Hi Ben, I see the Holocaust as the most successful and the most organized genocide which ever happened. I don't want to rank it and put it on the top. The point is exactly not to compare. It happened, it was bad, we should remember and don't let it happened again. Period. When we start making comparisons and conclusions that Sharon is as bad as Hitler, we are sliding toward dangerous idea that probably Holocaust was not that bad and it had some reasons. I think, the truth is: history is not the math, there is no "if Hitler, then Sharon". Saturday, February 21, 2004, 1:08:28 PM, you wrote:
From: Peter Gannushkin <shkin@shkin.com>
"Leaving aside how much people each of them killed I would still claim that there was nothing compared to the Holocaust and if we will remember it there will be nothing like that in the future I hope."
BA> I ask this question seriously and don't mean to be confrontational or BA> playing devil's advocate: Why does nothing compare to the Holocaust? BA> Surely there have been other (attempted) genocides. I'm not so sure why BA> first we have to rank historical atrocities and then accord the Holocaust BA> top honors. Or why we must view Hitler as not only a historical figure but BA> the embodiment of pure evil. Is what he did any more evil than the genocide BA> of the Native Americans or the Armenians? Or the hundreds of years of BA> trans-Atlantic slavery? -- All the best, Peter Gannushkin URL: http://downtownmusic.net/