During the beginning ceremony of the Frankfurt book fair, my speech was interrupted twice by Uwe Becker, Antisemitismusbeauftragtera (a proxy for anti-Semitism—among others) of the German Land of Hessen, and shortly afterwards triggered an full avalanche of attacks on me. Why?
Let's start with the facts. I initially wrote a completely different text, but a day or 2 after the Hamas attack was contacted by Juergen Boos, president of the Frankfurt fair, and asked me to mention the war in the speech. It was most likely expected that I would join the choir of unconditional support for what the Israeli State is doing. I sent the fresh text to the Slovenian organizers in advance, as well as to Frankfurt (including Boos himself), after which I was suggested to change any of the wordings (as I did). So there was no surprise in my speech: the curious people had already learned about my own.
So why these attacks on me? It took me any time to realize this: the attacks occurred not due to the fact that my words were besides extreme, but due to the fact that they were balanced and moderate. It was feared that specified an approach could tempt those who oscillate around full support for Israel to besides see Palestinian suffering.
How the war in Gaza divides the left and polarizes Western democracies
It is easy to brand individual who chants “Death to Israel!” It is much harder to do the same with individual who unconditionally condemns the attack of Hamas and at the same time pays attention to its context. My critics were besides alarmed by the fact that I quoted (in a affirmative light) only judaic figures: Moshe Dajan, Simon Wiesenthal or Mark Edelman.
I besides got quite a few messages from the Palestinians in the West Bank. They are angry at me for not saying openly what they expected: that the Palestinians in the West Bank do not just gotta play the function of victims, but they besides have the right to anger.
My own anger is directed at this point alternatively to people like Uwe Becker who, on behalf of Germany, prosecute the most disgusting possible strategy: those who have committed the Holocaust are trying to wash their own faults distant in specified a way that they support the injustice Israel is doing to another congregation.
But let us return to my speech – this is the typical reaction that could be found in the media:
"The popular Slovenian philosopher and culture critic Slavoj Žižek sparked scandal during the beginning ceremony. Žižek criticised the terrorist attack committed by the Palestinian muslim Hamas movement against Israel and stressed the request to “listen to Palestinians and take account of their history”.’
First (as is frequently the case today) the words quoted in quotes are not a quote from my speech, although as specified they were presented. Secondly, yes, there was a scandal, but did I truly origin it? Wasn't it a real scandal how my speech was interrupted twice, the second time the intruder approached me on stage? And for what, exactly? Only for saying the apparent that we can read in newspapers all day: that there is no solution to the mediate East crisis without solving the problem of Palestinians being suspended in vacuum.
To realize the desperation of the Palestinians of the West Bank, it is adequate to callback a wave of individual suicide attacks, mainly on the streets of Jerusalem, which occurred about 10 years ago: a common Palestinian approached a Jew, pulled out a knife and stabbed him, knowing he would be immediately killed by another passersby. In condemning these attacks, I must see that there was no message in them. The attackers did not shout "Free Palestine!", no large organization (even the Israeli authorities claimed otherwise), these attacks did not constitute any large political task – they were just an expression of pure desperation.
While I was going to Jerusalem at the time, my judaic friends warned me of danger, telling me that if I realized that something like this was going to happen, I should shout aloud, “I am not a Jew!” I remember very clearly that I felt profoundly ashamed of it and that I had no thought what I would truly do in specified a situation.
Calling for pity for Gaza is anti-Semitism, or communicative of the war in the United States
The main candidate for stupidity of the year is, in my opinion, the title of the last article published in Die Zeit magazine: Hamas' evil has no context. The importance of this title becomes clear thanks to the message I heard at all turn erstwhile I was in Frankfurt: “There are no 2 sides here. There is only 1 side." 1 of the panel participants even stated that she hates the word "aber" (but) – but is not "but" a polite way of expressing disagreement in dialogue? “I realize and respect your position, but...”
Context analysis does not mean seeking excuses or justifications. Many analyses of the Nazi investigation process have been written, and in no way do they justify Hitler – they only describe the confusion Hitler utilized to take over. Hitler did not appear in vacuum: in the 1920s and 1930s, he proposed anti-Semitism as a communicative explaining the problems experienced by average Germany, specified as unemployment, demoralization or social unrest. According to Hitler, “The Jew” was behind all this, and this “Jewish conspiracy” explained all the problems.
