Politics vs. Morality: The Armenian Genocide

[Nick_A]

Hello Dear Reader

This is not a critique of Judaism but rather proof of what humanity is collectively. What we preach is not what we do. We just take turns demonstrating our hypocrisy.

Being part Armenian and having lost family to the Armenian Genocide, I've found myself in a very odd position. Legislation has been proposed to have the United States recognize the Armenian Genocide. It was rejected and will come up again for a vote.

Naturally I am in favor of such legislation, As of now neither the United States, Israel, or Turkey recognize the Armenian Genocide. Since Turkey was the cause of the Armenian Genocide, their denial is obvious. However with the United States, Israel, and certain Jewish groups in the United States, the resistance seems largely political with a little bit of "exclusivity" involved from the Israeli perspective described well in Yair Auron's book: "The Banality of Denial."



From my perspective or from the perspective of any Armenian that has lost family to the Genocide, it is disappointing how Jewish groups that understand the Holocaust so well, seem to turn on the Armenians for political reasons. I know how important it is psychologically for recognition for many Armenians just as it is important for recognition of the Jewish Holocaust to the Jewish community.

This has caused a division within the Jewish community over politics vs. morality. Two well respected Jewish men wrote an editorial for the LaTimes expressing disappointment with several Jewish groups.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/com ... t-opinions

This is why it is troubling that some major Jewish organizations have lined up in support of Turkey's efforts to keep the U.S. Congress from recognizing the Armenian massacres as an act of genocide. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the American Jewish Committee (AJC), the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and B'nai B'rith International recently conveyed a letter from the Turkish Jewish community opposing a resolution recognizing the genocide.

The ADL and the JINSA also added their own statements of opposition, suggesting that the massacre of Armenians was a matter for historians, not legislators, to decide.

It has become personal between Jewish politicians:

http://www.graberforcongress.com/article.php?id=5

The ADL has become controversial in Watertown mass. and is now being condemned not only by Armenians but moral Jewish people as well. Consider this letter by a highly qualified Jewish doctor:

http://blogs.townonline.com/watertown/?p=4152

It does appear that a sharp divide is being drawn between the moral and political people of the Jewish community. This means of course that there are also many Jewish people in the middle. Their support for recognition of the Armenian Genocide will be meaningful. Their letters to their congressman would help for example. My question to you is how best to get their support? How do I and others convince them that morality must take precedence over politics? People of morality must stand up to these organizations. I haven't had much luck with my efforts. Yet I know that to make efforts is important. consider this last of the eight stages of genocide:

http://www.chomedeynews.ca/articles/...TCN150808.html

Denial is the eighth stage that always follows a genocide. It is among the surest indicators of further genocidal massacres. The perpetrators of genocide dig up the mass graves, burn the bodies, try to cover up the evidence and intimidate the witnesses. They deny that they committed any crimes, and often blame what happened on the victims. They block investigations of the crimes, and continue to govern until driven from power by force, when they flee into exile.

So the defeat of the bill and the acceptance of indifference has gauranteed the recurrence of genocides and proof that politics wins over morality.

[Catharsis]

Hello Nick,

>>>Naturally I am in favor of such legislation, As of now neither the United States, Israel, or Turkey recognize the Armenian Genocide. Since Turkey was the cause of the Armenian Genocide, their denial is obvious. However with the United States, Israel, and certain Jewish groups in the United States, the resistance seems largely political with a little bit of "exclusivity" involved from the Israeli perspective described well in Yair Auron's book: "The Banality of Denial."<<<

Unfortunately, there is no "morality", only political and other interests. The truth remains: Muslim Turks slaughtered Christians by the millions.


During 1894-1923 the Ottoman Empire conducted a policy of Genocide of the Christian population living within its extensive territory. The Sultan, Abdul Hamid, first put forth an official governmental policy of genocide against the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire in 1894.

Systematic massacres took place in 1894-1896 when Abdul savagely killed 300,000 Armenians throughout the provinces. Massacres recurred, and in 1909 government troops killed, in the towns of Adana alone, over 20,000 Christian Armenians.

When WW1 broke out the The Ottoman Empire was ruled by the "Young Turk" dictatorship which allied itself with Germany. Turkish government decided to eliminate the whole of the Christian population of Greeks, Armenians, Syrians and Nestorians. The government slogan, "Turkey for the Turks", served to encourage Turkish civilians on a policy of ethnic cleansing.

