“Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald,” Obama said in Cairo, “which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed – more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today.” Buchenwald was indeed part of the network of concentration camps established by Nazi Germany, both in Germany proper and the occupied territories. And it is indeed true that some Jews were interred at Buchenwald and that many of those that were died there. According to the estimate of the Buchwald Memorial, from 1937 when the camp was established until its liberation in 1945, altogether some 11,000 Jews died at Buchenwald. 11,000. That’s roughly the number of Jews that were killed at Auschwitz in a single week. In total, not 11,000, but over one million Jews are estimated to have been killed at Auschwitz.
What explains the huge discrepancy? What explains it is the fact that while Buchenwald was indeed a concentration camp, it was not one of those camps – like Auschwitz or Treblinka or Belzec – that was specifically devoted to exterminating Jews, as Obama’s remarks mistakenly imply. Some historians grasp this distinction by speaking of “normal” concentration camps, on the one hand, and “death camps,” on the other. This is not to say that hundreds of thousands of inmates did not also die in the “normal” concentration camps. They died from exhaustion, starvation, and disease or as the victims of medical experiments and sometimes they were simply executed. Murder and death were regular features of the “normal” camps. But, nonetheless, killing was not, so to say, their raison d’être. When it was a matter, for instance, of killing Jews interred at Buchenwald en masse, they were as rule shipped to Auschwitz.
Moreover, the majority of the inmates at Buchenwald, like in the other “normal” camps, were not Jewish. The Nazis liked to lock people up and they did so for all sorts of reasons, not only on “racial” grounds. The persons interred at Buchenwald included political prisoners, Jehovah’s Witnesses, “gypsies,” homosexuals, common criminals, and the so-called “asocial.” (The latter category was not precisely defined in Nazi law, but it included, for instance, vagrants and persons who were judged by the authorities to be “work-shy.”) Jews were treated as a subcategory of other categories. (These and other details on Buchenwald are discussed in Eugen Kogon’s classic study of the concentration camp system Der SS-Staat, which is available in English as The Theory and Practice of Hell.)
After the start of the War, foreign prisoners were shipped to Buchenwald from all over German-occupied Europe. They would later be joined by captured Red Army soldiers. The fate reserved for the latter was perhaps the most unequivocal of all: an estimated 8000 Soviet prisoners of war were summarily executed by gunshots to the back of the head. Altogether, again according to the estimate of the Buchenwald Memorial, some 56,000 of Buchenwald’s inmates would perish in the camp.
In short, Buchenwald is a highly fitting symbol of Nazi barbarism: which barbarism, as Buchenwald’s history shows, was by no means reserved for Jews. As a matter of fact, however, Buchenwald was not one of the principal sites of the Holocaust. Why, then, would Obama treat it as such?
Well, let us recall that during last year’s electoral campaign, then candidate Obama said that his “uncle” had helped to liberate “Auschwitz” as an American soldier during WWII. As it turned out, it was not his uncle, but rather a great-uncle and it was not Auschwitz, but rather Buchenwald. And in fact it was not quite Buchenwald either, but rather Ohrdruf: a satellite camp of Buchenwald some sixty kilometers away. By commemorating the Holocaust at Buchenwald, it is as if Obama was trying to make the historical reality conform to his own gaffes and misconceptions.
Analyzing the political purpose of Obama’s Buchenwald visit, Peter Frey of Germany’s ZDF television writes:
In Buchenwald, Obama wants to send a signal to the Jewish community in the USA and to the Israelis: we may be involved at the moment in a political conflict over the [Israeli] settlement policy, but we are well aware of the history of the Jewish people and of the origins of the Israeli state.
But in fact the Buchenwald visit demonstrates precisely the contrary. It shows that Obama knows precious little about the Holocaust and even less about the full scope of Nazi Germany’s crimes.
28 responses so far
1 ottovbvs // Jun 5, 2009 at 7:53 am
Is Mr Rosenthal deranged? According to him the fact that “only” 11,000 Jews were murdered at Buchenwald makes it ineligible for membership of what the President described as”
part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today.
This apparently confirms that the President has “precious little” knowledge of the holocaust. If I may make use of that old Jewish witticism….. when Israel has friends like Rosenthal, who needs enemies.