Does not hatred of multiculturalism and threats of immigrants work in the same way today? unusual things happen in the world, there are financial disasters that affect our regular lives, but we experience them as something completely opaque. But the criticism of multiculturalism introduces a false sense of clarity: aha, it is strangers who are destroying our way of life!
Returning to my speech – the only comparison I made in it was a unusual similarity between Hamas and the extremist attitude of Netanyahu's last government. Here's a quote:
"Ismail Hanija, Hamas leader who lives comfortably in Dubai, said on the day of the attack: "We have only 1 thing to tell you – get out of our land. We never want to see you again [...] This land is ours, Al-Quds [Jerusalem] is ours, everything [here] is ours. [...] There is no safe place for you.” These words are unambiguous and disgusting – but did not the Israeli government say something similar, though not in specified a brutal form?
Here is the first of the authoritative “basic principles” of the current Israeli government: “The judaic people have exclusive and inalienable rights to all parts of the land of Israel. The government will advance and make settlements in all parts of the land of Israel – Galilee, Negev, Golan hills and Judea and Samaria”. Or, as Netanjahu stated, “Israel is not a state of all its citizens” but “a national state of the Jews—and only of them”. Doesn't this regulation rule regulation out any serious negotiation? Palestinians are treated exclusively as a problem, and the State of Israel gives them no hope. [...] Behind the quarrels about “who is the greater terrorist” lies a heavy, dark cloud of masses of Palestinian Arabs who have been kept suspended for decades and exposed to regular harassment by settlers and the Israeli state. [...] possibly the first thing to do is to see the tremendous desperation and confusion that can produce acts of evil, and give a clear expression of it. In short, there will be no peace in the mediate East without solving the Palestinian problem."
Strong, colonizing Israel as a denial of a weak hebrew from the ghetto
I was criticized for missing the key fact: the difference between the words of the Israeli government and the words of the Hamas leader is not just about form, but besides about the content: Israel does not request (and does not allow) mass killing of Palestinians. I answer: it is true, but while Hamas and his allies postulate the expulsion of Jews from the land of Israel, Israel now de facto does so with the Palestinians of the West Bank, gradually but inevitably depriving them of their land.
Even the United States expressed concern about the attacks of West Bank settlers on Palestinians. Secretary of State Antony Blinken “speaked concerns” about this substance and, of course, heard A solemn assurance that Israel will look into this. What's it gonna look like with Itamar Ben-Gewir as national safety minister, you don't know. Ben-Gewir declared on 7 October 2023 that his ministry was buying 10,000 rifles to arm civilian defence troops, and it was in those cities that lie close the borders of Israel, as well as in cities with mixed Jewish-Arabic population and settlements in the West Bank.
As far as I know, no 1 has yet attempted to refute the facts I referred to in my speech. The main counterargument was that this minute (when Jews are dying heavily) is not appropriate for making wider analyses. I could not believe my ears erstwhile I heard it – due to the fact that 10 days after the Hamas attack, much more Palestinians died than Jews.
But why did I miss the horror scene in Gaza? Let's remember the last lines Operas for 3 cents Brechta: “Denn die einen sind im Dunkeln / Und die andern sind im Licht. / Und man sieht nur die im Lichte / Die im Dunkeln sieht man nicht” (For any are in darkness and others are in light. You can see only those in the light, and those in the darkness you can't see). This description fits perfectly with the current situation (maybe better than ever) in the era of supposedly modern media: erstwhile the main media were full of reports from the front in Ukraine, the world's most bloody wars were not reported. Now that the attention of journalists has been drawn to the mediate East, it is hard not to announcement that the Jupiters are almost exclusively directed at Gaza, alternatively than the West Bank, where there is simply a gradual "ethnic cleansing" of the Palestinian population. I can only sign The words Judith Butler:
"From systematic land takeovers, regular bombings, out-of-court arrests, military checkpoints and forced separation of families to executions of elected persons – all this makes Palestinians forced to live in a state of death, both abrupt and violent."
After the creation of the fresh Netanjah government, this multidimensional force grew almost geometrically – from direct killings by settlers to bureaucratic and administrative measures. There are dozens of video recordings, but I will only describe one, at least not denoting the top strength of violence, but at least the most depressing for me. movie presents the settler..who plagues a group of Palestinian farmers working on their land. He humiliates them and throws names at them, claiming that this land does not belong to them. He spreads their sacks of grain, and he is provocatively facing any Palestinians, exclaiming: “Why don’t you hit me? Aren't you a man?’ All of this happens at the silent presence of respective Israeli soldiers who stand by and do nothing. Can we imagine what would happen if a Palestinian farmer behaved this way toward a group of judaic settlers?
But much worse things are happening. For example, settlement groups send messages to Palestinian farms, informing residents to leave the home within 24 hours. If the Palestinians do not decision out at this time, settlers usually truly come to beat and even kill the Palestinian family. Here is 1 case: 2 Palestinians died after Israeli settlers opened fire for a ceremony tour close the town of Kusra on the West Bank south of Nablus. "The ambulances carried the bodies of 4 Palestinians shot the day before, according to reports besides by Israeli settlers, erstwhile settlers appeared and tried to halt the ceremony procession. 1 of the ambulance drivers told the paper “Haaretz” that “the settlers had already waited there. They blocked the gate and started shooting at us and another people who came to the funeral” — wrote "The Times of Israel".
Official response? "Israel's armed forces study that, following clashes between settlers and Palestinians in the village where the ceremony was to take place, Palestinian fatalities have been reported and that this incidental is being investigated". A lone incident? "Last year there were repeated incidents in which young settlers attacked villages, resulting in respective Palestinians being killed, respective twelve injured and valuable property being destroyed. Assaulters seldom get arrested after attacks, let alone brought to justice for their actions." If it's not a form of terror, nothing is.
As long as traditional, secular, Zionist colonist ideology prevailed, the state (not very much) treated its judaic citizens discreetly in a privileged manner compared to Palestinians. However, the same state has put large effort into maintaining the appearance of neutral regulation of law – from time to time it has condemned Zionist extremists for crimes against Palestinians, limited the formation of fresh illegal settlements in the West Bank and so on. The main institution playing this function was the ultimate Court – no wonder that the Netanjah government formed in 2022 began pushing judicial reformwhich deprives the ultimate Court of its autonomy.
Mass protests against the improvement of the judiciary are the last cry of secular Zionism: under Netanyahu anti-Palestinian force (pogrom in Huwara, attacks on the Carmelite monastery barefoot Stella Maris in Haifa, etc.) is no longer formally condemned by the state. The change best shows Ben-Gevir's fate. Before entering politics, it was known that on the wall in his surviving area there was a image of Baruch Goldstein, an Israeli-American terrorist, who in 1994 in Hebron shot up the praying Palestinian Muslims, killing 29 people and injuring 125 (the event was later called a massacre in the Patriarch Cave). This man, Ben-Gevir, condemned by Israel itself as a racist, is present a national safety minister to uphold the regulation of law. The State of Israel, which likes to introduce itself as “the only democracy in the mediate East”, de facto re-entered “Theocratic halochemical state (equivalent to Sharia law)’.
The “free courts” battalion in Israel enters a fresh phase. It's a sign of chaos in the region.
Direct evidence? During the tv discussion on August 25, 2023, Minister Ben-Gewir said: “My right, the right of my wife and my children to decision freely along the roads of Judea and Samaria [on the West Bank – ed.] is more crucial than the law of the Arabs.” Later, addressing Mohammad Magadle, the only arabian invited to the studio, Ben-Gewir said, “Sorry, Mohammad, but this is reality.” And he was right – that is actually the reality on the West Bank. In short, Palestinian force is no longer even formally condemned by the state. No wonder UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres He said 24 October 2023 at the safety Council meeting:
"It is besides crucial to point out that Hamas attacks did not happen in vacuum. The Palestinian people have been subjected to a stifling business for 26 years. [Palestines] look at the gradual absorption of their land by settlements, the plague of violence, the inhibition of the growth of their economy, the displacement of their people and the demolition of their homes. Their hopes for a political solution to misery are melting away. But the harm to the Palestinian people cannot justify the disgusting attacks committed by Hamas. And these repulsive attacks cannot justify collective punishment of the Palestinian people."
These words brought the expected consequence – not only violent criticism and threats of ‘teaching the UN’, but even call to Guterres' immediate resignation: "The UN Secretary-General has shown his actual face and demonstrated to the full planet that he is prejudiced and conflicted, and that he is the incorrect man to lead the United Nations in this tense period of the past of our world." The cynicism of this reaction takes breath away: “People of Israel (Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druz and Bedouins) experienced a powerful terrorist attack.” While the Israeli government is now openly treating non-Jews as second-class citizens, abruptly all these groups are collectively treated as victims of Hamas.
