Eugenics in America After 1945: Term Post #1

The study of human history shows the many achievements and journeys of our race. From our humble beginnings, through the development of culture, religion, communities, hierarchy and power structures, to what and who we are today... well, as a less-than-humble commercial suggests- 'You've come a long way, Baby!’ The path to the twenty-first century has not been smooth nor painless and, like our predecessors, we view ourselves, our lives, and our world as an improved and civilized place with the human race as the most intelligent and virtuous beings on it. Looking at the history of the human race, I see many recurring themes that are a part of every society; hope, love, beauty, want, etc. The theme of self-improvement or change that benefits ourselves and, in turn, society has been a reappearing idea that became more pronounced after the Enlightenment and the Renaissance along with the concept of improving groups of people to improve society. However, like all virtues, self-improvement or personal development can come with a dark side that is exposed when the virtue itself is placed on a pedestal or idolized without regard to the thoughts and rights of those we consider 'lesser' than us. When this happens, any noble or virtuous ideas are shown to be the shallow horrors that they can become ... the virtue is pulled and stretched out of its normal view to a pained and stretched mask of what it actually is. During the twentieth century, the themes of human breeding, genetics, prejudice, self-improvement and social progress collided to serve the virtue of better breeding and health of human beings. Eugenics, which means 'well born', was created in

America. This movement was so strong and large that it was able to spread into other cultures and countries before its horrors and Machiavellianism tendencies became apparent enough to create a sizeable opposition that attempted to crush it. In response to the common belief that eugenics was no longer an important movement after World War II, I will discuss briefly the history of eugenics in the United States before WWII and then analyze the way the movement changed after the war. I will show that the ideas behind eugenics are still alive, well and being acted upon in our society today. Recognizing the way the movement itself has adapted to our changing culture and its opposition helps place us in an informed position to focus on the fearful and reactive areas of ourselves and our society so we may work to create a more lasting and peaceful change in our thoughts and fears. Hopefully, that will help us change how we act upon our fears and prejudices and how we justify acting on them in our communities and society.

The idea of eugenics is a simple idea with more complex answers. The word was coined in 1883 by Sir Francis Galton who advocated the scientific regulation of human breeding to ensure that 'better' genes had a larger chance of predominating in the continuation of the human species. Eugenics encompassed the progress of medical practice and scientific thought and recognized the inseparable relationship between medicine and social progress. To be blunt, the idea of the eugenics movement was that better breeding would lead to a healthier population and was an effective way to deal with social problems. It provided a comfortable way to rationalize people's prejudices about race, poverty, etc... and also suggested that 'undesirable traits' could be minimized within a few generations if people were only brave and good enough to work towards it. Undesirable traits that were thought

to be correctable through eugenical reproduction included epilepsy and other physical disabilities, alcoholism, tendencies towards rape (rapists), and other criminal behavior, promiscuity, and more. Races and immigrants that were not of Anglo-Saxon heritage were also of 'suspect' genetic material and poverty was thought to be a characteristic of genetic inferiority. Always a controversial movement, eugenics has had its loyal adherents since its conception and even the tragedy and knowledge of the German Holocaust in World War II didn't change those who believed and followed its tenets. Before the war, it was common to institutionalize the ‘feebleminded’ or those that those in power worried about reproducing. The rationale was that the only way to stop a living being from reproducing was to limit its movements, monitor it in risky situations, or make it biologically impossible for breeding to take place. Institutions for those who were ill, the ‘feebleminded’ or those who had medical difficulties were created to isolate and remove those individuals from active society. Laws were passed that forbade marriages between people who had specific medical or mental health problems. However, locking people up costs a lot of money and the inability to remove everyone from the community that fit the criteria (due to lack of funds or institutional space) made the original eugenics process less effective than its early adherents wished. Sterilization allowed the individuals to be released back into their local communities to support themselves while not crating any more individuals like ‘them’. Because of that, sterilization became the easy, cheap, and irreversible weapon in the eugenics supporter’s arsenal.

The Holocaust did shift some of the popular views of how eugenics should work, but didn’t change any of the eugenic and popular thoughts of a large part of the populace nor did it change the most popular procedures that were used. In 1927, psychologist George Ordahl explained at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco that if it was possible to calculate “the economic burden of the moron” that [was] paid for by taxpayers, “every patriotic citizen would become a eugenicist in search of methods of prevention even more drastic than any now known.” The tone may have softened since WWII, but not by much. Dr. Charles Gamble wrote in 1947, “Tomorrow's population should be produced by today's best human material” and he complain[ed] that only one in forty-one people with severe mental illness had been sterilized, leaving dozens of others to spread defective genes. In 1966, C. Lee Buxton published an article titled

“The Doctor’s Responsibility in Population Control” in which he reminded his colleges that “medical responsibility demands more action than just passing resolutions and making recommendations...” and advocated sterilization as a solution to the ‘problem’ of unwed mothers on welfare. In his view, the problem was multiplying “because the medical profession has controlled the death rate but has done very little about the birth rate.” The exact number of women- for women were by far the more common victims of eugenics- involuntarily sterilized after the end of World War II into the 1980’s remains unknown due to the lack of collected statistics, listings in medical records of coerced sterilizations as ‘voluntary’, the social and reluctance of women to file formal complaints, and the ignorance of individuals who never knew or were never told that they had been sterilized. (The reason I stop at the 1980’s is due to a lack of information on current trends.)