2 A.B. // Jun 5, 2009 at 7:56 am
It seems perfectly obvious that Buchenwald was chosen in deference to Mr. Wiesel. While it is quite difficult to think of Mr. Rosenthal as a “nabob,” it is possible for all of us to “natter,” from time to time.
3 balconesfault // Jun 5, 2009 at 8:13 am
Clearly, Obama should have geared his speech to deliver the goods to hyperliteralists like Rosenthal, rather than to communicate effectively with his Cairo audience. Thus, the speech should have said:
“Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part – albeit a very minor part – of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Granted, only 11,000 Jews were murdered at Buchenwald, and I’m not visiting Auschwitz or Treblinka or Belzec which were camps which were much more dedicated to the extermination of the Jewish people in Europe – the number of Jews murdered at Buchenwald was only about 1% of the number murdered at Auschwitz, for example – but it still was not a good place. And while I’m mentioning Auschwitz, I’d like to take this opportunity to clarify some misconceptions from some things that I said during the 2008 US Presidential campaign. I had said that my uncle helped liberate Auschwitz … in fact, I slightly misspoke, perhaps because I didn’t remember some of the details he’d told me when I was young correctly, perhaps because he didn’t correctly remember the details – and it was actually Buchenwald that he helped liberate as a part of the great US military, or actually really Ohrdruf, which was a satellite camp for Buchenwald. Oh, also, it was my great uncle, and not my uncle – and I thank you al for the opportunity to clear up that error. But anyhow, back to the point, and given that 11,000 Jews murdered at Buchenwald is a trivial number compared to the much greater numbers murdered at some of these other camps, I think that we can all agree that even 11,000 is a substantial number and that while maybe Buchenwald wasn’t the best choice of a place to commemorate the Holocaust, and I’ll have to check in with my staff as to whether the choice of that site was made by the German Government which is hosting our visit or whether that site was made at our request, since it’s far more critical that I micromanage details like that than focus on larger issues, we still should all remember that the Jews have a legitimate reason to remember the Holocaust. Which really did happen.
4 tdawg11870 // Jun 5, 2009 at 10:43 am
Obama didn’t go to Auschwitz or Treblinka during his trip to Germany because those two concentration camps are in POLAND. If you’re going to be a hyper-literal nitpicker, get your nits in a row before picking.
And seriously, the whole suspicion that Obama has some problem with Jews or Jewish issues is a tired meme from the election that deserves to be buried. Carp all you want about his choice in concentration camps (!!!) but scare tactics about Israel will get the GOP the same fifth or so of the Jewish vote it has had for decades. Time for something new.
5 tarazeigler // Jun 5, 2009 at 10:51 am
Rosenthal cannot be serious. What exactly is Obama’s offense? The author seems to be annoyed that Obama is visiting the “wrong” concentration camp. For real? And, apparently, his great-uncle’s contribution to the freeing of the Jews is lessened by the fact that Obama misspoke. Good Lord.
I agree with A.B. about the likely reason that Buchenwald was chosen. It was a beautiful tribute to both Mr. Wiesel and Obama’s great-uncle.
I often return to the reason New Majority was started. Posts like this fly in the face of that mission. There is plenty to complain about with Mr. Obama. If Republicans waste their time with petty complaints like this, we can be sure that Obama will win public opinion every time. As Ottovbvs said in another thread: “If these folks got any smaller they’d be invisible.” That sums it up for me.
6 krove // Jun 5, 2009 at 11:04 am
This is another stupid nit picking obtuse post from yet another stupid nit picking poster. Get a grip and criticize from a position of reality.
7 Patrick // Jun 5, 2009 at 11:09 am
Good Lord.
If you minced words any finer, you’d be screaming that “OMG! OBAMA USED A ‘C’ INSTEAD OF A ‘K’?!!
Is there not one single intellectually honest Conservative left?
Do you wonder why reasonable people who generally vote Republican are abandoning the GOP?
I’ll give you something to ponder.
Credibility.
Conservatism as a whole, and the Republican party in general, have abdicated intellectual honesty and responsible action in accordance with what was once principled Conservative Ideals.
The right wing has become myopic in the extreme and relativistic in its application of Conservative Principle.
In short, their actions contradict their rhetoric.
While in power, the “conservatives” abandoned any pretense of competent governance, fiscal responsibility, cautious and pragmatic foreign policy, smaller government, rule of law, respect for privacy and very nearly all other principles of Conservatism in favor of cronyism, unrestrained spending, nation-building, government interventional, disrespect for the Rule of Law, panty-sniffing social policy and numerous other tactics designed to expand and retain power.