In order to find a way out of this situation, we request to start by admitting that we are dealing with a real tragedy: there is no clear, simple solution another than those recommended by Ben-Gewir and Hamas, or the annihilation of the another side. My condemnation of the Hamas attack is clear and unambiguous. How can I be accused of supporting Hamas force erstwhile even alone The title of my interview in ‘Die Zeit’, read: Die Hamas must vernichtet werden (Hamas must be destroyed)? It is truly terrible that the area east of Gaza, ravaged by Hamas in a murderous frenzy, was inhabited mainly by Jews who were supporters of peaceful coexistence with the Palestinians. any of them even took care of helping people in Gaza.
Žižek: Hamas and hard-headed Israelis – 2 sides of the same medal
It is not a good place to analyse the dark beginnings of Hamas, which, according to many sources, was initially supported by Israel to divide the Palestinians into 2 camps—a more secular Palestine Liberation Organization and muslim extremist Hamas. "For most of the time, Israel's policy has been to treat the Palestinian Authority's authorities as a burden, and Hamas as an asset that can be utilized operationally," said the utmost right-wing parliamentarian Becall Smotricz, present Minister of Finance in 2015 Netanjah's hardheaded government and leader of the spiritual organization Zionism.
According to many reports, the same thesis was formulated in early 2019 by Netanyahu himself during a gathering of the Likud party. He was going to saythat "those who are opponents of the Palestinian State should support the transfer of funds to Gaza, since maintaining separation between the Palestinian Authority authorities in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza will prevent specified a country from forming". In another words, Israel made the same mistake as the Americans in Afghanistan, supporting extremist Islamists in kind Bin Laden Osamas to defeat the Soviet-backed authorities with their hands.
Juwal Harari is right. emphasisesThat the main intent of the Hamas attack was not to kill the Jews, but to strike out in the foreseeable future any chances of peace. This war Hamas began to become eternal. Harari rightly adds that Israel should avoid the trap set by Hamas due to the fact that “in the future peace will come, provided that the Palestinians can live decently in their homeland.”
It is worth highlighting these second words – “in your country”. Harari accepts that the land occupied by Israel is besides a Palestinian homeland. Consciously simplifying: Israel should treat Palestinian citizens as its own citizens. To the disappointment of many of my “left” critics I agree with the main thesis of the letter signed by Harari and David Grossman, among others, whose authors write“ There is no contradiction between the firm opposition to the Israeli business of Palestine and the subjection of its citizens and the unequivocal condemnation of violent acts of force against innocent civilians. Indeed, all individual with coherent leftist views must share both of these demands at the same time."
That is precisely what I said in my speech: “You should go to the end in both directions, both in the defence of Palestinian rights and in the fight against anti-Semitism. These are 2 elements of the same fight [...] Those who see in my attitude of any expected contradiction endure from full moral confusion.”
On the wall of my hometown, Ljubljana, I erstwhile saw the inscription, “If I were a Palestinian from the West Bank, I would deny the existence of the Holocaust too.” specified logic should be avoided at all costs, for example, due to the fact that it is simply a reproduction of the Zionist argument: “The Holocaust survivor has the right to ignore the insignificant injustices that the Israeli State commits against the Palestinians.”
One of the disastrous effects of the war in the mediate East is besides the blurring of any key differences: Israel's supporters in the West (especially in the US) present Ukraine's defence against Russian aggression and Israel's defence against Hamas as 2 elements of the same global war, putting a sign of equality between Israel and Ukraine. On the opposite, pseudo-left side, there are claims that both attacks (Russia and Hamas) are legitimate defensive mechanisms that broke out in the face of long past of persecution – in short, Donetsk is simply a Russian West Bank.
Why Ukrainians (and their allies) Should Support Palestinians
Why do I compose “pseudolevic”? Because, for an old Marxist tradition, I say that the left cannot be structurally anti-Semitic, due to the fact that it knows that anti-Semitism is based on a basic ideological operation: the transfer of interior social antagonisms to individual from outside, who should be annihilated to solve these interior problems. For the same reason, populists frequently go to anti-Semitism: populism does not question antagonism in the basic social order, but only focuses on “corruption” and akin issues.