Euthanasia programs never gained popular ground in the Unites States, but did have their supporters before WWII. One egregious example is Dr. Harry Haiselden who advocated and practiced denial of life saving treatment (even of newborns) and thought it was acceptable for an institution to give inmates tuberculosis through infected milk because only those with ‘defective’ genes would get the disease and die. In the end, after the Holocaust, sterilization was the procedure of choice and was perfectly legal through the decision in Buck vs Bell decided by the Supreme Court. This court decision has never been overturned and has been used to support involuntary sterilizations since its publication and over the last sixty years. Here are some examples....

pictures from: https://mediachecker.wordpress.com/2013/11/10/bill-gates-its-gods-work-monsanto-vaccines-eugenics/, http://www.uvm.edu/~eugenics/whatis1.html, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Galton, http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-horrifying-american-roots-of-nazi.html, http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/05/darwin_day_in_may_buck_vs_bell003669.html, http://galleryhip.com/american-eugenics.html, http://365daysofthis.blogspot.com/2013/02/define-eugenics.html
eugen

Thoughts on the Film: "Forgiving Dr. Mengele"

I originally wrote this review last December. I hope you enjoy. :)

It is dark outside and I still see snow on the ground and feel the wind seeping through the cabin walls around me. There is very little moon outside... and so the only light in the room comes from my computer screen and the reflective views of light from my cat's blinking eyes nearby. I cannot see my face nor anything in the room around me, but I can feel the tears on my face as the moisture in them chills on my cheeks and I see the blurring images on the screen through the tears that are still gathering and pooling in my lower lids. This was a very painful and powerful documentary and I am grateful for the opportunity to learn some of the life, deeds and thoughts of Eva Mozes Kor.... prisoner number #8706 in the Auschwitz concentration camp in Germany during World War II.

Eva Kor was one of a set of twins that survived the Holocaust and Dr. Melange’s twin studies in Auschwitz during WWII. Her sister Miriam survived, but later died from complications with her kidneys from the experiments performed on her in the concentration camps. In an attempt to save her sister's life, Eva not only managed to will herself to live through the experimental treatments in the camp- for if she died her sister would be killed- but she donated a kidney to her sister after the war. She also tried to discover the records kept by Dr. Mengele of his experiments to possible help her sister and other victims. Miriam died in 1993 and Eva's efforts towards finding the documents were not successful, but those efforts helped create a group that brought many of the surviving 'twins' together and also brought her to the doorstep of Dr. Hans Munch.... a former SS doctor who knew Dr. Mengele in the past. Dr Munch has been tried for war crimes, but had also been found not guilty due to the number of people who testified that he saved them from death during the Holocaust. Ms Kor contacted him interviewed him looking for information on the experiment or any memories that he might have that could have helped. Dr Munch discussed his thoughts about Mengele and his experiments ('… did things in a very amateurish way) and his memories of Auschwitz – he still has nightmares about the gas chambers. This experience/ opportunity had a very profound impact on Ms Kor and she decided to go to Auschwitz for the anniversary of the liberation of the prisoners. She also made the unusual request that Dr Munch should also attend with her and her family. He agreed and she read out a statement that Dr Munch wrote stating that he was a witness to the 'gas chambers' and it was important to acknowledge his past as a testimony to the deniers and the revisionists of the Holocaust. After a chance emark from a reporter, she too decided to make a statement later . That statement was that for herself, she was forgiving not only Dr Mengele, but all the Nazi's who killed her family and the millions of others who died in the genocide.

Later, Eva opened up a small Holocaust museum in her town and has spent a lot of time traveling, teaching and talking about her experiences. Her work on forgiving Dr Mengele and the Nazi's who harmed her and her family has been met with different responses. Some of the individual twins that survived and were at Auschwitz when she brought Dr Munch were offended and angry. Others over time have been angry and have had negative responses to her talks and her advocating forgiveness as a way of healing. In November 2003, an arsonist successfully burned down the museum destroying almost all of the memorabilia and exhibits housed inside. One the outside of the building, a message was spray painted on the wall; 'Remember Timmy McVeigh'. (I am not really sure I understand what the arsonist was trying to say with that statement. I do not feel like what Timothy McVeigh was trying to express has anything to do with the Holocaust or its education, but I am pretty ignorant on all of his radical goals so there might be a clear link I haven't recognized.) She has begun rebuilding the museum and continues to travel and teach about the Holocaust and her experiences.

“... to forgive that God of Auschwitz. Me, the little nothing... I might as well forgive everybody.”
“It time to forgive, but not forget. It is time to heal our souls.” - Eva Kor

One thing that I found while listening to Ms Kor was the idea that she thought/thinks of herself as 'nothing' in comparison to Dr Mengele. In the documentary, the doctor was described as an individual who was at the forefront of German science and genetic research. In other research and testimony from survivors, his near obsession with twins and with his job as one of the doctors of Auschwitz camp is mentioned and some suggest that he went out of his way to work and make medical and life/death decisions for prisoners even when he was off duty. To be fair, before the war all of his studies were connected scientifically and for the most part ethically as well toward test subjects. It was only in the concentration camps where the life, death or pain of his subjects no longer mattered and so his studies and research were able to be given more of a full range in regards to his ideas and curiosity. It was here that Eva Kor, her sister, many other sets of twins as well as large populations of Jewish, Roma or other 'undesirable' individuals fell under his 'care' and supervision. In his work and what we know of it, Dr. Mengele tortured and killed hundreds if not more (depending on if you count arrivals to the camp in his numbers) and she is very lucky to have survived at all. To think of him as a 'God' seems so offensive to me and yet, I see it clearly. In his capacity, Dr Mengele had many of the powers that we ascribe to our deities (both good and bad). I can see the image of her- of myself- struggling to recognize that while the power situations are different, the human beings involved are equal... the same.... we are 'one'. To recognize that powerful fact is sometimes a hard and amazing moment. To seize the opportunity that she did within herself is simply breathtaking.

“... the pain of the shots that Mengele did to us...” - Pearl Pufeles

I just got shots in both my shoulders at the beginning of the week. For my internship in a doctor's office next year, I am getting all of my vaccines again as I have no titers to them in my body (long story.) When I am given one shot, I am febrile for a week with on and off migraines, vomiting, dizziness, weakness and shaking. I spend the days ahead downing Tylenol and ibuprofen and praying the symptoms and side effects will pass as quickly as Heavenly Father will allow. The effects are much stronger with two shots and so I found myself this week trying to rationally remind myself that the pain and discomfort will pass and it is short lived. Yet I sit with swollen shoulders and everything else and listening to Eva talk about a shot that her sister was given that eventually killed her and the years of pain and challenges that she struggled with and I listen to Ms. Pufeles and I am finally able to rationally realize how easy my situation is. I know it will pass.... I know it will pass soon.... I can be quite sure I will not have any significant long term problems. To recognize that these victims could not have even these simple assurances- if fact, they could be sure that it probably would cause pain and long term problems- is another window into a world and a reality that I have never had true first hand experience in. To be able to learn, to understand, to develop clarity about the experience of others, the depths of thought and behavior that humanity can dive and to recognize those traits or small flaws in myself... and work on transforming them to something positive and more wholesome is a beautiful gift