The next step of the Armenian Genocide began on 24 April 1915 with the mass arrest, and ultimate murder, of religious, political and intellectual leaders in Constantinople and elsewhere in the empire. Then, in every Armenian community, a carefully planned Genocide unfolded: Arrest of clergy and other prominent persons, disarmament of the population and Armenian soldiers serving in the Ottoman army, segregation and public execution of leaders and able-bodied men, and the deportation to the deserts of the remaining Armenian women, children and elderly. Renowned historian Arnold Toynbee wrote that "the crime was concerted very systematically for there is evidence of identical procedure from over fifty places."

The Genocide started from the border districts and seacoasts, and worked inland to the most remote hamlets. Over 1.5 million Armenian Christians, including over 4,000 bishops and priests, were killed in this step of the Genocide.

http://www.serfes.org/orthodox/memoryof.htm

[Nick_A]

Hello Nick,

>>>Naturally I am in favor of such legislation, As of now neither the United States, Israel, or Turkey recognize the Armenian Genocide. Since Turkey was the cause of the Armenian Genocide, their denial is obvious. However with the United States, Israel, and certain Jewish groups in the United States, the resistance seems largely political with a little bit of "exclusivity" involved from the Israeli perspective described well in Yair Auron's book: "The Banality of Denial."<<<

Unfortunately, there is no "morality", only political and other interests. The truth remains: Muslim Turks slaughtered Christians by the millions.


During 1894-1923 the Ottoman Empire conducted a policy of Genocide of the Christian population living within its extensive territory. The Sultan, Abdul Hamid, first put forth an official governmental policy of genocide against the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire in 1894.

Systematic massacres took place in 1894-1896 when Abdul savagely killed 300,000 Armenians throughout the provinces. Massacres recurred, and in 1909 government troops killed, in the towns of Adana alone, over 20,000 Christian Armenians.

When WW1 broke out the The Ottoman Empire was ruled by the "Young Turk" dictatorship which allied itself with Germany. Turkish government decided to eliminate the whole of the Christian population of Greeks, Armenians, Syrians and Nestorians. The government slogan, "Turkey for the Turks", served to encourage Turkish civilians on a policy of ethnic cleansing.

The next step of the Armenian Genocide began on 24 April 1915 with the mass arrest, and ultimate murder, of religious, political and intellectual leaders in Constantinople and elsewhere in the empire. Then, in every Armenian community, a carefully planned Genocide unfolded: Arrest of clergy and other prominent persons, disarmament of the population and Armenian soldiers serving in the Ottoman army, segregation and public execution of leaders and able-bodied men, and the deportation to the deserts of the remaining Armenian women, children and elderly. Renowned historian Arnold Toynbee wrote that "the crime was concerted very systematically for there is evidence of identical procedure from over fifty places."

The Genocide started from the border districts and seacoasts, and worked inland to the most remote hamlets. Over 1.5 million Armenian Christians, including over 4,000 bishops and priests, were killed in this step of the Genocide.

http://www.serfes.org/orthodox/memoryof.htm

Being both Armenian and Russian, I know of these "delights" from both directions. I know of family killed by the communists when leaving a Church service for not renouncing the Church and becomeing communists. I lso know of family killed in the Armenian genocide

It seems that some people can be moral and others have no need to be so. Unfortunately it is often these types that are ruthless enough to acquire power.

I read the letter by Dr. Michael siegel I linked to and feel his moral force. It is obvious that he is a man of inner quality. Then I read about Foxman and sense the exact opposite. Yet they are both considered Jews.

It is of course the same with Christendom. This word can contain people capable of great compassion along with those capable of great cruelty.

This is another reason why the govt. must assert moral courage. It cannot, so regardless of fine speeches the country loses the respect for the balance between obligations and rights and begins to decline in quality.

[PC1]

Nick A.,

I'm also a direct descendant of genocide victims (on my mother's side). I must say, I can see where you're coming from. My great-grandfather wrote vivid accounts of what he and his family had to endure, and to be honest, I hate to even think about it (even in this political context). To make matters worse, it seems like almost all Turks insist that it never happened, and sometimes even mock it. It's unfortunate that politics is overriding justice, and I remember when this was at it's peak all of the political pundits expressed sympathy to the Armenians, but all held that this was simply not the "right time" because of America's relations with Turkey.

I must confess, I would not be able to fully comprehend the horrors that the Jews had to endure without knowing the pain genocide can cause directly. I've read Ellie Weisel's Night on what he endured during the Holocaust and I know for a fact that without my personal connection to the Armenian genocide, my sympathy for the Jews would only be on a "secondary level." I simpy wouldn't be able to comprehend their personal struggles. With my own direct link to genocide, I can certainly feel their pain much better than I would be able to without this link. Human nature is just selfish in that way. I don't think we should hold it too strongly against anyone - they simply don't feel what we do.