I am perfectly aware that there are no uncertainty anti-Semitic tendencies in the modern left, but it is simply a credible signal that something with this left is very incorrect – and 1 can say the same about all left-wings, from Stalin to Hugo Chávez (whose anti-Semitism was advised by no 1 another than Fidel Castro). In the first years after the October Revolution, the most crucial political positions were taken by many Jews, which changed after Stalin came to power. The same can be said of modern leftist people who shout anti-Semitic slogans. So let's go back to my last speech. Here is another typical press study on him:
" Frankfurt mayor Mike Josef called Žižek's speech disturbing. “Freedom of speech and culture of debate are important. But erstwhile Žižek quoted SSman Rainhard Heydrich, he crossed the line of provocation," Josef says. The deputy mayor of Narges Eskandari-Grünberg was peculiarly moved by the fact that in her speech Slavoj Žižek linked Hamas' current panic to the unresolved Palestinian conflict, thus relativizing it. »This relativisation is untasteful and unacceptable. Nothing can justify terror.”
To the bare eye, this second approach is ridiculously ridiculous: of course there is simply a link between the Hamas attack and the unresolved position of Palestinians in the occupied territories. Hamas took advantage of Palestinian misery just as Hitler took advantage of the discontent of the average Germans during the crisis after planet War I. As for the first direction of criticism (quoting Heydrich is crossing the boundaries of provocation), I reply: yes, my speech was interrupted again erstwhile I mentioned Reinhard Heydrich, but the insinuation that I put Heydrich in 1 line with Israel is completely missed.
Then why did I mention him? I did this to evoke a line of reasoning that I developed in my books and another speeches (also in Tel Aviv, where they were accepted without problems). Something unusual is emerging present – something that already existed. On 1 side Trump recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and on the another hand, any of his supporters (for example in the arrogant Boys movement) are anti-semites. But is that truly a contradiction?
When Trump signed a controversial presidential decree on anti-Semitism, John Hagee, the founder and president of Christian-Zionist organization Christians United for Israel, was present. In addition to conventional statements in the Christian-conservative spirit, Hagee expressed views that sounded very anti-Semitic: he accused the Jews of bringing the Holocaust upon themselves; he claimed that Hitler's persecution was a "divine plan" to bring the Jews into the creation of the modern state of Israel; he said that liberal Jews were "poisoned" and "spiritually blinded"; he admitted that the preemptive atomic attack on Iran, supported by him, would lead to the death of most Jews in Israel.
Is this “support” for Israel? Israel should approach specified allies with large distrust.
Trump to Palestinians: Be careful, it can get even worse
Let's remember. Anders Breivik, hateful of Norwegian immigrants liable for the massacre: Breivik has anti-Semitic but pro-Israeli views, as he considers the State of Israel to be the first line of defence against Muslim expansion. He even wanted to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, but he wrote in his manifesto: “There is no judaic issue in Western Europe (except in large Britain and France) due to the fact that we have only 1 million Jews in Western Europe, of which 800,000 live in France and large Britain. But in the US, where there are over 6 million Jews (600 percent more than in Europe), there is simply a crucial judaic problem." In the form of Breivik is realized in the most developed form the Zionist-antisemite paradox. However, we find traces of specified a unusual attitude more frequently than expected. Sam Reinhardt Heydrich, the creator of the Holocaust concept, wrote in 1935:
“We must divide the Jews into 2 categories: Zionists and supporters of assimilation. Zionists preach strictly racial concepts and by emigrating to Palestine aid build their own judaic State [...] We send them the best wishes of good luck and officially assure them of our goodwill.”
That's the Zionist anti-Semitism of the purest water! Has that attitude gone back to the past? Here's the thing. said any rabbis teaching in an elite state-funded academy, where many future military officers are educated:
“With God’s help, slavery will return. Non-Jews want to be our slaves. Being a Jew's slave is best. They must be slaves. They want to be slaves. alternatively of wandering around the streets and getting into trouble, hurting each another – now life begins for him. People around us have genetic problems. Ask the average arabian who he wants to be. He wants to be under our occupation. [...] They don't know how to manage the country or anything. [...] Yes, we are racists. We believe in racism. Breeds have genetic features. So we request to think about how to aid them [...] The Holocaust wasn't about killing Jews. It was systematic and ideological, which made it more than random murder. Humanism, secular culture – this is the Holocaust. The real Holocaust is pluralism. To believe in a man – this is the Holocaust. [...] The logic of the Nazis was internally consistent. Hitler said that 1 of the groups in society is the origin of all the evil in the planet and so must be exterminated [...] For years God has been shouting that the diaspora is over, but the Jews do not perceive to him. This is their illness that the Holocaust must cure [...] Hitler was the most righteous. Of course, he was right about all word he said. His ideology was right [...] Their [Nazis] only mistake was who was on their side” (channel 13 of Israeli television, April 19, 2019).
