The Holocaust
Status
The Holocaust
When we speak about the Holocaust today, powerful and horrific images come to mind. We are reminded of the horrors which Jews and other persecuted groups faced: forced labor, starvation, humiliation, and torture which often resulted in death. We see the systematic effort to wipe out an entire population from the face of the earth. We see everyday people turning their backs on neighbors and friends in their plea for help. And we see the collective spirit of the world ignoring these atrocities and denying any responsibility for their outcome.
The Holocaust and Modern Genocide
In a speech about the Holocaust and the atrocities of Bosnia, Rabbi David Saperstein said the following, "The Holocaust is used as the ultimate benchmark for our generation of the worst atrocity ever committed against one group of people. This comparison offers us a basis of measurement, a level of brutality, that may in fact provide an impetus for action. The consequence of using Holocaust imagery in the case of Bosnia is quite significant. If the Serbs or anybody else are indeed guilty of committing "Nazi-style" atrocities in Bosnia, then the West has the supreme moral justification to intervene, which it has done. When questions are raised, as they are now, whether the U.S. should remain as a peacekeeping/military force in Bosnia, memories of what the U.S. and other western nations did not do for the Jews of Europe come flooding back."
This (that the world stood silent while atrocities were committed) is the true lesson from the Holocaust that can be used as a comparison device to contemporary issues. This is the reason that the Reform Jewish community supported U.S. involvement in Kosovo. The Holocaust has taught us the price we pay when we stand idle.
The Holocaust as a Comparitive Device: The Holocaust and Abortion
In a July 7, 1999 Press Release entitled "New European 'Black Death' Now Comes in Pill Form," Robert Sassone of the World Life League outrageously compared a newly available prescription medicine (RU486) with the Holocaust. In a press statement, Rabbi David Saperstein declared, "Comparing the difficult personal decision of a woman whether to terminate an individual pregnancy to the Nazi government's systematic extermination of six million Jews is an insult, both to the memory of those who perished and to the women who must wrestle with their conscience in making a deeply personal decision."
In order to truly understand this comparison, let's consider how abortion was treated in Nazi Germany. By some yard-sticks, Adolph Hitler might have been labeled as "pro-life". He was outspoken in his opposition to abortion for German women, seeing them simply as the breeders for the Aryan master race he envisioned. While abortion had been widespread in Germany prior to the rise of Nazism, Hitler issued a law which made the act of helping in an abortion a penal offense.
After promising in Mein Kampf to "to do away with the idea that what one does with one's own body is each individual's business," Hitler campaigned for an increased birth rate among German citizens, offering government loans to newlyweds, with abatements for each child produced. By also discrediting birth control and closing clinics which had dispensed contraceptives themselves, the Nazis succeeded in raising the German birth rate by 18% in 1934, with even greater gains in subsequent years.
However, Hitler's "pro-life" attitude did not extend to non-Aryan peoples, nor to Aryans deemed to be less useful in German society. He began his eugenics campaign by having the "imperfect" elements of German society-the mentally and physically handicapped-forcibly sterilized. As documented in the Nuremberg trials, high ranking officials of the RuSHA (a NAZI group of medical officials) initiated a program which required "racial extermination" of pregnant women and suspected fathers to determine the "racial characteristics" of the offspring. In cases where the offspring was not "racially valuable", an abortion was ordered by the SS high-command.
How could a government justify two divergent policies on abortion? How is it that abortion could be prohibited for some and mandated for others? The answer is, sadly, quite simple. The government was not required to explain: the citizens of Germany allowed themselves to become the tool of Hitler's will. The people abrogated their rights and responsibilities as individual moral decision-makers and allowed their own choices to be supplanted with those of the Fuhrer. With this information, can the freedom of choice over abortion in the United States be blindly compared with the Holocaust of World War II. The answer is simply no.
For more information on reproductive rights and related issues, go to the RAC Reproductive Rights issue page.
Reparations
Reparations and restitution for the victims of the Holocaust and their heirs are, after decades of delay, being addressed in a variety of forums today.
Fifty years after the Holocaust, world Jewry finally finds itself legally able to find financial restitution. In 1933, Jewish assets were confiscated, art collections were looted, and bank accounts were seized under Hitler's Nazi regime. In recent years, the truth has come to light over issues of Nazi gold, Swiss Bank accounts, stolen artworks and Italian insurance indemnities, among others. In addition, class action lawsuits have been filed against the Swiss Banks, against Germany for forced "slave labor," as well as against major corporations (including Deutsche Bank, DaimlerChrysler, and Volkswagen).
After the horror of World War II, Germany developed a plan of restitution to those German Jews whose property and assets were confiscated during the Holocaust. According to Dr. Gilbert Kahn, almost $60 billion has been transferred to survivors. Israel was named the beneficiary of national restitution because it was the refuge for so many victims and survivors. To date, goods and services from the German government to Israel total over $1.6 billion.
Some survivors and their heirs fear that the focus on financial restitution will obscure the much larger atrocities of the Holocaust. At the same time, anti-Semites voice the opinion that the Jewish community is emphasizing the Holocaust and Holocaust education purely for the sake of the money.
In the most recent court settlement, German companies offered $3.3 billion as compensation to Nazi-era slave laborers. According to U.S. Treasury Deputy Secretary Stuart Eizenstat, "the German offer was substantially less than that sought by representatives of surviving victims." The majority of the funds would go to current residents of Central and Eastern Europe who have benefited little from past or existing German compensation programs.
