The conference aims to present the newest research conducted in the rapidly growing field of Polish memory studies.
H-Holocaust exists so scholars of the Holocaust / Shoah can communicate with each other using this innovative and exciting new technology.
The above responses understandably ask whether in 2019 USA we should be leaping to analogies with the extermination camps. But I think Roger Simon's post is questionable also in its assumptions about German Jewry in the pre-Nazi period. Some years ago I wrote about the ways in which a narrative of complacency came to be applied to German Jews, and the possible psychological reasons behind it. The contemporaneous record suggests a different picture. The Jews most aware of the threat under the Nazis were the "liberal" Jews.
I doubt that anyone on this list -- however they feel about the current policies of the Israeli government -- is unaware of the absolute desperation and annihilation that required the establishment of a Jewish state in the aftermath of World War II. And I also know that most if not all of us are aware of the extensive literature -- including monographs and memoirs -- that details the tragic miscalculations of those who, trying to "time" their exit from Germany and other places, waited too long.
To the contrary, I think the length is appropriate and that some of its policies are not even being followed currently.
Perhaps the Advisory Board could weigh in on this. However, it appears that contrary to the by-laws we do not have an Advisory Board.
Hoping the H-Holocaust and H-AS editors will make serious review of criteria for appropriate and inappropriate posts. If the topic was, for example, juxtaposing Nazi Germany with contemporary politics, there have been widely circulated articles by Chris Browning, Debby Lipstadt, and others that speak to this. Such pieces by outstanding scholars would be a useful model for making such choices.
Hank Greenspan, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor