To skip this introduction and go directly to the full In-Depth Analysis of “Why Poland? Part 3,” click here.
This is my third “Why Poland?” post. In the first, I addressed the question as it was posed by my mother most directly. I reflected upon my experience as a Jew in communist Poland in the seventies, as I observed the official anti-Semitism and the official silence about the experience of my ancestors in that land. In the second post, I consider how that silence made it difficult for people, Poles and Jews, of good will to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, and how they somehow managed to join together, even as their collective memories in significant ways did not overlap. Here, I report and reflect on a debate in Poland which confronted the gaps in collective memory, a debate stimulated by the publication of a book, Jan Gross’s Neighbors, which tells the story of Polish Catholics killing Polish Jews, their neighbors, in the small town of Jedwabne during the war.
The book sparked a ferocious debate in Poland: denounced by extreme nationalists, but also the leader of the Polish Catholic Church, Cardinal Glemp, and many scholars and public figures. On the other hand, the book had many appreciative readers including citizens,officials, scholars, intellectuals and Church leaders. My report on the debate speaks for itself. My conclusion is that the debate has been difficult, but indicates that at long last there is responsible collective memory about the Shoah in Poland, which is a very positive sign, even as it reveals very negative attitudes and beliefs.
The first two parts of my “Why Poland?” reflections were written in the mid nineties, soon after the Auschwitz ceremony. This last part was added as I presented my thoughts to an audience in Lublin in 2007. I post here my address, with a few minor edits, that I presented in Lublin.
I worried about the reaction of my audience to the very critical things I had to say. I wondered if I would be taken to be too critical of the church or of Poland, or too soft. I struggled to get my tone exactly right, wanting to advance discussion not silence it. What surprised me was the relative calm of the response. I was asked one or two interesting questions, notes of appreciation were offered, but the talk did not generate much heat. I was particularly surprised and concerned that for the young people in the audience the talk seemed not to be of any special concern. It was almost as if I were talking to a group of German young people who have been through intensive instruction about the Holocaust for sixty years. But the Poles, like others in post- Communist Europe haven’t had such instruction. Thus, I do have a concern that there is a kind of premature Holocaust fatigue, enabling the rise of a rabid anti-Semitism, as can be observed in Hungary today.
To read “Why Poland? Part 3: Thinking about Jedwabne, Addressing Premature Holocaust Fatigue,” click here.
A piece that purports to be ‘reasonable’ and engages in much hand-wringing at the end of part 3, but reveals its underlying intent in several points.
[1] A key argument being put together is that Poland must ‘confront the Holocaust’, to then generate a ‘mea culpa’ of co-responsibility with Germany.
[2] The universe is Judeo-centric, so, “Jewish suffering has special significance” and everything / everyone else is subsidiary / incidental to it.
[3] The Jews do not have to answer for “complicity in deportations to Siberia, for sending Poles to jails, for the degradation of their fellow citizens”.
[4] It is impossible to be a Polish patriot “without using the symbol of the Jew”, since “Jews somehow play a central role in constituting their identity”.
[5] “The works of Jan Gross contribute to the foundation of democracy in Poland” by “confronting Polish complicity in the Holocaust”.
I do not accept the validity of any of these propositions, so treat the whole piece as being flawed, because of what it will do to the ‘understanding’ of people that have little knowledge of the issues.
This is a relatively mild example of some Polish nationalist responses my piece has provoked. Two others sent to me by email were much more explicit in their anti-Semitism. I do not argue for German Polish co-responsibility, nor for any kind of collective guilt. Suffering is significant. I don’t argue for the special character of Jewish suffering and I recognize the immense suffering of the Polish nation during WWII. The accusation of Jewish complicity in deportations is an anti-Semitic slur. I do think Jan Gross’s work contributes to Polish democracy.
Hi Jeff,
Regarding your posts about Polish Jews… You posted them at a time during which I find myself considering anti-semitism in the Arab world and my identity as an American Jew living here. I haven’t experienced any direct anti-semitism, but this is simply because I don’t tell people, who are not close friends, that I am Jewish. I usually say Christian or Muslim. This reaction, I realize, is significant. That I feel I should (but not necessarily “must”) hide part of my identity to avoid a counter reaction tells me that I don’t feel like I can “fit in” %100, like an “other.” In some of the classes that I’ve taught, or around some of my acquaintances, I’ve been confronted with some horrible anti-semitic remarks, as well as some “code reproducing” stereotypes. The difference, however, between the Polish situation and the situation in the contemporary Arab world is the Palestinian question. Israel is viewed as a colonial aggressor, as well as the representative of Jews. Israel is no longer a victim, nor is it politically legitimate to reproduce the narrative of Jewish victimhood in the Palestinian case. This narrative no long washes with the new generation of moderate American Jews. Peter Beinhart has some insight into this issue (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/jun/10/failure-american-jewish-establishment/?pagination=false).
There are times, however, when I do feel an affinity with my semitic/Arab brothers and sisters and the potential for anti-semitism fades to the background. When I mentioned Jewish history/tradition, in connection with Christian and Muslim history/tradition in the region, my students understood and were aware and accepting of this. This was no surprise to me. Throughout history, particularly Medieval history, Jews, Christians, and Muslims were able to live in coexistence. This isn’t to say that they loved each other, but they lived fairly peacefully and were treated more or less equally under state law in the Egypt, Spain, Yemen, and other states (S.D. Goitein wrote extensively on this topic). And Spain has been able to come to terms famously with this history. But as you said, Jeff, there is code reproduction and I am pessimistic about a change in code. I am able to separate my Jewish identity from Israel because I am an American first, but it may take a long time for many people here to separate Israeli national identity from Jewish cultural identity.
See, religion is thought of very differently in this part of the world than in America. Religion is not a private issue here and while it is clear to you and I that religion has nothing to do with one’s politics, or his/her government, it is often thought to reflect these attributes. It’s important that Christian, Jewish, and Muslim civilization is part of the same, but the discourse that is used on all sides perpetuates conflict and often marginalizes serious dialogue–this is politics.
It is difficult to think of two groups in history that hated each other more than Catholics and Protestants, but they stopped killing each other over time and now they recognize each other as Christians. (Although, John Locke failed to mention that the Jews should be recognized as sharing the same monotheistic tradition.) But serious historical reflection and dialogue are missing, or there is something missing within these dialogues and reflections.