On a sidenote, my mother actually grew up attending one of the chapel's in Watertown.

[Nick_A]

Nick A.,

I'm also a direct descendant of genocide victims (on my mother's side). I must say, I can see where you're coming from. My great-grandfather wrote vivid accounts of what he and his family had to endure, and to be honest, I hate to even think about it (even in this political context). To make matters worse, it seems like almost all Turks insist that it never happened, and sometimes even mock it. It's unfortunate that politics is overriding justice, and I remember when this was at it's peak all of the political pundits expressed sympathy to the Armenians, but all held that this was simply not the "right time" because of America's relations with Turkey.

I must confess, I would not be able to fully comprehend the horrors that the Jews had to endure without knowing the pain genocide can cause directly. I've read Ellie Weisel's Night on what he endured during the Holocaust and I know for a fact that without my personal connection to the Armenian genocide, my sympathy for the Jews would only be on a "secondary level." I simpy wouldn't be able to comprehend their personal struggles. With my own direct link to genocide, I can certainly feel their pain much better than I would be able to without this link. Human nature is just selfish in that way. I don't think we should hold it too strongly against anyone - they simply don't feel what we do.

On a sidenote, my mother actually grew up attending one of the chapel's in Watertown.

Hi PC1

Thanks for a heartfelt meaningful response. The Armenian genocide is mocked in ways that would be impossible in the US for any other genocide. Consider this account:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/03/news/armen.php

You and I can appreciate the Holocaust for what it is and when the Jews say "Never Again" we are in complete support. This is what makes denial on the part of those like Foxman so callous. He must know better but still denies the attrocities are a genocide.

It's unfortunate that politics is overriding justice, and I remember when this was at it's peak all of the political pundits expressed sympathy to the Armenians, but all held that this was simply not the "right time" because of America's relations with Turkey.

I read the same. The question then is when is the "right time." When is the right time to admit rape, child molestation, or any of these atrocities? Do we only stand up to a rapist because he cannot threaten us?

Human nature is just selfish in that way. I don't think we should hold it too strongly against anyone - they simply don't feel what we do.

True, but we have the obligation to Armenians to make this hypocrisy known. Having experienced it, we also owe it to all such minorities to encourage their unification in defending against genocide. Jews and Armenians must stand together with others without fear of calling it as it is for our mutual benefit. There is simply no "wrong time" to call it what it is and stand in unison against genocide denial.

[Goat]

Nick A.,

I'm also a direct descendant of genocide victims (on my mother's side). I must say, I can see where you're coming from. My great-grandfather wrote vivid accounts of what he and his family had to endure, and to be honest, I hate to even think about it (even in this political context). To make matters worse, it seems like almost all Turks insist that it never happened, and sometimes even mock it. It's unfortunate that politics is overriding justice, and I remember when this was at it's peak all of the political pundits expressed sympathy to the Armenians, but all held that this was simply not the "right time" because of America's relations with Turkey.

I must confess, I would not be able to fully comprehend the horrors that the Jews had to endure without knowing the pain genocide can cause directly. I've read Ellie Weisel's Night on what he endured during the Holocaust and I know for a fact that without my personal connection to the Armenian genocide, my sympathy for the Jews would only be on a "secondary level." I simpy wouldn't be able to comprehend their personal struggles. With my own direct link to genocide, I can certainly feel their pain much better than I would be able to without this link. Human nature is just selfish in that way. I don't think we should hold it too strongly against anyone - they simply don't feel what we do.

On a sidenote, my mother actually grew up attending one of the chapel's in Watertown.

Hi PC1

Thanks for a heartfelt meaningful response. The Armenian genocide is mocked in ways that would be impossible in the US for any other genocide. Consider this account:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/03/news/armen.php

You and I can appreciate the Holocaust for what it is and when the Jews say "Never Again" we are in complete support. This is what makes denial on the part of those like Foxman so callous. He must know better but still denies the attrocities are a genocide.

It's unfortunate that politics is overriding justice, and I remember when this was at it's peak all of the political pundits expressed sympathy to the Armenians, but all held that this was simply not the "right time" because of America's relations with Turkey.

I read the same. The question then is when is the "right time." When is the right time to admit rape, child molestation, or any of these atrocities? Do we only stand up to a rapist because he cannot threaten us?

Human nature is just selfish in that way. I don't think we should hold it too strongly against anyone - they simply don't feel what we do.

True, but we have the obligation to Armenians to make this hypocrisy known. Having experienced it, we also owe it to all such minorities to encourage their unification in defending against genocide. Jews and Armenians must stand together with others without fear of calling it as it is for our mutual benefit. There is simply no "wrong time" to call it what it is and stand in unison against genocide denial.