“Most of my fellow survivors are so hurting, they do not even have the ability to even understand what I am talking about. And so many of them will die without ever feeling free from that pain” - Eva Kor

“Forgiveness has nothing to do with the perpetrator, has nothing to do with religion- it has only everything to do with the way the victim is empowering him or herself and taking control of their lives” - Eva Kor

When watching and listening to the other survivors and their stories and emotions as they flowed forth, the overwhelming thing I felt was anger. They talked about sorrow and grief, but the tone of anger was interwoven throughout every word and motion they made. In some situations it was so palpable that I felt like I could reach out, touch it and even pick it up and hold it for a closer look. While I feel like sometimes Ms Kor pushes people too quickly to accept her thoughts and she acts defensive, I can see how she must find herself verbally confronted by many people about her choices. Not only does she have to deal with the deniers and the revisionists, but she must also deal with those who feel like she is giving the Nazi's and those who worked with them excuses or justification for their misdeeds. Few people have to deal with the challenges of the process of forgiving others while being criticized for participating and utilizing that process for their own healing. I couldn't figure out how anyone could criticize her and after that was mentioned in class and how her forgiveness was 'controversial', I decided I needed to see this film only to try and understand that. It feels so sad that people who are stuck can feel so much anger about someone working to loosen themselves from the grief and anger. I felt some anger listening to the arguments that forgiving was forgetting and forgiving was accepting and absolving the perpetrators of the crime. I can tell I'm still angry because I want to argue for the defense even as I write this. ;) Watching this has made me even more convinced that the process of reconciliation is so important to the well being of the survivors, the offenders and the communities which surround them both.


“... and not create a catastrophe for the Palestinians... and say what have we done”

I thought it was interesting to watch Eva Kor sit at the table with those working towards peace in Palestine and Israel and hearing her say she didn't want to hear the stories that were being shared. On one hand, she recognizes that stories are important and educate people about situations and yet when it comes to the idea that some groups of Jewish individuals themselves are now being perpetrators of genocidal violence towards Palestinians she is unable and unwilling to listen. I was disappointed and annoyed, but when I continued to think about it I realized how distinctly challenging that must be for anyone in her position. I heard this line and realized that, at least in my opinion, a catastrophe has already been created for the Palestinians and I do not think that at this point, the use of the word genocide is that far off. Here is an opportunity for her and she wasn't able to really use it. I wonder what opportunities I have that I haven't noticed or taken to work towards this horrible problem and ending it successfully. I do not think that I have had any opportunities, but I might not have recognized them when I did. I have decided to write my governor and my representatives to ask for a change of name for Columbus Day and to also ask for a state holiday acknowledging genocides- not sure how to address my thoughts on the latter.

Thank you so much for mentioning this film. I am very glad I watched it and that I have the opportunity to share it with others. I am also happy to learn a little more about Holocaust awareness and how Dr Mengele's experiments affected people long after the war was over.

pictures from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489707/, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lhAU868230, https://www.tumblr.com/search/forgiving%20dr.%20mengele, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2807743/How-Angel-Death-saved-mother-s-life-creator-world-s-iconic-dress.html, http://gauredevta.blog.com/2014/06/26/dr-mengele-experiments/, http://tmcnews.tendenciapp.com/articles/survivor-of-nazi-experiments-speaks-at-medical-ethics-conference/, https://googlingtheholocaust.wordpress.com/tag/forgiving-dr-mengele/

Thoughts on the Film: "The Music Box"

When this film was mentioned in my genocide class, I didn't really get a real idea of what the film was about. That was a very difficult piece of cinema to watch. I consoled myself a few times with the idea that it was fictional, but that wouldn't stay in my head very long as I heard the stories and thought about listening to Dr. Steve Rogers from the OSI and the testimonies that I heard, watched and read. Before I watched this film, I felt pretty secure in the idea that there shouldn't be a statute of limitations on war crimes- I totally agreed with Dr. Steve Rogers. After watching this film, I still feel the same way, but I see what damage can be caused in the present far removed from the crimes themselves. It's clear that these crimes and those who perpetrate them have created the potential for harm throughout their lives and the lives of others. It's really a challenging situation because I also feel that if they are hiding their past, they haven't repented or recovered from it. The metaphor of the music box was really apt- the music cannot go on forever and truth does sometimes come out.... and underneath the beauty and simplicity that can be seen can hide some pretty awful stuff.

“It's never going to be OK again” - Michael Laszlo

The story is focused on a man called Michael J. Laszlo, an immigrant to the United States from Hungary. He is a single father who lives in the same town as his daughter Ann Talbot with her son Michael. Ann Talbot is an attorney and when her father is charged by the Office of Special Investigations for lying on his US citizenship application and has the potential to be extradited to Hungary to be charged for perpetrating war crimes, she agrees to be his attorney. She reads the paperwork and evidence and finds herself slowly questioning her father's past and defending him until his case is dismissed. However, she struggles mentally and emotionally as she discovers her father is the man that is described in the documents and she has set him free. Discovering his past and confronting him with it, realizing that he still cannot admit it and is willing to cut her off for it, recognizing he is only interested in the pictures and where they are.... The film ends with her mailing the photographs along with a letter to the prosecutor in the OSI and the photos being released to the media. She then has the hard task of explaining to her son that her father and his grandfather is guilty of the crimes he was charged with. As Mr. Laszlo says, things will never be OK for him again. When secrets are discovered, the world appears to change for everyone.... even though nothing has changed but perspective.

“The Holocaust is the world's sacred cow. Holocaust survivors are secular saints. You'd be better off pissing on the tomb of the unknown soldier than cross examining them” – Harry (her father-in-law)

This quote was pretty revealing to me and it suggested two things to me. It suggested that individuals who have survived the Holocaust are singled out and get special help and that this character doesn't agree with that. I looked at my own feelings and feel like I see and understand part of this statement in my own life and perspective. I think that I do treat known Holocaust victims differently. I think that I would be more likely to give them special treatment and if I could find a politically correct way to do it, I would want to hear and document their stories. I also recognize that I feel like their experiences were so horrible that if I can make their current life a little easier, I want to do it. I can't make up for what happened and I wasn't even alive, but I still feel a debt. I feel like my country didn't do enough soon enough and they were human beings that were significantly persecuted. Heck, I am a Mormon and my religion has a history of persecution against its members as well... not nearly as much as those of the Jewish faith I must stress. However, I see that as a debt I owe and I feel no anger towards the victims themselves nor do I feel that if people feel the same way I do it is inappropriate. I listened to that statement and realized that character feels annoyance that these victims may get special treatment. He even described them as 'sacred cows' – animals who are treated better than some people... Funnily enough, I agree in one way as I feel like we should be treating all people better and only see a problem with treating the cows well and people poorly.... can't we treat people and animals well? Is that possible for us as a race? I do wonder and doubt sometimes....

