![]() ![]() ![]() Many of those breaches are inspired by another tradition, more recent in origin, but now familiar to the point of tedium: the revolt against realism and its ethical implications. ![]() The third circle of normalizing Hell is reserved for the “aestheticizers.” The West, Rosenfeld writes, has a tradition that “historical events should be depicted from a realistic perspective.” Realism respects “a prevailing desire to preserve the integrity of the historical record.” This desire has “clear moral underpinnings,” even if, as with many of our moral underpinnings, we observe the principle in its breach. The analogies could, however, attract a "backlash from those who believe in the uniqueness of the Holocaust," and could even encourage passivity: By comparison to the Holocaust, every humanitarian crisis might look "not so bad after all." Holocaust analogies did not force the Clinton administration to intervene in Rwanda, or after Srebrenica. But Power also saw that "Holocaustizing" could be counter-productive. In her 1999 essay "To Suffer by Comparison," Samantha Power suggested that "Holocaustizing," the drawing of analogies to the Holocaust, had helped "stir the conscience" of American politicians during the Yugoslav Civil War and the Rwandan Genocide. The “universalizers” want to inflate the aura of exceptionality and liberate it as a license for present ambitions, especially humanitarian intervention. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |