The Holocaust and the Risk of Silence
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2a730/2a73006ce34ae3bd9a1fe5ceafdc4ac80ebbf808" alt="Image"
On Friday, I gave an introduction at our Jockey Club to selections from Hegel's Philosophy of History (the 1830 Lectures on World History). During the discussion, a debate erupted regarding whether the Holocaust was comparable to other historical atrocities—whether every century and people have suffered their own respective catastrophes, therefore rendering Auschwitz a symbol of the defining tragedy of the 20th century in the West. This affirmation of a type of historical relativism was, of course, not swallowed easily by everyone present. It prompted additional conversations between friends after the Jockey Club about what is so unique about Auschwitz. Why is it utterly incomparable to other historical disasters? What type of violence does it do the lives of its victims and survivors to relegate their fate and experience to just another bad period in the course of history? Emil Fackenheim explored exactly this question in To Mend the World . He there expresses the key issu...