Why is Trump's omission of an explicit mention of Jews from the holocaust memorial a big deal?

Question

So, I'm not a fan of President Trump, but I feel like it's a not a big deal when Trump didn't explicitly mention the Jews in his holocaust memorial. Per his statement, he didn't make light of it or try and lessen its impact. It was just a canned holocaust memorial speech in which he mentioned the victims and survivors. Why is it being made into such a big deal?

"It is with a heavy heart and somber mind that we remember and honor the victims, survivors, heroes of the Holocaust _{[Emphasis Mine]}. It is impossible to fully fathom the depravity and horror inflicted on innocent people by Nazi terror.

Yet, we know that in the darkest hours of humanity, light shines the brightest.‎ As we remember those who died, we are deeply grateful to those who risked their lives to save the innocent.

In the name of the perished, I pledge to do everything in my power throughout my Presidency, and my life, to ensure that the forces of evil never again defeat the powers of good. Together, we will make love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world." [1]

Answer 1

Antisemitism was central to the Holocaust, the reason for which was the desire to exterminate all Jews.

To not acknowledge that fact when remembering the Holocaust is at least careless and it sends out a certain message, even if that message was not intended. It generalizes the Holocaust to a generic evil, and strips all context from it.

The message was also promptly picked up by the far-right. Richard Spencer for example welcomed the "de-Judaification" of the Holocaust, and the Daily Stormer called it "pushing back against Jewish supremacy".

Vox puts this in a larger context:

Trump’s most fervent supporters included outspoken anti-Semites, online trolls on the “alt-right” who delighted at tormenting Jewish journalists and public figures. His campaign flirted with anti-Semitic tropes, including tweeting an image of a star of David with Hillary Clinton’s face superimposed on a pile of money. His closing ad warned of a shadowy cabal of bankers and international elites. His son casually used the phrase “warming up the gas chambers” to refer to vociferous criticism.

In each case, Trump and his inner circle refused to back down or apologize, and his anti-Semitic fans interpreted those controversies as coded signals in their favor. Now that he’s president, the same dynamic is playing out around his statement on the Holocaust.

Answer 2

It's not (I'm Jewish and neither myself nor family members who actually lived through Holocaust find it in any way objectionable), except to people who view it through a partisan confirmation bias.

But it fits into left wing made up narrative that Trump is somehow "antisemitic" (must be news to Kushners - including Trump's daughter who converted to Judaism, her husband who's an Orthodox Jew; or Dan Shapiro who's major Trump opponent but explicitly said Bannon is in no way antisemitic; to or a majority of Israel-residing Americans who like Trump, or to US based Orthodox Jews who back him), and this is a useful fact to cherry-pick to somehow support that made-up narrative.

Answer 3

It's a big deal because while Germany killed much larger numbers of people overall over the course of the Nazi regime there, especially during the war, the largest group of victims of mass genocide by far were Jews. In fact, Jews constitute either about half all victims, or by some (most?) accountings - much more than all of the other victims of mass German organized killing put together.

I obviously do not wish to belittle the significance of the deaths of people in the other groups - ethnic Poles, Slovenians, Homosexuals, left-wing political activists, disabled people, Roma, and arguably also prisoners of war from the USSR (my own grandfather was both a Jew and a soldier in the Red Army); and it's important to mention them as well. In fact, when they aren't mentioned, that's also arguably somewhat of an affront to their memory. But when even the largest group of victims is not mentioned, the message is "Ok, we're observing this day because we sort of have to, but we would really rather not be reminded of all that stuff, all those people who shall not be named."

That's why it's a big deal.

It's even bigger of a deal due to Trump having a history of racism both in words and in deeds (you can look this up, I just don't want to write a dissertation here), plus the fact that many White-Supremacist groups are among his supporters, and a borderline White Supremacist, or at least an enabler of those groups, Stephen Bannon, is Trump's key advisor.

Now, you might say that Clinton, Bush and Obama should have been protested even more angrily than Trump. After all, they had ordered and presided over the direct and indirect killing of tens or hundreds of thousands - in attacks on civilian and half-civlian targets, in "collateral damage", through the debilitating sanctions in 1990s that resulted in a huge death toll, indirectly through stoking inter-ethnic and inter-religious strife and so on. And, frankly, I'd agree with you. But it's still a big deal.

Answer 4

Nobody has yet mentioned the historical precedent for minimizing the Jews as victims of the Holocaust. There's a good piece about it here.

It may sound harmless to modern non-Jewish listeners in America where anti-Semitism levels are very low, but his speech echoed decades of Soviet propaganda. Yes, many non-Jewish Soviets died at the hands of the Nazis, but the centrality of Jews to the holocaust is undeniable. As Nazis took over Soviet territory, local non-Jewish populations were more than willing to betray their Jewish neighbors. Anti-Semitism ran very deep in that part of the world. As the Soviets took back their territory after the war, "universalizing" the horror of the holocaust was in large part a way for the USSR to reintegrate populations which were still very anti-Semitic.