Well, it does seem that those of certain backgrounds tend to be more violent in response to criticism of historically events. I personally don't see how a non-binding resolution against Turkey will resolve that issue. Unless much stronger
and universal restrictions are in place, they won't change. If people are really serious about this, the same kind of voluntary restrictions that were put into place for South Africa could be put into place for Turkey, but that would only be practical if the situation of the Armenians were similar to the blacks in Africa.

Change can not be imposed from without. It can be encouraged.. like the restrictions that many companies did against South Africa at the behest of their stock holders. It has to be current injustice , rather than acknowledgment of past injustice to have that be practical.

I think that what would be better would be advertising the Armenian Genocide Museum in Washington better, and getting better education for people. It is slated to be opened in 2011. That is a much more practical, and a much more fitting
method of dealing with the issue.

[Nick_A]

Goat

Obama keeps referring to "change" He says we need "change." I say we need a president with moral balls.

Education just goes so far but if the govt is afraid, the people are afraid. Bush is afraid and on april 24, the day of recognition for the Armenian genocide, Bush doesn't use the word genocide. Hopefully on April 24, 2009 the new president will have moral balls and express his sympathy for the victims of the Armenian genocide and use the word "Genocide." Just such an action will provoke as much respect as it does growls.

[Goat]

Goat

Obama keeps referring to "change" He says we need "change." I say we need a president with moral balls.

Education just goes so far but if the govt is afraid, the people are afraid. Bush is afraid and on april 24, the day of recognition for the Armenian genocide, Bush doesn't use the word genocide. Hopefully on April 24, 2009 the new president will have moral balls and express his sympathy for the victims of the Armenian genocide and use the word "Genocide." Just such an action will provoke as much respect as it does growls.

I never respected Bush. As far as referring to the Armenian Genocide.. it is an important lesson in history, that alas was not learned soon enough. There is genocide happening in the world today, in Darfur, yet no one is willing to step in and stop it.

I would be more impressed with someone who took action to stop Genocide happening in OUR time, than recognizing the genocide in the past. I would be more impressed with someone who stopped the violence in Iraq that we caused, rather than recognizing the past. What good is recognizing the past unless we can apply the lessons learned to the present? Merely recognizing it is not enough.

[Nick_A]

Goat

Obama keeps referring to "change" He says we need "change." I say we need a president with moral balls.

Education just goes so far but if the govt is afraid, the people are afraid. Bush is afraid and on april 24, the day of recognition for the Armenian genocide, Bush doesn't use the word genocide. Hopefully on April 24, 2009 the new president will have moral balls and express his sympathy for the victims of the Armenian genocide and use the word "Genocide." Just such an action will provoke as much respect as it does growls.

I never respected Bush. As far as referring to the Armenian Genocide.. it is an important lesson in history, that alas was not learned soon enough. There is genocide happening in the world today, in Darfur, yet no one is willing to step in and stop it.

I would be more impressed with someone who took action to stop Genocide happening in OUR time, than recognizing the genocide in the past. I would be more impressed with someone who stopped the violence in Iraq that we caused, rather than recognizing the past. What good is recognizing the past unless we can apply the lessons learned to the present? Merely recognizing it is not enough.

The bottom line is that we have moral weakness. The genocide in Darfur occurs because of genocide denial. We simply are both unwilling and unable to admit to what it is. If we had stood up to the Armenian genocide perhaps Darfur wouldn't be as it is. Now is the right time to condemn all genocides.

Yair Auron understands it but why not others in israel and the US?

http://armenianstudies.csufresno.edu/hy ... 2/jews.htm

Why don't we learn by experience? We don't feel but instead rationalize so everything repeats. An incident between these two talented Simone's expresses it well:

Simone Weil's fellow student, the feminist writer Simone de Beauvoir, wrote of Weil in her book Memoirs of a Dutiful Daughter:

She intrigued me because of her great reputation for intelligence and her bizarre get-up; "A great famine had broken out in China, and I was told that when she heard the news she had wept: these tears compelled my respect much more than her gifts as a philosopher. I envied her having a heart that could beat right across the world. I managed to get near her one day. I don't know how the conversation got started; she declared in no uncertain tones that only one thing mattered in the world: the revolution which would feed all the starving people of the earth. I retorted, no less peremptorily, that the problem was not to make men happy, but to find the reason for their existence. She looked me up and down: 'It's easy to see you've never been hungry,' she snapped.

Unfortunately dear lady, you've been compelled by the absence of moral balls in men to try and compensate for this lack through your own efforts.