“I'm not a beast, I'm a father. It's not me... It's not me” - Michael Laszlo

“None of the men I knew were monsters. They were salt of the earth men like your old man.” - Harry (father in law)

These statements are an amazing commentary on perspective and values and the ability to excuse behavior in those we like. All of us have done things we are ashamed of in our lives.... mistakes, poor choices, etc... I believe that is part of being human and so we feel pressed to attempt to learn and to understand our experience better. This helps us to understand other people and their experiences and how the world and our communities and we as human beings really work. I look at my friends and see only good and wonderful people. I look at my church community and I see many people that I may not know well or even may not like, but people that I think are generally good and kind and nice people. I found myself really identifying with Ann Talbot as she looks at the people around her and is confused as to why they say some of the things that they say and discovers new aspects of those she cares for. It is sometimes very easy to see what we want to see in other people and in ourselves.

“He's not a monster. I'm his daughter. I know him better than anyone.”

When I heard this line, I thought about the character standing in front of a mirror that then cracked and became several views that she was trying to put together but the pieces didn't seem to fit. They didn't fit because she was trying to keep the image and perspective that she had of her father intact... It was a challenge to recognize that was the problem with the image. (It's a challenge for any of us.) This was a powerful moment because I thought back on my life and my parents and realized that I do not know much about their pasts as well. I have some ideas and have been told things, but that's it. Except for a quirk of fate, my parents can't surprise me in the same way that Ann Talbot was. These people that we call monsters can be the man next door who is someone we like, we respect. And we just didn't know.

“I care about remembering. It's too late to change what happened but its never too late to remember what happened.... Our country has always tried to be a haven for those who have been persecuted and after the war we let in thousands of its victims, but unfortunately we also let in some of the executioners.” - Prosecutor Burke

I feel the same way. I cannot change anything and watching this film was so immensely painful. It is not too late to remember, to recognize and to try and understand. I believe that when in doubt, our country needs to let someone in. I would rather save a few executioners to save victims just like I would rather a few guilty men to not go to jail if it makes it sure that no innocent person will go. I had never heard of the OSI before this class and one thing I feel sure of is that this department is not a waste of governmental resources. I feel its importance more strongly as I watched this prosecutor having to explain that he isn't being vindictive, that this isn't a personal vendetta, that his job is needful and has meaning. Dr Steve Rogers seemed to have some of the same experiences and I wonder how much of a struggle that has been for him. When I listened to him I found myself wondering how much of his experience was more of a view of his perspective and not entirely the way 'it might be'. I watched Ann Talbot tear that prosecutor apart and I saw his frustration that years of research was simply being disregarded and I thought of Dr. Rogers and felt I understood his history a little better. I hope we do continue to fund the Office of Special Investigations.

“How could you do those things papa? How could you do those things to us... to Mikey?... Why can't you try to say the truth.?” - Ann Talbot

Michael Laszlo was unable to even verbalize or admit his part. It is always someone else persecuting him. Whether it's communists or other enemies, he feels like he shouldn't have to pay for his past and that its not important. What he wants is what matters. In that moment, we can see the young man he was and so can Ann. She can see the angry, violent man that she didn't know was in there. He sees the past as the past and lying as nothing... it isn't important. Throughout the film we get hints that he really hasn't changed his mind on things. He doesn't have any Jewish friends or relationships and his comments on the Holocaust suggest that by denying it, he can deny his past and potential complications in his own life. He lied on his application – which suggests he knows that his behavior was questionable if not wrong. The fact that he can't even admit it to his daughter after she helped him and seems only interested in the proof suggests to me his concern with his safety and what he wants and that no acknowledgment of sorrow, remorse has entered his head. I did like Michael Laszlo and I commend how he changed his life. But he didn't change what was important.... all he did was do what he could to stay out of trouble. He treated those he loved and respected well- like he did when he was younger. He avoided anyone who was Jewish – I didn't feel like we were able to be sure whether he was avoiding those populations out of fear of being recognized or from dislike (I suspect it was both) just as he did when he was younger. He hasn't made it possible to reconcile his acts to himself, his family or anyone else. In fact, by denying them I feel like he makes the whole situation worse. He resurrects the 'monster' within himself and we can see more clearly the emotions and behaviors that he allowed to get out of control.

Thank you for the opportunity to discover this film. I appreciate a better perspective on the Office of Special Investigations and on Dr Roger's life experiences. I appreciated seeing a fictionalized, but realistic understanding of the trauma and difficulty that these cases bring to families and communities. I questioned some of my own history and thoughts on defending war criminals and whether good behavior really changes anything. We all act 'good' in most circumstances but that doesn't mean our thoughts or ideas have changed... especially if they are not challenged. I appreciate the opportunity to think more and to recognize the challenges on all sides. I feel like I understand people who deny genocides more and while I do not like it, I understand. I wonder how many deniers do so to rehabilitate loved ones instead of just racism and prejudice. I wonder if the OSI has problems recruiting....? I also found myself wondering if laws restricting speech when it comes to genocide denial are a good idea... yet I really believe in free speech. I leave this film with many more thoughts than I walked in with and more questions. That is the sign of a good piece of art.

pictures from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_Box_%28film%29, http://www.snipview.com/q/Music%20Box%20%28film%29, http://www.filmmisery.com/women-in-film-jessica-lange/, http://nuovocinemalocatelli.com/2013/06/28/film-stasera-sulle-tv-gratuite-music-box-di-costa-gavras-con-jessica-lange-venerdi-28-giugno-2013/, http://forum.tntvillage.scambioetico.org/?showtopic=232866,

United States Governmental Priorities and the Office of Special Prosecutions

In our current times, some politicians like to argue about ways to cut taxes, cut the budget and to eliminate governments programs and organizations that they feel are redundant or unnecessary. I say current times, but this same process of politics and political spin has been around since governments began. One of the organizations that has been targeted by some politicians and talking heads lately to be eliminated is the Office of Special Investigations(OSI). A link to their mission statement found here.

On the face of it, the OSI is a really easy target. It is a small section in the criminal division of the US Department of Justice that only deals with human rights violations/crimes. Because of our laws and freedoms, there are only certain way to target those individuals that they find which is usually a long and expensive process- we do not charge them so much as a regular criminal and need to have overwhelming proof to deport them and then need to find a place to take them which isn't simple either. It needs a budget, but never creates an income of its own. With few exceptions, this department only works on 'cold cases' looking for people that are not currently in the news and for crimes that the majority of citizens do not feel have touched them or their families personally. The crimes they are investigating are huge with names like 'Holocaust' and 'genocide' that add another layer of distance from the average American as most of us have never participated in (we think) nor been affected by these human rights crimes in our daily or personal lives. So one the face of it, I can see why some people believe the department should be shuttered.

However, there are a few reasons that the Office of Special Investigations is of great value and needs to be kept open and funded. One is that the United States has a legal and binding obligation to do so. While the United States was one of the early signatories, the convention was not ratified until 1988. When signed (and afterwards ratified), our country agreed to work to prevent genocide and prosecute those who commit it no matter where in the world the acts were committed. In fact, when President Harry Truman signed the convention and then sent it to the Senate to be ratified, he stated: “The Senate’s approval would demonstrate that the U.S. was “prepared to take effective action on its part to contribute to the establishment of principles of law and justice.” Later, President Richard Nixon asked and reminded the Senate to pass it and it was later ratified with two reservations and an addition of legislation. That legislation was signed into law by President Ronald Reagan and was called the Genocide Implementation Act of 1987 which made genocide a crime if committed on our soil or by US citizens. There is no statute of limitations and comes with life imprisonment and hefty fines. At the time of its signature, President Reagan expressed that he would have preferred a bill that call for the death penalty, but “This legislation still represents a strong and clear statement by the United States that it will punish acts of genocide with the force of law and the righteousness of justice." So we have agreed to try and prevent as well as prosecute war crimes both in an international treaty and within our own laws. If we want other countries to abide by international treaties and laws, it stands to reason we must show the example and do so as well. While the department was originally created to find and prosecute Holocaust victims, we have had a few genocides since then and it seems to me that we must follow through not only with our legal commitments to prevent, discover and prosecute war criminals, but we must open it up to other genocides for two reasons; the continued finding of Holocaust perpetrators is going to become impossible soon as mortality will win that particular battle and if it is about the act and not the ethnicity or national identity of the perpetrator (as most were German from the Holocaust) then were must treat all genocides as equal and in need of our resources. I understand that this unit has started investigating and searching for those who have committed crimes in Rwanda, Bosnia, Darfur, etc... and I am glad for it. Another reason that this office should stay open is because fulfilling our requirement under laws and treaties would be much easier if we had one department to do it that has specialized skills and the ability to focus on it. Local police forces would find themselves very challenged to take up this cases from tips and continue to do the local policing that they specialize at.

We also have a moral obligation to look for and try to create justice for those who have been victims of human rights crimes and genocide. When we concentrate on looking for the perpetrators and trying to hold them accountable, we tell the victims and others that we take what happened to them seriously and believe that they deserve justice. We also give people (indirectly) a lesson and warning- that this behavior is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. By continuing to look and follow up on leads towards those who broke the laws, we do not give the offender easy rest because that person will always know that their lifestyle/ life is at risk... secrets do get found out. While I sympathize with the idea that sometimes the person who is caught is a good and active member of their community now, I do not believe that crimes of murder without some justice and restitution should be ignored... no matter how 'good' the person has been afterward. (I question if sometimes the individuals are good...not to be 'good'... but to not get caught.) The obligation that we have is not only to ourselves and our families but to humanity as a whole in pursuing justice and educating each other about tolerance. As all of us work together to acknowledge these crimes are unacceptable and work together to prevent them, then over time maybe we will hunt down fewer of these offenders... because there will be less crimes against humanity. Only then should we possibly consider closing the Office of Special Investigations. Only then...

Review and Introspection : "A Scrap of Time and Other Stories" by Ida Fink

I had many reactions to a book I recently read that I can share today. The book is a fiction book filled with novellas on the Holocaust called "A Scrap of Time and Other Stories". I think that this book is both haunting and wonderful... a mixture of pain, horror and it's like looking in a broken mirror; you want to try and fix it, yet you can't do anything but look into the mirror and look at the cracks and how it distorts the image you see and recognize and changed the way you feel about the image and your perspective on the mirror itself.

One thing that I felt throughout the book was the idea of choice. Choice is a word and idea I do not like to chat about very much because so many of my family members see choice as black and white in all situations and do not see that how you are born and where you live and what gender/ race you are can make a big impact on your life and your choices. So it is hard to talk about choice without the anxiety of waiting for the argument to begin. I might get an argument here as well, I do not know. I feel like depending on the situations we find ourselves in or our perceptions we may not have many choices or we may feel like we have very few. Either way, we all make choices not necessarily knowing all the options within the choice we have to make. So, with this viewpoint that I hold in my heart, I picked up the book. I read about the parents who wanted to save their daughter and were just not able to figure out how to do and in a spontaneous moment try to have their daughter run away and she is almost immediately shot down. The father picked her up and carried her body on his shoulder while he walked obediently towards what he knows is his own death. I thought about the man who shot her, knowing she was a little girl, a small child, who couldn't even understand the situation or the why for her death or any of the others. How it was a blessing that it was quick for her yet more pain for her parents in their last moments. I thought about another story where the other prisoners play a mean game on the newest prisoner and how the prisoner will not play and how those prisoners, waiting for their own death try to create control and power in the tiny area they are allowed... recognizing that they have so little. The character Von Galoshinsky- young and scared- made the choice to be a bully when he could and so did his fellows. I think about what other choice he could have made and so I look at him as a big mean man until my mental camera pans back as I read and we all see him as the situation changes and get a better view of who and what he is; young, scared, crying. I thought of the girl who gives her body for papers to try and save herself and her mother and how her 'savior' sees her as an easy lay/ a whore.... this virginal girl who feels forced to give herself in the act of survival sex to try and survive... to try and save her mother.