I am one of the millions of people who quietly supported the GOP through thick and thin, and believed in the Conservative Principles as expressed by Goldwater and Reagan. I vote at every opportunity. I donate money to candidates I support. I have even been known to display bumper stickers and yard signs for candidates I plan to vote for, but Conservatism has been given over to the idiot shouters and shriekers, and they have twisted it into something I no longer recognize.
Conservatism lies in tatters at our feet.
I seriously doubt that you have read this far, and if you have, I seriously doubt that you will respond, because that’s what Conservatism has become – people who won’t listen, won’t engage and won’t address the reality of how their own head-in-the-sand myopia has damaged the Ideals and Principles of Conservatism.
But I would certainly like to see someone of any stature in the media give and honest, principled assessment of the credibility gap – the disconnect between the conservative rhetoric and Republican actions of the past years.
Because for this Conservative, the credibility is non-existent. Until that changes I become less and less interested in the hypocrisy coming from the right wing with each passing day.
Warmest regards
8 Joseph Baugher // Jun 5, 2009 at 11:12 am
Looks like someone flunked English class. Interred means put into the grave. Interned means put into an internment camp. Buchenwald was a concentration camp, mainly for Communist political prisoners and captured Resistance fighters. The mistake that Obama made was saying that Buchenwald was in the network of camps which had a “gas chamber.” Buchenwald was the only major concentration camp which has been determined to have had no gas chamber.
Obama chose Buchenwald to visit because his great uncle had helped to liberate Ohrdruf, one of the sub-camps of Buchenwald. There is nothing left of Ohrdruf, so he couldn’t go there. Buchenwald is in the former country of East Germany, where Angela Merkel grew up and it is also the camp that Elie Wiesel was in when he was liberated. He had survived Auschwitz and had been evacuated to Buchenwald.
9 ottovbvs // Jun 5, 2009 at 11:27 am
Patrick
wrote 5 minutes ago
……I read you all the way through. Every so often Frum has a crazy post up, his blogging of the Obama speech regrettably falls into that category, but this one is a real doozy. You really captured a large part of why Obama is where he is and Republicans are where they are. As I mentioned in another comment for the first time in modern history a majority of college grads and the upper middle classes voted Democratic. These people are not stupid in the main.They have extremely well developed antennae when it comes to bs. And that’s what the GOP is serving these days. This piece by Rosenthal and David’s blog are basically insults to the intelligence as was another conservative line this morning that Obama stayed in Dresden because he was “apologising” for the bombing of Dresden. Leaving aside that the bombing of Dresden was almost entirely a British bomber command production……is there no limit to the elevation of triviality by these people. For the moment apparently not. Noonan was basically right the other day when talking about Sotomayor, these people need to play at being grown up.
10 balconesfault // Jun 5, 2009 at 12:01 pm
“This piece by Rosenthal and David’s blog are basically insults to the intelligence “
Yep.
A key phrase in what Patrick wrote was the term “competent governance”.
It is often said that a clear sign that Republicanism isn’t dying, is the popularity of many Republican governors.
Most of those governors shy from the ideological – and focus on competent governance. Even Rick Perry here in Texas – he of the “secession” comment a couple months back – is smart enough to call for FEMA assistance as soon as a twister blows through, a hurricane hits the coast, a flash flood washes away a small community, or a drought destroys a planting season.
Governance. You make sure that one of the basic reasons people elect governments – along with security – are taken care of.
At the Federal Level, the Republicans have waged a 30 year rhetorical war against competent governance. The purpose was to push a lot of these functions down to the state and local level – but the message that the public has taken away was that this road leads directly to New Orleans.
I think a lot of these carps about Obama – from the oft-repeated “57 state” line to this ludicrous quibble over which concentration camp best symbolizes the Holocaust – are an attempt to play tit-for-tat for the left’s constant mockery of Bush’s tome of linguistic and historical errors.
But if step back – all those attacks on Bush’s mangled rhetoric did little. He still had high support levels – until the conclusion came around that he was incapable of competent governance. And that problem has to be attributed to the fact that Bush loaded his administration with a lot of Heritage Foundation vetted types who fundamentally believed that much of the competent governance that the public expected shouldn’t be a function of the Federal Government.
