Poland Struggles With The Reality Of Genocide: It Emerges From Resentment Of Diversity

Although the scientists tell you not to rely on anecdotal data, there is a certain role for stories. These show us the arc of events from distant causes through results and then aftermath. Often they are symbolic, meaning that we can derive a great deal of understanding from seeing one event this way. In fact, history and literature are based on that notion.

This week, Poland is struggling to come to terms with genocide. Specifically, it is trying to accept its own role not as a government, but as a people, in murdering Jews. The most shocking and also most revealing story about this is from a little village that developed its own final solution in a story that could come straight from Hollywood:

By the time the sun set on July 10, 1941, all 1,600 of Jedwabne’s Jews had been killed — shot, bludgeoned, knifed, and drowned, some tortured first — the last 340 of them locked in a barn and burned alive. Similar horrors occurred in other nearby villages, not by German occupiers, although certainly with their approval.

Driving all of the town’s Jews into a barn and burning it seems to be a trope that appears multiple times. It probably reflects how one would deal with a plague of zombies, rats, or alien attackers. It enables a straight clean-up in a symbolic way, since fire is associated with permanence and cleansing. It slams shut one chapter of history and opens another.

This shows us the nature of genocide. It is not caused solely by government action; rather, it arises from resentment. Whether right or wrong, Poles perceived Jews to be associated with nepotism, organized crime, and Communism. That would be consistent with the immigrant group working toward its own supremacy, which is what always happens with diversity.

Diversity naturally causes genocide because each ethnic/religious group acts in its own interests only. This means that it seeks to dominate other before it can be dominated. That in turn causes friction, especially as smaller groups engage in passive aggressive activity because they do not have the numbers for outright conflict. Majority versus minority results.

In the case of Europe, the tragedy of the Holocaust came about because everyone was too oblivious to note that diversity is paradoxical and will result in a massive conflict at some point. Thinking themselves clever, they denied the association between Jews and Communism (quoting (this source), itself associated with organized crime, but the ordinary people did not, and when given an excuse, took their revenge.

In 1934, according to published statistics, 38.5 percent of those holding the most senior posts in the Soviet security apparatuses were of Jewish origin. They too, of course, were gradually eliminated in the next purges. In a fascinating lecture at a Tel Aviv University convention this week, Dr. Halfin described the waves of soviet terror as a “carnival of mass murder,” “fantasy of purges”, and “essianism of evil.” Turns out that Jews too, when they become captivated by messianic ideology, can become great murderers, among the greatest known by modern history.

As those who seek to avoid genocide ever again, our focus targets avoiding the pattern of events that sets up the conditions for genocide more than vainly crusading against genocide itself, like trying to ban any other human impulse. When the conditions are right, genocide appears like fire in a locked room, and humans shrug and seem helpless to stop it, although they easily could have stopped its genesis.

Anti-Diversity Means No More Ethnic Conflict

The Jersusalem Post opines that racial animosity arises from conflicting interests even in neutral, pacifistic, diversity-worshiping America:

Though US President Donald Trump is a philosemite and has proven to be a major ally of Israel, many of the issues that he has advanced – anti-immigration, America First, anti-globalism – are shared by blatantly antisemitic conservative politicians. Indeed, a number of political pundits have noted that, leaving aside Patrick Buchanan’s anti-Israel and antisemitic rhetoric, there are remarkable similarities between Trump’s campaign and the issues championed by Buchanan during his unsuccessful 1992 and 1996 presidential campaigns.

As a result, the supporters of men like Buchanan have shown thrown their support behind Trump and have been emboldened by Trump’s victory. Because Trump is dependent on this constituency for its support, he cannot easily disassociate himself from them or openly criticize them.

The tragedy here is that ethnic interests conflict: the Western European substrate of America wants to have its own nation, and the Jewish people surely need theirs. While Donald Trump is not anti-Semitic, he recognizes the primal rule of nations. One ethnic group defines one nation. Only when two or more overlap do we see the horrors of racial resentment, pogroms, Holocausts and other outward signs of ethnic conflict.