Atrocity Denial Is (Sadly) The Norm

Credit here.

Holocaust denial is a big issue in some parts of the world. Social and political influences have created a climate in places like France and Iran where it’s very common for people to downplay the Holocaust, claiming that only a few- if any- were killed and that there were never any gas chambers. It’s a stark contrast to the United States where people employ the terms “Hitler” and “Holocaust” on social media when talking about border control and the detention of undocumented immigrants. Canada has passed laws dealing “inciting hatred” that they have used to prosecute a few people who have publicly denied the Holocaust.

My point being that in the US and Canada, most people know the Holocaust happened. Holocaust denial is out of favor or even illegal in some areas. However, these types of denials may be the general rule rather than the exception– even in the United States and Canada which so carefully remember the horrors of the Holocaust.

For example, during the Rwandan genocide, the UN quibbled about whether there was an actual genocide in Rwanda of just “acts of genocide”. President Clinton encouraged Americans to go see Schindler’s List and then refused to take efforts to stop the genocide in Rwanda. In America, denying atrocities can make you a celebrity and get you a standing ovation at the Cannes Film Festival. Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 claimed that Iraqi citizens were living normal, quiet lives prior to the invasion of Iraq, which is untrue. In 1988, thousands of Kurds in Anfal were killed in a genocidal campaign. And Abu Ghraib was a torture chamber long before the Americans ever showed up. It’s not just a small fringe group who support these views. The movie grossed over $200 million and movie review sites show that the vast majority of viewers give it a positive review. 

Vietnam is another situation where Americans misunderstand what was going on before American involvement. I think the former peace protester interviewed on Ken Burns’ documentary of the Vietnam War summed it up in his comments: “These people were living their lives and we came in and told them how to run their country.” No. The people of Vietnam were killing each other in horrendous ways before the Americans showed up. Ngo Dinh Diem, president of Vietnam in the 1950’s had a campaign to imprison, torture and execute Communists while the Communist rebels (Viet Cong) employed a campaign of terrorism and assassination against Vietnamese government officials. But in America, we don’t talk about how Vietnam was already at war with itself in the first place. Whether we showed up or not, Vietnam was going to suffer. Saying that the war was wrong or we never should have gotten involved doesn’t change that suffering.

I once saw Elie Wiesel on Oprah talking about the Rwandan genocide. He was appalled that after the Holocaust the world would allow a slaughter like Rwanda to happen. It’s not enough to remember the Holocaust and look away from the other dark parts of our world. In fact, if we deny the other atrocities in the world, I don’t think we have remembered the Holocaust at all.

 

Imperialism— You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Vizzini: HE DIDN’T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE. 

Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I hear people describing America’s involvement in different conflicts from 1965 on as “American imperialism”.

That’s not imperialism.

Imperialism is defined as: 

“the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.”

This was a policy in America- under Teddy Roosevelt. The US tried to make the Philippines a territory/colony of the US. (Before WWII the plan had been to get the Philippines independent, but then the Japanese Imperial army invaded the Philippines. The ill-equipped American military tried to defend it with Filipino help, but failed. The Americans got the Philippines back during a long fight. After WWII the Philippines gained independence. )

In Vietnam, the objective was to strengthen the South Vietnamese military to fight takeover by the Communist North Vietnamese army and keep the existing democratic government in place.

During the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein ordered an invasion of Kuwait. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other Middle Eastern nations appealed to the United Nations for help in getting Iraq out of Kuwait. When Saddam Hussein refused to leave Kuwait by the UN deadline, international forces led by the US intervened to force Iraq out.

In Somalia, the objective was to capture trade routes so that UN food shipments would actually reach the people of Somalia instead of being hijacked by Aidid’s forces to force support or punish dissenters. The UN orders stressed restoring law and order and helping the Somali people set up a democratic government of their own. 

In Afghanistan, the objective was to work with anti-Taliban allies in the Middle Easy to oust the Taliban (which had attacked the US) and help the Aghanis install their own democratic government and train the Afghan army and police to combat insurgents on their own.

In Iraq, the objective was to catch Saddam Hussein, try him for war crimes and execute him if found guilty, then help the Iraqis establish a democratic government and to train their police and military to defend themselves against insurgents.

Why don’t these countries just fend for themselves? They’re impoverished. They don’t have the resources that US does to train and arm their police and military like the US does. We are fortunate to live in a nation that is so abundant.

None of these examples fit the definition of imperialism.

So why does this fashionable use of “American imperialism” persist?

Because it allows for a very comforting illusion: 

That the US government and military is the main source of evil in the world. Since protests and votes have the potential to influence the use of the US military forces, the concept of “American imperialism” supports the belief that evil can be contained and doesn’t truly exist on a massive scale in the world. If left to themselves, people will treat each other kindly is the wish that the myth of “American imperialism” is built on. Ironically, people who are upset about “American imperialism” typically claim that they care about human rights, yet they ignore murder, rape and torture and that takes place when the US fails to intervene. We have seen that a lack of US intervention as nations invaded other nations led to World War II and to civil conflicts like the Bosnian War, the Rawndan genocide, and the rise of ISIS.

Truthfully, the people who say they are against “American imperialism” fit the definition of isolationists.