in the world to achieve.

[deleted]

I don't often post here, but I feel I need to say something in response to the endless recriminations that are being hurled around over so many of the issues here.

I am no aplogist for Israel, but in my humble experience, the more I dig into how the Middle East as it is today came to be, the more confused I get and the more difficult and, I feel, irresponsible it is to come out with a simplistic good-guy bad-guy reading of such issues as the creation of the Israeli state and indeed the doling out of parts of Palestine to other Middle Eastern countries after the First World War (Israel isn't the only country to have lusted after a piece or two, and indeed have only expanded into what was won in a war they didn't instigate - not a justification, but middle eastern states have been invading each other's land for centuries!) Yes I think the Palestinian PEOPLE are generally appallingly treated, but if you follow Middle Eastern history back even only to the beginning of the last century you will see that they have essentially been dumped upon by almost every other major Middle Eastern state, and treated shockingly by their own profoundly corrupt 'governments.'
Arafat was seen as a valiant freedom-fighter by the western press when he died, when in fact he ruthlessly expoited his own people for political and financial gain.

The cause is one thing, the activist is another, and I think we too readily justify and indeed admire the activist's often horrific brutality because we assume it comes from some kind of pure and true sense of idealism. I will not praise Israel's actions, but I will not be foolish enough to idealise the behaviour of a member of Hammas or the IRA either (to take only two of many examples).
Isn't this why so many of us cannot shake off the alure of revenge? You have your ego wounded, you feel low status as a result of something done to you, so you do it back because you think it will make you feel strong again, even if in fact your actions (as they most often do) will end up making you more like your enemy, and perpetuate a cycle of the kind of behaviour you apparently disapproved of in the first place?

How about another notoriously white-washed figure in the West: Che Guevara - a glorious freedom fighter because we approve of his cause? Or are we more brave and ready to examine the often appalling and needless brutality of his many campaigns? Was he perhaps a thug who enjoyed war and violence and found (as many have over the millenia) that the 'just cause' is the perfect thing to help you justify indulging your own bloodlust / ego / personal sense of grievance, to yourself and others....?

Let's start looking at the grey areas here, rather than perpetuating the kind of emotive, simplistic readings of such highly complex issues. Yes it can be that one becomes so confused by the vast, often overwhelming contradictions of human action, especially in political situations, that it becomes difficult to know WHAT ONE FEELS about a given situation; but then, it's extremitsts who are always so sure about what they FEEL isn't it? And they tend to avoid complex grey-area analysis of situations because most of the time their emotion-based justifications do not hold up under even the most basic intellectual scrutiny. It is much more difficult to throw a bomb if you are alive to the many different sides there almost always are to any given issue - as Wilde said: "The truth is rarely pure, and never simple.' Underinformed, over-emotional opinion is dangerous, and I'm seeing it too much here - ironic since the central character in the film is brought down by his inability to align his evidently keen intellectual abilities with his regretably even stronger sense of personal rage and grievance at the forces in the world he perceives as trying to oppress and emasculate him.
The one person Danny is a puppy-dog with is his father - watch his behaviour in that one very subtle scene. Nevertheless he rages at God for being a castrating patriarch, and despises the Jews for their masochism. Who is he really angry with? Who is he really unable to confront and actually feels emasculated by? Is the cause personal or political?

Let's not repeat his mistake. Go grey guys.

[deleted]

"Maeaculpa how dare you even suggest that the holocaust is over represented in the media and education"

I agree with that, IT IS overepresented (compared to other recent and contemporary tragedies).

I personally can point to a new book on Hitler and the Holocaust EVERY TIME I pass by a bookstore (every week on my way to local Wall Mart).

And I SERIOUSLY doubt there's a single person on EARTH that isn't well aware of Hitler and the Holocaust.

Nazis and other racists are like that because they were taught to be so by their parents, and so on. Seeing 100 times Schindler's List won't change their perspective unfortunately.

"and that Isreal is a country which has an, at best, dudious right to be recognised"

Who has said that on this board? Personally I get angry when I see Israely atrocities against palestinians (collective punishments, destroying Lebanon for losing 2 soldiers, etc). But it's not that black&white, the arab states are MUCH worse to their people and others, AND the palestinians themselves (I personally doubt I would ever be put in jail, or beheaded on prime time for worshipping Christ in Israel, can't say the same thing for most arab states, starting with dearly devoted Saudi Arabia).

But unfortunately I do think it's overepresented (if I were jewish I'm sure I would disagree though). I live in Mexico and most comments I hear when another Holocaust/Hitler film gets released I get to hear are "Another one?", "Gee, we got it the first time", "Aren't there other genocides happening right now?" and so on.

[deleted]

"but this original post suggests nothing about israel's right to exist as a state, but only to what this state is doing, which quite nears the same. a genocide. "

I disagree.

You can't call Isrseli actions "genocide". You can call the abuse, disproportionate, even Apartheid maybe, but not genocide.

I'm yet to see Palestinians being rounded up in concentration camps.

I'm sure black hat jews like Baruch Goldstein would love to do that, but then again so would many arabs in say dearly devoted Saudi Arabia (I would be more sacred of going there as a Christian than of going into any section of Israel).