The point is, the holocaust was neither the first nor the last time that Jews have faced large scale persecution, and it could happen again. The past few years have seen protesters in Paris shouting "Jew, France is not yours," "Death to the Jews," "Slit Jews' throats," and "Hitler was right," In Berlin, of all places, "Gas the Jews!" These protests and many others around Europe are often accompanied by acts of violence against synagogues and Jewish establishments. There is real cause to protest some of the actions of the Israeli government, but anti-Zionism in Europe is the new face of deeply held anti-Semitism. To be a Jew is to know that you are hated across much of the globe. If we forget what the holocaust was to the Jews -- and we are rapidly forgetting -- then little stands in the way of history repeating.

Edit: It's not just in Europe. Today, 2/4/2017, "Chicago Loop Synagogue Vandalized With Swastikas, Broken Window"

Answer 5

Take that speech. Show it to a clever child who has never heard of the holocaust. What would that child learn? What would the child learn to remember? The child would learn that there were Nazis, and they were depraved, and people died and there were heroes who risked their lives to save the innocent. It doesn't say anything about what this memorial is actually about, so the whole speech isn't exactly helpful to keep what happened in memory.

How can we remember those who died when he doesn't actually say who died?

I would also be curious who the "heroes" were.

And frankly, "together, we will make love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world" will be taken as a sick joke by many (and as a lapse by others).

Answer 6

Because not acknowledging the main victim of a tragedy (crime, death, etc…) on a day specifically set aside for it is tone deaf, callous and stupid.

On a most basic level, the day in Judaism is known as “Yom HaShoah” was created in 1953 specifically by Jews in Israel to memorialize the tragedy of the Holocaust. It’s not some magical day that popped out of nowhere as “Generic Massacre of 6 Million People in World War II Day” or some nonsense like that.

And furthermore, Trump’s statement was connected to the U.N.’s 2005 resolution to create an “International Holocaust Day” which clearly states; bold emphasis is mine:

“Reaffirming that the Holocaust, which resulted in the murder of one third of the Jewish people, along with countless members of other minorities, will forever be a warning to all people of the dangers of hatred, bigotry, racism and prejudice,”

And besides that, people have brought up many differing issues in the answers here:

• That Jews were not the only targets of the Nazis.
• That it’s somehow a “leftist”/“liberal” (I can’t keep track of this bothering) agenda that is upset at this.
• That in the great scheme of things, what is the big deal.

The “big deal” is kind of like saying the Civil Rights struggle in the United States was somehow “not” about blacks in the United States; that somehow it was some magical “Civil Rights” struggled that just tangentially benefited blacks in the United States.

For that matter it’s like saying slavery in the U.S. is not a black issue since many immigrant groups—Jews, Irish, Italians, Chinese, etc…—experienced slave-like conditions at one point.

Or that somehow The Women’s Rights Movement in the U.S. during the late 19th/early 20th century was just not for women: That it was for all oppressed groups.

Look, here is the deals: Jews were the main targets of the Nazis during the Holocaust. The reasons—past insane hatred—are varied, but like it or not Jews were an easy target in Eastern Europe during the early 20th century. They were the largest group that was “othered” and hated across Europe and other places, thus were blamed for all kinds of social ills.

Now flash forward to 2017: Muslims are a strong target of similar hate in the United States. Mexicans as well, but why? Both groups have a strong presence in the U.S. and are somehow being blamed for all kinds of nonsense.

But back to the main question: Trump’s statement. To make a statement about the Holocaust and not acknowledge that tragedies main victims is suspicious. Anyone not believing the Jews were the main target of Nazi hatred is dense. Also, by eliminating identity politics the Trump administration is making the statement so neutral it’s useless.

• Jews who were affected by the Holocaust are not really acknowledged.
• “Alt-Right” pundits latch onto the exclusion of the Jews as a “good thing” to basically state, “Hey! Look! The Holocaust was bad, but let’s stop making it a Jewish thing! Let’s just call it a ‘bad’ thing were 6 million plus people were just murdered for… What reason?”
• The wording of the statement also alludes to the whole “Pro-Life/Pro-Choice” world of politics. The statement was so nebulous many people theorize the generically world, “…we are deeply grateful to those who risked their lives to save the innocent.” was a nod towards the “Pro-Life” world.

In short, it’s bizarre that anyone would acknowledge the “…depravity and horror inflicted on innocent people by Nazi terror.” but simply not state their name.

On a most basic level, if—for example—your father died and someone said, “It’s a great tragedy that your loved one was lost. I care deeply about your loved one.” What does that mean? How would you feel about someone not even bestowing basic human identity to someone who has passed away?