That man could have given her the papers- he could have tried to save them without taking anything from her- but he did not. He took all that she had including her dignity and self-respect as he left with his thoughtless comments and we do not know whether she survived, but we as readers feel what he took from her... When I was reading I sometimes needed to stop and just think. Why did the soldier shoot the child? Why didn't the man give the girl the papers to save her and her mother? Why did the death of a pig from being run over seem more important than the death of many people? How can someone feel comfortable telling someone to deny their past and themselves... and think that would make everything all right? How can you live with the knowledge of your own acts and reconcile your mind to it? I thought about the man in the film “The Pianist” and how so many people made choices that put themselves at risk to save this man... this one man. I thought of the boy in “Europa Europa” who didn't know his family nor his people were dying... who tries to save himself in a few ways including having perfectly fine teeth pulled to get out of doctor's visits and to try and stitch his foreskin down to the penis and the pain, determination and desperation that he must have felt to try and do that. To try and deny who you feel you are and to fear discovery. I wondered how I would respond in some of the same situations... the girl who feels uncomfortable with murder in all forms and feels so much sorrow and anger when her cats kill a small vole. I realized that I would be willing to hide, but I would probably sob walking to my own death being unwilling to defend myself. I think this because I still feel uncomfortable questioning authority and allowed my mother's abuse to go on for decades. I wonder what I would really do if I had to...

I thought about the stories and how many people have heads and memories absolutely filled with these images, conversations and this pain... and how they keep it inside and do not speak. I wonder if they do not speak because they wish to spare their friends and family from seeing and hearing the same images, or to continue to try and bury it all in the darkest recesses of their minds, or if they worry about ridicule or confirmation that they deserved this experience... this horror... I thought about how our minds can try to save us when most of us are unwilling or unable to save ourselves and how we might create a companion such as a dog to stay will us... to help us feel safe in situations where safety isn't even an option and to feel the surprise and confusion to recognize the trick our mind has played on us to get us closer to our very survival. That our very cells may try to save themselves even when our souls are too tired to try.

While these stories are fiction, each and every one had the ring of truth in them. That unmistakable aura of “I have heard this/ been there/ felt this before.” The benign feeling of being safe in a world that really isn't safe and to see that reality through words and identity and recognize so many different emotions, thoughts, and parts of the reality of the world that you haven't understood before.... the reality that so many other people have had to deal with and face... it's not the easiest thing in the world to do.

I highly recommend this book. If you have the opportunity to read it, please do so....

pictures from :http://www.amazon.com/Scrap-Other-Stories-Jewish-Lives/dp/0810112590, http://www.holocaustpictures.org/pictures/holocaust-pictures/holocaust.jpg.html, http://ivarfjeld.com/2010/07/05/widespread-dangerous-misuse-of-the-word-holocaust/, http://int.icej.org/holocaust

Genocide in Our Time – Introduction to February’s Topic

Over the last few years, I have found out so much information on the act of genocide and man’s inhumanity to man that I feel pretty well verses in it. This month I am going to focus on some modern day genocides as well as my thoughts on them, actions and ideals that are more likely to lead to violence, ethnic cleansing and genocide as well as a few books and related topics. There are many more genocides that I studied but I will not include writings about because they are pretty graphic and I am not sure a PG -13 blog is the best place for all of it. I do think it’s important to start the conversation and not hide the reality of humanity and what we are capable of… we have genocides happening in our world right now…. This is not an act we have become to civilized to perform.

So this is your introduction to the topics and ideas that will be discussed throughout February. Welcome! : )

1. picture from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/04/02/11-powerful-photos-from-the-aftermath-of-the-rwandan-genocide/

“The Pianist”... and the Horror of Human Bigotry and Intolerance

I am so careful what I put in my mind- the images and words and the horror. I had heard of this film... and knowing the topic I have never watched it, I have never considered it at all. A small part of that was the director- what little I have heard about the private life of Roman Polanski hasn't been very good at all. I will see these images for months, for years and they hurt, because I do not feel like I can do anything. The past is over … and yet I feel like these same sentiments echo through our current world and even our hearts. So many of us say that we are better than the Nazi's and that Hitler was pure evil, but in all of these images I see shades of all of us, even me. These classes are so challenging because sometimes I feel like I learn too much, like I feel too much and I feel sometimes like I could die from the feeling of it. So I hope that you can understand what I can't really explain. On a less serious note, I left the subtitles on so I could have help with my spelling... and thank goodness I did or this paper would be a mess of guesses!

Summary

This film tells the story of a young Jewish man named Wladyslaw (Wladek) Szpilman who lived with his family in Warsaw, Poland during the very beginnings of World War two. He lived with his father, mother, one brother and two sisters and the film starts at the with the German bombing of Poland. Szpilman is playing piano in the local radio station on air when the street outside is bombed and he stops playing when he becomes injured and the building collapses around him. He returns home and for a few moments his family feels much joy over a BBC broadcast that informs them that Britain has declared war on Germany and that “Poland is no longer alone.” The joy soon turns to anger, terror and fear with the new governments decrees towards anyone of Jewish decent: they cannot go to school, go into many shops, use the public parks or benches, may not walk on the pavement and must wear visible emblems of the Star of David on their arms. Soon his family is forced to live in the Jewish Ghetto as also decreed in the new laws. They struggle to work and live there until the Germans divide them up sending most of his family on a train- he is able to not get on the train with the help of a Jewish police officer who knows him. Wladyslaw later learns that all of his family were most likely sent to Treblinka where they would most likely have died.

