It seems no matter how long it has been since ww2 ended, things still rise way above the accepted level. I came across this site looking for some details on Auschwitz and whether or not it should be left to ruin. Did not take long to go off the tracks half way through the thread. Should Auschwitz be closed and left to crumble ?
I for one think the place should stay open for future generations to see the cruelties that went on there. Many people, especially from my generation tend to forget about the history and the sacrifices of WW2. By that I mean they neglect or just don't want to think about the holocaust, since it's such a long time ago and was such a dark period. But that's exactly why it should not be forgotten. Jakob
It seems no matter how long it has been since ww2 ended, things still rise way above the accepted level. I came across this site looking for some details on Auschwitz and whether or not it should be left to ruin. Did not take long to go off the tracks half way through the thread. Should Auschwitz be closed and left to crumble ? One of the reasons I like this forum as we are pretty civilised and do not tend to argue like schoolchildren. Thereagain it is also down to good moderation as well. Auschwitz left to crumble-I think not. There must be such memorials to show how man can descend to such depths in his inhumanity to fellow man. Regards Tom
I was educated about the Holocaust and Auschwitz etc when I was in college (Christian Brothers Catholic) and not from my parents however it never came back to interest until my thirties. My daughters education glossed over WW1, WW2, Hitler, the Japanese (due to our close proximity to the Pacific war) the Holocaust, Anzac Day, Remembrance Day. My two girls knew much more about the subject because I was interested, had a bit more knowledge than most and this showed in their results. To my point: How many people can name the 7 wonders of the Ancient World? The majority of people might know one because they still exist. The destruction of Auschwitz would send it also out of the memory bank for future generations which would be like winning Lotto for the Neo-Nazis and all those others who deny the Holocaust.
Having been there myself, I stress quite often to people that watching documentaries and reading books about it is one thing, but it is impossible to grasp the scale and the brevity of what happened at that place unless you see it with your own eyes. Aside from that, there is a feeling about the place that I have never felt anywhere else, apart from maybe the Anne Frank House. If it wasn't there any more, it would make it all the more forgettable. And I can't escape the conclusion that any desire to let it decay or to demolish it must be driven by either incredible naivety or sinister motives.
I havent been to Auschwitz but I have been in Dachau and that memory will remain with me for the rest of my life. We owe to all those who perished to keep the memory of it alive. Destroying Auschwitz will do nothing except wipe away one more piece of physical evidence about the Holocaust. It should be kept, and the funding of it should not fall upon the Polish Government or any single government. It should be the U.N. or the E.U. who maintains that site.
I havent been to Auschwitz but I have been in Dachau and that memory will remain with me for the rest of my life. We owe to all those who perished to keep the memory of it alive. Destroying Auschwitz will do nothing except wipe away one more piece of physical evidence about the Holocaust. It should be kept, and the funding of it should not fall upon the Polish Government or any single government. It should be the U.N. or the E.U. who maintains that site. Actually, an agreement had been reached by German authorities to pay for up to 60 million Euro to the Auschwitz-Birkenau Foundation to help maintain the memorial and its museum on the site.
Perhaps rather stupidly, I hadn't realised that A-B is a UNESCO World Heritage Site: Auschwitz Birkenau <br /><small>German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp (1940-1945)</small> - UNESCO World Heritage Centre The WHS status confers a modicum of protection but at the end of the day it will be up to each nation to care for 'thier' WHS, with all that that implies... CS
This is from the Wikipedia entry on World Heritage Sites: Each World Heritage Site is the property of the state on whose territory the site is located, but it is considered in the interest of the international community to preserve each site. 'In the interests' is quite a loose term. Essentially, the World Heritage status is a list, and a placque. I'm not exactly sure what the UN could or would do if a World Heritage site was at risk... I suspect that as in Team America they would write a letter saying how angry they are.
I've read that thread and can't see too much wrong with it (looks like 'noimmigration' was banned...), the BBC article is on Auschwitz-Birkenau: BBC NEWS | Europe | Cash crisis threat to Auschwitz And looking at the state of that, as opposed to the better preserved main camp the questions over restoration or preservation seem valid. I don't agree with restoration in this context, as it seem wrong to rebuild and potentially create a historical pastiche, but I'm probably in favour of preservation to attempt to keep all traces from disappearing by the natural processes of time.
Some interseting comments in the link that suggests that the contributors think that only Jews visit the site. I fet this was an uncomfortable view. A-B is far too valuable for learning the mistakes of history so that they are not repeated. The victims of the Holocaust included all those not considered desirable by the Nazis, and millions of people died fighting them, not just the Camp victims. A-B is something tangible to hold on and remember and perhaps avoid repetition. Jim
How many people can name the 7 wonders of the Ancient World? The majority of people might know one because they still exist. The destruction of Auschwitz would send it also out of the memory bank for future generations which would be like winning Lotto for the Neo-Nazis and all those others who deny the Holocaust. At first I thought, what an easy question. Then I counted 5 wonders....certainly highlighted your point of how easy it is for people to forget, especially if there is no physical reminder. Now going to look up the other two wonders...my mind is boggling
I've read that thread and can't see too much wrong with it (looks like 'noimmigration' was banned...), the BBC article is on Auschwitz-Birkenau: BBC NEWS | Europe | Cash crisis threat to Auschwitz You are right VP. I got down to "noimmigration" and thought here we go. Just seems the same old thing that some get their jollies in purposely being racist. Cheers Geoff
Tom Auschwitz left to crumble-I think not. There must be such memorials to show how man can descend to such depths in his inhumanity to fellow man. Regards Tom Have to agree - allowing Auschwitz- Birkenau to crumble away would be something this generation should not allow _ without having read from the link it is easy to imagine the way it went.