It’s all bizarre.

Answer 7

A lot of people died during WWII and the scope of the Holocaust can be expanded or contracted to include different sets of these people.

Examples of groups: Jews, Political Prisoners, Gays, Gypsies, Russian and Polish POWs.

The "Minimalist" position is that the Holocaust (which means Total Destruction) refers to the targeted extermination of the Jews ( and perhaps the racial minorities) and not to the Russian POWs, Gays, and Political Prisoners because Jews were uniquely singled out in Mein Kampf and other Nazi writings. e.g. It was Jews who stabbed Germany in the back. Total Victims ~6 million Jews + a few hundred thousand Gypsies, Gays, "defectives" etc. The majority of Holocaust victims are Jewish.

The "Maximalist" position is that everyone killed directly or indirectly by the Nazis outside of combat are victims of the Holocaust. Add 3.3 million Soviet POWs plus ~12 million from bombing, hunger, disease. The minority of Holocaust victims are Jewish.

Proponents of the Minimalist position argue that the Jews were singled out and their persecution is unique. Although it is certainly valid, Anti-Semites prefer the Maximalist position because it downplays the specific targeting against Jews. A corollary to this is that Jews are overplaying their persecution (for sympathy), which has its own implications.

The official position is relevant to spectators because of how the Holocaust relates to Zionism and Israel.

A component of Zionism in a nutshell: Jews are persecuted everywhere, the only way to avoid this is for the Jews to have their own state.

A component of anti-Zionism in a nutshell: Jews aren't persecuted any more than anyone else really and Jews use this argument to gain sympathy so they can flock to Palestine and persecute others.

By not mentioning Jews, the USA is not disavowing the view preferred by the anti-Zionist camp and this bothers Zionists and Jews.

Answer 8

Preface note: While answering the question "Why is it being made such a big deal of?" it is important not to grow sectarian hatred as by-product of debate. Specifically, care should be taken not overstep the boundaries of the logical question at hand and end up drifting into dogmatic hatred and making generaliztions about the stupidity or evilness of those we don't agree with. Last year Canada's Trudeau did not mention Jews in his commemeration, this year he did.

Trumps speech (or announcement) was made on the Jan 27, which is
International Holocaust Remembrance Day. This date was chosen by the United to yearly reaffirm a set of principles and commemorate some of the victims of WWII. The text of the UN resolution [1] includes the statements:

Reaffirming that the Holocaust, which resulted in the murder of one third of the Jewish people, along with countless members of other minorities, will forever be a warning to all people of the dangers of hatred, bigotry, racism and prejudice.

and

Rejects any denial of the Holocaust as an historical event, either in full or part;

and

Condemns without reserve all manifestations of religious intolerance, incitement, harassment or violence against persons or communities based on ethnic origin or religious belief, wherever they occur

So to answer your question "Why is it being made such a big deal of?". If Trump chooses to make a statement to honor UN International Holocaust Day, he has a duty to stay true to that label. Here is why he was not true to that label:

1. Because it doesn't mention the main ethnic group, Jews, who were most numerous victims of the victims killed in the concentration camps. Therefore it does not refute the claim that Jews were not killed the Holocaust - this claim is widely made, just search Google for "Was the holocaust a lie" to see how much time and effort is being put into denying that Jews were killed in the Holocaust. Therefore Trump's omissions are counter to the first two UN resolution items quoted above.

2. By not mentioning Jews, nowhere is it mentioned that an ethnic / religious group was was victimized. Thus it fails to point out the existence in the Holocaust of religious intolerance and violence against persons or communities based on ethnic origin or religious belief, as the UN resolution does in third item above.

Trump could have mentioned more about the other victims and fulfilled his role in honoring Holocaust Memorial Day. He could even have mention that Soviet POWs in 1941 were among the earlier victims of gassing in the Auschwitz I gas chamber [2]. He could have mentioned other genocides throughout history and the world, and pointed out that the UK's Holocaust Memorial Day, also held on Jan 27, also explicitly commemorates the subsequent genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur [3]. Perhaps next year, the president will do so.

[1] Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on the Holocaust Remembrance A/RES/60/7, 1 November 2005, http://www.un.org/en/holocaustremembrance/docs/res607.shtml

[2] THE TREATMENT OF SOVIET POWS: STARVATION, DISEASE, AND SHOOTINGS, JUNE 1941–JANUARY 1942, Holocaust Encyclopedia, https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007183

[3] Holocaust Memorial Day (UK), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_Memorial_Day_(UK)

Answer 9

We should remember that Jews were not the only victims of the holocaust. The nazi's imprisoned, tortured and murder en masse many groups - non-arian, homosexual, jews etc ...