Szpilman soon finds himself in a work party/ slave labor group ruled over by some of the German military. He manages to escape with the help of a friend in the slave group who is working to start an uprising and some non Jewish friends outside the ghetto. He is living alone in a small apartment provided by these friends when the Jews in the slave camp commence to try and win their freedom in an act known as the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and Szpilman watches it fail and the few survivors executed by the German troops. Later, when his friends are captured and his apartment is no longer safe he escapes to the emergency address he was given by his last rescuers. There he finds another old friend and she and her husband hide him again. In this apartment, he is again safe for a while. The stress has come with some cost however and he ends up with a severe case of jaundice. While recovering and without the help of his friends who have now left for a safer area, he finds his apartment building in the middle of a battle between the Polish resistance and the Germans and once again is forced to flee, at one point hiding by lying down in the road near other bodies and pretending to be a corpse himself. With no more friends that he knows of or is aware of how to contact, he finds himself searching the bombed out and abandoned buildings for food. He does manage to find a can of food but at the very moment of his discovery of food and what appears to be a peaceful and safe opportunity to open the can, he is discovered by an German officer named Wilm Hosenfield.

The officer questions him, and upon learning that Wladyslaw is a pianist, he asks him to play on a nearby piano in the semi ruined building. In the cold- so cold that you can see his breath, he begins to play and as his hands and his heart warms he plays more quickly and with more feeling- his soul and so much feeling are released through the strokes of his fingers on the ivory keys. The officer doesn't actually appear to have much emotion at all after the recital and asks him more questions. He then leaves him in the place he is hiding and the stress and all of it have been too much and Szpilman begins to sob. Within a few days however, we realize that the officer did feel something powerful from his encounter and as he moves his troops and office personal into the building, he quietly sneaks food up to Wladyslaw in his attic hiding place. The officer also lets him know that the Russians are just across the river and that they will probably cross over within a few weeks. The Germans pack up to leave and Officer Hosenfield gives him more food and his coat. They part amicably with the officer saying he will try to listen to him on the radio. When the Russians come into the town after the Germans leave, they almost shoot Szpilman because he is wearing a German officers coat. When they discover he is Polish, he is set free.

As the war ends, Wladyslaw is able to go back to playing the piano on the radio and to live and try to begin life anew. He also discovers that the German officer that helped him needs help but not knowing his name or where the Russians have taken him, Szpilman can do nothing to help -he continues to earn money playing the piano and we learn he died at eighty-eight years of age. The officer whose name he couldn't remember died in a Soviet prisoner of war camp a few years after the end of the war.

Historical Matrix - The order runs as follows: each number has two sections. The first section shows the part of the film picked for analysis and a brief description of the scene. The second contains the analysis. :)

1. German invasion of Poland / invasion of Warsaw (Oct 1939) - Wladyslaw Szpilman is working at his job at a radio station in Warsaw when the street in front and the nearby buildings are bombed. Slightly injured, he returned to the family home to listen to the radio announcement that both Britain and France had declared war on Germany who had just invaded Poland.

The German invasion of Poland finally began on September 1, 1939 after negotiations and talks between the United Kingdom, France, the Soviet Union and Poland. It is estimated that ten percent of the population at the beginning of the war was Jewish- the city of Warsaw was estimated at being 30% Jewish. This resulted in Poland being divided between both the Third Reich and the Soviet Union with the slightly larger share occupied by Germany.

2. New Anti-Jewish laws / decrees (Dec 1939) - The family discusses the new laws and how they affect them and their community. One of his sisters says that the occupiers “are trying to be more Nazi than the Nazi's”

These laws included provisions such as wearing a 'Star of David' on the arm if you were Jewish, carrying special papers with your race on them and even signs in shops stating the race of the owner. Jews were no longer allowed to own real estate or valuable items- they must all be handed over to the Germans. Jews were only allowed to have 2000 zloty in cash and the rest had to be deposited into a closed account. There were also curfews and decrees against driving and also limited times that Jews could enter and leave the Ghetto for work. Jewish schools were closed and all organizations that were Jewish were disbanded by law. Some businesses did not serve Jews as well.

3. Warsaw Ghetto Development- start 1940 (1942) - The whole Szpilman family is forced to 'move' to the ghetto - their home was already in the land set aside for the ghetto so they were lucky.

The Jewish council or 'quarter' was established in October 1940 and was run by Adam Czerniakow, a Jewish engineer who was put in charge of moving people in and following the German commands for the place. It was completely walled in from the rest of the town (the walls were ten feet high with barbed wire on the top ) and was very cramped with the large population moved into an area slightly larger than three miles.

4. Trains to Treblinka (Aug 1942) - The Szpilman family is forced onto the train to 'somewhere' thought to be a labor camp, Wladyslaw is helped to escape... he discovers later that the train took his family to the concentration camp Treblinka

Treblinka was one of the larger camps built by the Germans during World War II as both a forced labor camp and extermination facility – mostly the latter. Some numbers suggest that 800,000 + individuals died in the camp during its operation between July 1942-July 1944. It was located 50 miles northeast of Warsaw. Most individuals massacred in this camp were killed by a mixture of suffocation and carbon monoxide poisoning. None of his family survived the war and he never saw them again.

5. Warsaw Ghetto Uprising - Wladyslaw Szpilman is looking out of his window in his secret apartment when the end of the uprising is suppressed by the Germans and the last of the resisters that were caught are executed.

The first armed uprising in the Ghetto happened in January 1943. As the Jews that remained in the ghetto realized that the people being forcibly put onto trains to go to labor camps were not actually going to camps but were being exterminated, those left determined to fight as they were going to die anyway. The German Army, unable to quickly quell the revolt, began to burn the buildings in the ghetto in sections to give the rebels fewer safe places to fight from and eventually forcing the insurgents into the sewers and underground. By June 1943, the Germans had successfully put down the uprising with very few survivors. It is thought that 13,000 died either fighting, dying in the fires, or by being sent after capture to concentration camps.

6. Russian Occupation of Warsaw (January 17, 1945) - Szpilman is told by his 'friend' Wilm Hosenfield that the Germans are retreating and the Soviet Army will probably succeed in taking Warsaw in a few weeks- this did happen and after almost being shot by the Russian army, he is finally safe!

The Soviet Army was able to take control over Warsaw in January 1945 and pushed the German occupation out. However, the Russian army waited for over two months to help allowing the Germans to overcome the Polish resistance and giving Poland and its control pretty much to the Soviet Union. It is suggested by many historians that this delay was purposeful so that Russia and Stalin could have control over more of Eastern Europe after the war.

7. Starvation - You can see the bodies of the Jews that died of starvation in the film and the slenderness of the actor himself through the film as he gets thinner and thinner over time.