After 8 years of Bush, the country is looking for competent governance as much as they were after the Carter years … and quibbles like this aren’t going to do anything except provide fodder for the true believers.
11 sinz54 // Jun 5, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Mr. Rosenthal sez: “….Nazi barbarism: which barbarism, as Buchenwalds history shows, was by no means reserved for Jews.”
It’s ironic that Mr. Rosenthal is making this point. The Jews have always maintained (correctly) that they were singled out by the Nazis more than any other ethnic group. And that to say “the Nazis murdered homosexuals, the disabled, gypsies, Slavs, Jews, captured POWs, etc.” was to trivialize the unique genocidal experience that the Jews went through.
Now Mr. Rosenthal wants to reverse the argument and claim it wasn’t primarily reserved for Jews.
Why?
There is much to criticize in Obama’s speech–most notably his awkward straddling of democracy promotion, multiculturalism and Realpolitik, which don’t fit together well.
Instead, New Majority is diverting us to trivialities. In which I’m not interested.
12 The Editrix // Jun 5, 2009 at 1:33 pm
I think the uncle-great-uncle gaffe is rather unremarkable, considering that Obama’s grandparent’s acted in lieu of his parents. However, the “Auschwitz” gaffe is really telling, as is the choice to visit Buchenwald of all concentration camps. Besides, the juxtaposition of Buchenwald and Dresden implies a relativation of the German crimes — and an intended one, for that or at least so I think.
No wonder all of Germany is drooling over that man. After he’d thrown Israel to the lions (or rather the jackals), he laid a wreath at the site of a German concentration camp. Typical hypocrisy to “show solidarity” with Jews — as long as they are safely dead and gone.
13 midcon // Jun 5, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Given the title of this article, I resisted reading it because I knew it was going to be trival. Well, I finally read it and not only is it trivial, but it borders on the bizarre. However, it does point out the sensitivities of many Jewish and Israeli supporters as they go on full alert at the slightest nuanced word or deed that is perceived as having some slight influence on Israel and Jewish interests.
Unfortunately they have yet to understand that it is not all about them. Genocide has and is happening in a lot of places in our world to many different people – mostly to people who can’t defend themselves, who don’t have a voice that is heard and answered. It is especially ironic that those who know about genocide the most are not the first answer the cry’s for help.
But no, let us review the mistake of the Buchewald visit where comparatively few Jews perished and ignore what is happening in countries where people are dying, but do not happen to be Jewish.
14 gVOR08 // Jun 5, 2009 at 2:13 pm
I agree with most of the commentors. Nit picking trivia. Belongs on RedState.
15 Jeremy // Jun 5, 2009 at 2:31 pm
I’m heartened by the comments on this thread. I’ve generally felt that the quality of ideas expressed on this site is a step above most other conservative sites, but this article was a load of trivial rubbish.
16 ottovbvs // Jun 5, 2009 at 2:50 pm
The Editrix
1:33 PM
“No wonder all of Germany is drooling over that man. After he’d thrown Israel to the lions (or rather the jackals), he laid a wreath at the site of a German concentration camp. Typical hypocrisy to “show solidarity” with Jews — as long as they are safely dead and gone.”
……….I’ll let this comment speak for itself.
17 ottovbvs // Jun 5, 2009 at 3:03 pm
balconesfault
12:01 PM
“are an attempt to play tit-for-tat for the left’s constant mockery of Bush’s tome of linguistic and historical errors.”
……I think you endow it with a philosophical underpinning that doesn’t really exist. What does exist is a spin machine extending from talk radio through cable tv and conservative think tanks to, at the bottom of the food chain, internet blogs. This machine exists to create attack lines against the Democrats and liberalism in general and therefore has to produce material that feeds the base and fills the media every day. Faced with an administration that in everything from news management to economic and foreign policy strategy is unusually competent they are reduced to picking up scraps from the table. Thus arguments about how many jews were killed where and Michelle’s wardrobe choices get elevated as talking points regardless of their merit. Quality control is totally absent. The British historian A. J. P. Taylor is famous for expounding the the theory that train timetables were principally responsible for the first world war. What he was saying was that process had taken over reality. And that’s sort of what’s happening here.
18 gibberish // Jun 6, 2009 at 7:37 am
Let’s go back to what New Majority is supposed to be for, the the ‘about’ link:
“NewMajority.com is a site dedicated to the reform and renewal of the Republican party and the conservative movement.”