Swiss Banks
At the end of World War II, as the Nazi government realized its eventual demise, the Hitler regime put stolen money from German Jews into Swiss banks in an attempt to hide the funds from the rest of the world. For years, the Swiss government denied the existence of the funds. In 1997, after pressure from both the United States and Israel, the Swiss government created a government-funded task force to study the possibility of stolen funds.
In October 1996, a class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The claim alleged that a number of Swiss banks and Swiss companies profited from the Nazi persecution of Jews, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, and physically or mentally disabled individuals.
In January, 1999, the Swiss banking community reached a final settlement with the attorneys working on behalf of Holocaust survivors, their heirs, and the World Jewish restitution Organization. This unprecedented agreement will allow Holocaust survivors and their heirs to receive some degree of financial restitution for the suffering and injustice they endured.
The Swiss banks have set up a $1.25 billion fund. Victims of Nazi persecution and their heirs worldwide may be eligible to receive compensation if they:
- had deposits in Swiss banks before 1945; or,
- had assets looted by the Nazi regime; or,
- were forced by the nazi regime to perform slave labor; or,
- unsuccessfully sought refuge in Switzerland to avoid Nazi persecution, or wee mistreated as a refugee in Switzerland.
The deadline for applications passed on October 22, 1999.
The Vatican, The Catholic Church, and the Holocaust
On March 16, 1998, after eleven years of study, the Vatican released its long-awaited response to the Holocaust: We Remember: A Reflection on the Shoah. Cardinal Edward Idris Cassidy, head of the Church's Commission, wrote the response for Religious Relations with the Jews. The statement is presented as a form of teshuva — repentance — for injustices inflicted upon Jews by Christians throughout history and, specifically, during the Holocaust. Since the document's release numerous Catholic leaders, from France, Germany, Poland, Hungry, Holland, Switzerland, Lithuania, and America have made statements apologizing for the sins committed by officials or members of the Catholic Church.
In March 2000, the Pope's visit to Israel was the culmination of his effort to build durable relations between Israel and the Vatican. In 1994, he extended full diplomatic recognition to Israel. His trip, the first official papal visit to Israel, is a historic Christian affirmation of the Jewish right to a sovereign homeland. Prime Minister Ehud Barak emphasized that affirmation as the most important aspect of the week's events. After the Vatican formally announced the Pope's plan to visit Israel, Rabbi Michael Signer, the co-chair of the Commission on Interreligious Affairs issued a statement, welcoming this opportunity "to advance mutual understanding between the Catholic Church and the Jewish and Muslim communities."
In his visit to Jerusalem's Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial, Pope John Paul II paid eloquent homage to the six million Jewish victims of the Nazi genocide. He noted his own memories of the Nazi occupation of his native Poland and of Jewish childhood friends and neighbors who perished in the concentration camps.
During his pilgrimage, the Pope visited the Western Wall and placed a letter in the crevice of the Kotel. The letter was placed on permanent display of the Yad Vashem Memorial. The words of the prayer follows:
God of our fathers, you chose Abraham and his descendants to bring your Name to the Nations: we are deeply saddened by the behavior of those who in the course of history have caused these children of yours to suffer, and asking your forgiveness we wish to commit ourselves to genuine brotherhood with the people of the Covenant.
-Jerusalem, March 26, 2000
On March 23, 2000, during the Joseph Klein Lecture on Judaic Affairs, Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie, President of the Union for Reform Judaism discussed the current status of Catholic-Jewish relations, in a speech entitled "Good News, Bad News: Extraordinary Achievements and Current Tensions in Catholic-Jewish Relations."
Legislative Summary
Holocaust Survivor Tax Relief Act (H.R. 1292)
On April 14, 1999, Senator Daniel Moynihan (D-NY) joined with Senators Peter G. Fitzgerald (R-IL), Charles Schumer (D-NY), and Spencer Abraham (R-MI) in introducing legislation exempting all restitution payments to Holocaust victims and their heirs exempt from federal income tax. Senator Moynihan announced that "the victims of the Holocaust have waited over half a century for these payments. Most of these people are elderly and many of them live in poverty. This legislation — which was first suggested by the Metropolitan New York Coordinating Council on Jewish poverty — is a small but symbolic acknowledgment of the dimension of their suffering." The bill defines a Holocaust victim as "any individual who was persecuted for racial or religious reasons by Nazi Germany or any other Axis regime as a result of the Holocaust." This bill was a proposed amendment to the Taxpayer Refund Act of 1999 (S. 1429) and provisions of it were agreed to in the Senate.
In March, 1999, Representative Jerry Weller (R-IL) introduced a related measure (H.R. 1292). The bill has 19 cosponsors.
Justice for Holocaust Survivors Act (H.R. 271)
A bill to amend title 28 U.S. Code relating to jurisdictional immunities of the Federal Republic of Germany, to grant jurisdiction to the courts of the United States in certain cases involving acts of genocide occurring against certain individuals from World War II in the predecessor states of the Federal Republic of Germany, or in any territories or areas occupied, annexed, or otherwise controlled by those states. Basically this bill allows Holocaust survivors to sue in U.S. courts for reparation from the German government. 92 cosponsors are currently signed on to this bill, including 77 Democrats and 15 Republicans.