This is a typical tactic that occupiers and governments have taken in the past to crush and decrease an unwanted or hostile population. Inside the Warsaw ghetto, food allotted for going in was not nearly enough for the population and so people of all ages became weak and died from lack of calories and nutrients. Another example of starvation in history around this time was the Holodomor in the Ukraine caused by Joseph Stalin and his collectivization policies.

8. Genocide – the 'Final Solution'

Originally determined by German government officials and Nazi party officials to deal with the 'Jewish' problem, this plan was nicknamed Operation Reinhard and how it would be implemented. This decision was not made at the conference as the 'Final Solution' had already been made higher up in government- only the implementation and details were ironed out during this conference. No one at this meeting objected to this operation and it was discussed that around 11,000,000 Jewish people would need to be 'affected' by this policy. There was even discussion on when to enforce the policy on 'secondary' participants such as non- Jews who had married Jews and how to convince other states to turn over their Jewish populations to the Nazis.

9. Eugenics - While the film concentrated mostly on anti-semitism, eugenics was the background to removal of the Jews and also led to ward the sterilization and extermination of other undesirables that affected the pure 'Aryan' race- Jehovah's Witnesses, gypsies, people of Slavic decent, and dissidents...

The first eugenics society started in Germany was called the 'German Society of Racial Hygiene' by Alfred Ploetz in 1905. It didn't gain popularity until after WWI. Laws were passed that prevented non-Jews from marrying Jews and to also prevent those individuals considered 'defective' from reproducing by compulsory sterilization... and laws and other services that promoted the reproduction of the 'right' people. These societies or ideas can be found in other nations around this time, including the United States.

10. Socialism - Some of the people who were killed in the film and also who protected Szpilman were Socialist.

Socialism is a movement which was attempting to make society more just towards workers and all people in general. Many Jewish individuals and groups were attracted to the tenets of socialism to help themselves leave poverty behind and even get rid of the baggage that their heritage might give them. Both democratic and communist governments saw the socialist movement as a threat to their forms of government. Some of the people executed as enemies of the state in Germany were members of the Social Democratic party.

11. Racism / Anti-Semitism - Several examples in the film

Some examples can be seen simply by the behavior of the Germans themselves. The Warsaw Ghetto was rationalized by the Germans as a solution to the 'diseases' such as typhoid that all Jews carried. In fact, the term 'ghetto' was not allowed because that would have suggested bias- the area was to be called the Jewish quarter where they (the Jews) could have total freedom and safety while not infecting the general 'Aryan' population. The Nuremberg Laws are also examples as well as the behavior of the Germans towards Jewish individuals.


So after all that, what are your thoughts?

The Consequences of Holocaust Trauma on Individuals and Future Generations

When I sat down to this week's readings, I felt like the last several weeks had given me a pretty basic background and preparation for this task. In addition to all the information talked about in this class I also had the benefit (I'm not sure that is the right word) of growing up hearing about the persecution and attempted extermination of the early adherents to my religion so I felt like that gave me an additional potential viewpoint. Yet even with all this preparation and my own past difficulties and trials- as well as a decent understand of how challenging the Holocaust was for those who were victims of the Final Solution (by far mostly Jews, but I believe homosexuals, Jehovah's witnesses and other groups were also targeted), I found myself shocked the depth and length of the trauma's effects even by those who had not experienced the worst horrors of the system... even those who experiences almost none of it, but lived with and loved those who had.

A few weeks ago, I made a comment in one of my discussion posts about a young child who I felt was potentially picking up PTSD from helping and living with her afflicted parent. I wrote it because I have been thinking it for a very long time, but I also have kept that thought to myself for the most part because I do not feel I have the qualifications to back up my belief... but I will admit my fear of the parent's reactions is pretty severe. I also wondered if that was generally possible- to get the symptoms and difficulties of a disorder simply by being around someone who has the problem... after all, you can't get AIDS or Alzheimer's with very few exceptions just by spending time with someone. Our readings definitely suggested to me that it is possible and while I may not be right, maybe there are some things that I can look into to maybe not only help, but also to have a greater understanding and sympathy for the suffering of this family.

In general it appears that the effects of surviving Holocaust trauma may be varied due to differences in people, trauma endured, and other life components, it is easily stated that this is a long lasting, multi generational problem that affects a survivor's social, cultural, medical and daily lives... as well as those individuals that live with, love, and entwine their lives with those that have survived. As mentioned in a paper written by Natan Kellermann, until the traumatic events are properly acknowledged and then the steps of the healing process properly followed, the trauma will continue to affect and distort the daily life of the victim and the secondary sufferers. Some symptoms that were mentioned from either direct sources or the family members of those primarily effected by the trauma are as follows: mourning and other emotions such as guilt, anger, anxiety, grief, etc. Also sleep problems including insomnia, nightmares, and other sleep problems and mental challenges dealing with depression, repression of difficult memories or feelings, overactive defense mechanisms causing problems with excessive fear, anxiety, lack of emotive or 'numb' response, etc... (Most of the symptoms of PTSD are present in this population.) Also, behavior that is defensive and not appropriate to the current situation is often found exhibited by victims. Some of these cognitive and behavioral challenges may affect the victim by holding them back from many social activities / events either emotionally or making special events that usually provoke joy to also cause sorrow and anger. These behaviors may vary per person and how the trauma has affected them, but it causes many parts of their daily life and activities to be challenged in a way that other unaffected individuals do not have to deal with. Other long term problems that sufferers may find are easier susceptibility to numerous other mental difficulties as well as stress related medical disorders.

A difficult and challenging problem to deal with... especially as we have had a few massacres performed on other groups since. I was listening to a commentary on a new music CD that was released by a group called 'Split Enz' (I think) a little bit ago and some of the songs on this album as well as past albums discuss the pain of the lead writer who is dealing with genocide of past relatives and his life of having to move and sometimes live a confusing existence as a refugee. One song was a poem by his mother who at the age of five lost many family members to genocide and he mixes his and her thoughts and feelings together in one song. As I was reading this week I thought about that interview and the struggles of people generations after the event as I hadn't really thought that much about it before.

A very difficult topic to be sure... what are your thoughts on this issue? Do you have any personal experience that you are willing to share? What do you think that we can do as a society to not only help victims of all crimes, but also try to help the families, caregivers and friends of those who have these challenges? Please share....