“New Majority aims to be a place of discussion of issues facing conservatism and that Republican party.”
Worthy goals, but the content is increasing failing to live up to it. Several contributors seem to have not understood the point of this site and continually post irrelevant or, as in this case, posts that flatly oppose the goal. Is Frum unable to find enough serious Republicans? Is Conservatism actually unable to engage with an issue at a level above name calling?
sad
19 balconesfault // Jun 6, 2009 at 8:49 am
gibberish – good point. You’d have to fault the gatekeepers here – snarks about Obama really aren’t a pathway to reforming the Republican Party and conservatism, are they?
20 nealjking // Jun 6, 2009 at 12:12 pm
I’m sorry, but Rosenthal’s piece is total idiocy.
21 Patrick // Jun 6, 2009 at 1:57 pm
It’s not just the content that is failing to live up to the stated goals of this site, but the fact that there is no engagement by those who generate the content.
It is typical of how the old-school GOP operates – “we tell you what to think and that’s all there is to it”.
They don’t listen to us, they refuse to engage us and are bewildered at why the GOP is in the ditch.
Is there a single example, anywhere on this blog, where an article author has come down here with us rabble in the comments and responded to criticism in any way?
The credibility issue is huge for me. You cannot regain my trust by telling me what to think. You can BEGIN regain my trust by talking WITH me as an adult and equal, and responding to my concerns.
I don’t see that happening here – or anywhere in the right-wing for that matter.
22 gibberish // Jun 6, 2009 at 2:54 pm
It is a failing – the absence of any interest in replying to comments. Or at least explaining what these postings have as their goal
Seems to me after all the excitement of the anti-Limbaugh campaign a little while back they haven’t noticed that this site risks just being a more erudite version of the ranters.
Maybe they should look into how William F Buckley did it:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00kwfbz
23 balconesfault // Jun 6, 2009 at 8:37 pm
“Is there a single example, anywhere on this blog, where an article author has come down here with us rabble in the comments and responded to criticism in any way?”
Yes – I can’t remember the poster, but he was talking about how the detainees issue is now Obama’s issue, and not Bush’s, responded to commentors.
24 // Jun 6, 2009 at 8:49 pm
Patrick and Gibberish:
Your comments could not be more accurate. Even though I’m a left of center Dem, I had come to this site hoping to hear both fresh policy ideas from the Right and thoughtful and honest criticisms of Obama’s policies. Unfortunately, except in very rare instances, I’ve gotten neither.
These failures probably mean the Right is much further away from developing fresh ideas than any of us thought. While that’s politically good for me and the Dems in the short term, I think it tends to hurt the country over the long term.
Neither the articles on this site, nor most of the commenters seem capable of offering thoughtful, intellectually honest criticisms of Obama’s policies. Instead, they pick out the most trivial inconsequential minutae.
It’s really disappointing.
25 ericna // Jun 7, 2009 at 2:38 am
Quite right. What Obama should have said was “Tomorrow, I will visit a normal concentration camp where lots of people, including a substantial number of Jews, but not one of the really bad death camps in Poland where millions of Jews died. Those I will perhaps visit later, but right now I am going to Germany and as none of the real death camps are located in Germany, Buchenwald will have to do. Of course, I could refer to Buchenwald as a KZ-camp that was part of to Holocaust, which would be a powerful message to the worlds Muslims. But then some idiot writer for New Majority will complain that the ratio of killed Jews at Buchenwald was too small to be used as an example of a Holocaust concentration camp and use this to make a rather a cheap shot while coat-tailing on the suffering of millions.
26 haloagain // Jun 8, 2009 at 7:15 pm
good lord –
Post’s this idiotic make me sad to be human. I’m honestly interested in hearing reasonable, intellectually honest conservative opinions. I thought this site might be a good resource. Turns out, there aren’t any intellectual conservatives left. You’re all so pathetic.
27 haloagain // Jun 8, 2009 at 7:17 pm
No doubt the typo in the first sentence of my last post will invalidate any opinion I have to someone as nit-picky as this fool.
28 Pajamas Media » David Irving and the Banality of Revisionism // Sep 11, 2009 at 2:41 am
[...] and political expediency, however, it was stylized into such by the Obama administration. See my “Obama Flunks History, Again.”) Page 1 of 2 Next [...]
You must log in to post a comment.