Unfair comparisons

Next week, students at Penn will observe Holocaust Remembrance Day from April 19 to 20. I admit that I have mixed feelings about this.

On one hand, I think it's important to promote Holocaust awareness, particularly in view of the ongoing problem of Holocaust denial. On the other hand, as a Jew, I worry that emphasis on the Holocaust encourages modern Jews to look backward rather than forward. I also know non-Jews who say they are sick of hearing about the Holocaust and Jewish victimhood. "Enough already!" they seem to say. "We know all about the Holocaust!" Sometimes, Holocaust awareness can be its own enemy.

All this awareness contributes to a troubling phenomenon: the use of Holocaust, Nazi and Hitler terminology as a rhetorical technique.

Examples abound. Earlier this year, MoveOn.org, a popular progressive Web site, featured material comparing President George Bush to Adolf Hitler. At the University of Colorado, controversial professor Ward Churchill expressed his empathy with the World Trade Center bombers by calling the victims "Nazis" and "little Eichmanns," a reference to Holocaust architect Adolf Eichmann. When Colorado censured him for his statements, he compared the university to Nazi Germany.

Penn has not been immune. Two years ago, Penn animal-rights activists invited People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals to set up a display entitled "Holocaust on Your Plate" comparing meat-eating to the genocide of 10 million people. And in 2003, College student Carlos Gomez publicly called then-University President Judith Rodin a Nazi, claiming that her actions in West Philadelphia were similar to those of the Third Reich.

On one level, these faulty comparisons may simply mean that Holocaust terminology has permeated our discourse. Political speech has always tended toward the hyperbolic, and Nazi comparisons may be the easiest way to claim that something is really, really bad.

On another level, such comparisons may be more insidious. Recent examples have demonstrated a disturbing trend: the tendency to compare Nazis to Jews. Posters in Paris compare Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to Adolf Hitler, and signs in Spain call him a Nazi. A recent poll by the University of Bielefeld in Germany found that 51 percent of Germans believe that Israel's current treatment of Palestinians is similar to the Nazis' treatment of Jews during World War II.

Everyday Nazi comparisons are bad enough, belittling the experience of survivors and mocking the pain of those who still grieve lost relatives. But the Jews-equals-Nazis comparison is truly grotesque. Israel's treatment of Palestinians is troubling and in need of reform, but it bears no resemblance to the genocide enacted by Hitler. Although people who make such comparisons do not intend to justify the Holocaust, a disturbing implicit reasoning underlies their claim. After all, if modern Jews commit genocide, such reasoning goes, it is understandable that people might have attempted to wipe out the Jews during World War II.

Are Holocaust comparisons ever warranted? It is sadly true that genocides continue to exist, whether in Sudan, Rwanda, or East Timor. Some may reach or exceed the proportions of the Jewish Holocaust. Nonetheless, it is not productive to establish the "validity" of these genocides by comparing them to the Holocaust. These other events are already valid and tragic in their own right. Such comparisons encourage a bizarre victimhood competition, as activists concerned with various genocides argue over which one is worst.

Thus, as we come upon Holocaust Remembrance Day, is there anything that we can do to discourage inappropriate comparisons? Some would argue that Holocaust awareness itself is to blame. Ubiquitous reminders of the Holocaust can commodify it, and extensive awareness campaigns may irritate people. Although it is never justified, anti-Jewish prejudice may be exacerbated by widespread efforts.

I think the best solution for modern-day Holocaust awareness is to take a broader look at genocide prevention in general, without making implicit comparisons between one genocide and another. I am proud to observe that some Penn awareness efforts already lean in this direction, but they can go further. A central Jewish tenet is tikkun olam, the notion that it is the duty of every person to improve the world. Preventing prejudice and genocide on a broad scale is an integral part of tikkun olam, and a potential way to turn tragedy into a forward-looking, altruistic movement. I can imagine no better tribute for those who died in Nazi Germany 60 years ago.

Jennifer Weiss is a senior Linguistics and Theatre Arts major from Los Angeles. War On Error appears on Wednesdays.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.