To single out the Jews, diminishes the atrocities committed against other groups. To generalize by mentioning "The Victims", Trump has actually included all victims of the holocaust.

What's the problem?

Answer 10

Alright. I'm going to take a stab at this.

It's a big deal because...look at this page. Look at the answers. Look at the 'debate'. There are people defending Trump making it a bigger deal by coming up with elaborate theories. There are people attacking trump the same way. For any of these theories to be true, it requires a level of planning and intentional thought process by Trump and his administration that none of us are privy to.

It's a big deal because people are making it a big deal.

Should it be a big deal? Probably not--at least not in and of itself. Are there legitimate issues overall with the Trump administration? For sure, and this is perhaps part of the greater context of it all, but that's a bigger conversation.

In the end, it was likely just lazy speech writing. It's only a big deal because pundits made it one. Good for ad-views, I guess.

Answer 11

Well, it's not a big deal; here's why...

---

Regarding this particular question:

Merriam-Webster's definition of the Holocaust:

the mass slaughter of European civilians and especially Jews by the Nazis during World War II

While Trump could've mentioned Jews, he didn't need to. Holocaust implies the genocide of Jews. Plus, saying "victims" encompasses everyone impacted by the persecution.

---

Related thoughts:

This "scandal" supposedly plays into the leftist claim that Trump is anti-Semitic. What they tend to forget is: his son-in-law is Jewish and was his right-hand-man during the campaign (and now in the administration), his daughter is Jewish and he never disowned her, he supports Israel (he didn't have to, as most leftist don't), and he had a rabbi speak at his inauguration.

Plus, the sentence after the one in question sounds as if he wasn't too pleased (to say the least) of the horrors the Nazis inflicted.

---

Addendum:

(disclaimer: this is totally speculation, so don't take it too seriously)

Imagine if Trump said "Jews" instead of "victims". Leftists would be outraged that he didn't include the homosexuals, handicaps, political prisoners, etc. So, Trump would "lose" whether or not he said "Jews" instead of "victims".

Answer 12

As a Jew, the first thing I think about when I hear the words "victims of the Holocaust" are my people. I probably think about it several times each month, and every time I do I am filled with grief and rage. For me, it is not necessary for Trump to explicitly mention "Jews" for me to know and remember who the primary targets of Hitler's final solution were.

That being said, the vast majority of Americans are not Jewish and may not have had the full scope of the laws levied explicitly against Jews and the inevitable horrors that followed, drilled into them from a young age. One could argue that his failure to remind non-Jews about who the primary targets of the Holocaust were, coupled with his association with hate groups today, is indeed a big deal.

Answer 13

It's all about unmet expectations. Trump was expected to mention the Jews explicitly in this speech, but he didn't. That's why it became a big deal.

If US presidents start to consistently commemorate a different ethnic or national group during their speech, suddenly stopping doing so won't go unnoticed as well.

Answer 14

There are specifically two reasons that it could be a big deal.

First, because the holocaust was mostly about the mass murder of Jewish people. It was nearly genocide, on that front. To generalize the holocaust as "a bad thing that happened to some people" is kind of like, in some people opinions, forgetting the details of situation. Those that forget history are doomed to repeat it. The other side of the coin however is that Jews were not the only people put in concentration camps and killed. You could say that not mentioning the other groups of people would be the same as marginalizing them. It's socially complex, and not everyone will feel the same way.

Second, because, right now, everyone likes to pick on Trump. I don't know why, but basically any action he takes, ends up polarizing the general population. I don't mean he is wrong, or he is right. I mean that the general audience as a whole seems to polarize around his every decision. That increases sales and ad revenue, thus the media will keep on going.

Answer 15

I think it is problematic in the mirror of previous such speeches, as leaving out some elements that where present previously for a long time is a message itself. If the Jewish people had never been explicitly mentioned, it would not be a big deal.

Of course, in a broader sense, the Holocaust was not restricted to Jews, and talking only about Jewish people can be seen partial, as tens of thousands of other nationalities, especially Roma were burnt, as well. In this sense, talking only about the Jewish people as victims can be seen as a denial of the full scale of the Holocaust.

So talking about survivors and victims without highlighting a particular group of them, even if that group has suffered the most deaths is politically correct and impartial.

However, since it is not a standalone speech, but has a historical backdrop of similar speeches before by people holding the same office, missing out some key features from before is a message itself.

Probably we should not forget that the US had a hand in the deaths of at least a few hundred Jewish people, when they turned back ships of Jewish refugees who made it safe to American soil for Hitler to do the dirty work. This was actually one of the drives behind creating a Jewish state. The experience that in the hour of need, no nation would help.

This moment could hint, why the Jewish victims of the Holocaust have more connection to the US, than any other group. I think if I were Jewish, it would be easy for me to see this change of tone as another betrayal of the Jewish people by the US government.