Žižek: What lies behind the far right policy of the Israeli Government
Although this utmost attitude is presented openly by only a very tiny number (it is worth noting that Netanyahu visited the academy, as the cameras have registered), the same fundamental assumptions which form the basis of what the Israeli state is now doing in the West Bank are set out in the foreground.
But is it not a laughing exaggeration to compare the present events in Israel with Nazism? Here we see the actual ethical size of Jews. If specified a comparison is made by a non-Jew, it is immediately rejected as an anti-Semite – and I share this reaction. I think that those who are not Jews themselves have no right to do so. But what if specified an reflection comes from crucial judaic figures? What if 1 of the highest erstwhile commanders of the Israeli armed forces says that the Israeli army is active in war crimes in the West Bank in a trial that resembles fascist Germany?
Speaking to Israeli public broadcaster Kan about the situation in the West Bank of Amiram Levin, a retired general, erstwhile chief of the North Command of the Israeli Army and deputy chief of the military intelligence agency, or Mossad, said that “there has been no democracy there for 57 years, is simply a full apartheid. Israel's armed forces, which are forced to impose their power there, are rotten from the inside. They stand by, look at settlers causing riots and begin to be partners in war crimes.”
When asked for circumstantial "processes", Levin reached for the example of fascist Germany. "It's hard to tell, but it's the truth. Take a walk under Hebron, take a look around the streets. Streets where Arabs no longer have the right to walk, only Jews. This is what happened there, in this dark country." As long as there are Israelis like Amiram Levin, there is hope. Only their solidarity and support give the Palestinians of the West Bank a chance. But the moral of it all is sad. In 1 of the memorable passages of the book Live on Ruth Klüger describes a conversation with a group of “advanced doctors” in Germany.
"One of them said that in Jerusalem he met an old Hungarian hebrew who survived the Holocaust, but this man cursed the Arabs and despised them all. How can individual who left Auschwitz say that? – asked Germany. I entered my function and began to discuss, possibly more passionately than I had to. What did he expect? Auschwitz was not an educational institution... Nothing was taught there, at least not about human attitude and tolerance. Absolutely nothing good came out of concentration camps – I heard my own raised voice – and he expects catharsis, cleansing, something like that, for which 1 goes to the theatre? The camps were the most useless, pointless institutions you could imagine."
The utmost horror of the Auschwitz camp did not transform it into a place where surviving victims underwent purification and became ethical, unself-serving entities. On the contrary, the horror of Auschwitz was partially about the fact that the camp besides dehumanized many of its victims, changing them into brutal, insensitive survivors, incapable to make balanced or ethical judgments. The moral we must draw from this is one more time very sad: we must abandon the thought that in utmost experiences there is something emancipative that allows us to get free of all the mess and open our eyes to the highest fact about the situation.
Is it possible that a “progressive” state is committing genocide?
For the same reasons, I think that the full debate under the slogan "Holocaust vs. colonialism – what was worse?", which broke out a fewer years ago in Germany. The Holocaust was 1 of a kind, a frightening mega crime; colonialism caused an unimaginable magnitude of death and suffering. The only correct approach to both of these nightmares is to see the fight against anti-Semitism and colonialism as 2 aspects of the same struggles.
Those who disregard colonialism as a lesser evil insult the victims of the Holocaust themselves due to the fact that they reduce the unheard horror to the function of leverage in geopolitical games. Those who relativize the uniqueness of the Holocaust insult the victims of colonialism. The Holocaust is not 1 of a full series of crimes. It was unique in its own way, just as modern colonialism was a unique, breathtaking nightmare committed in the name of “civilization: others. These are all incomparable horrors which cannot and must not be reduced to examples that can be compared – each of them is in a sense absolute evil.
**
From English he translated Maciej Domagała.
