Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide (Armenian Studies) by Richard G Hovannisian (PDF)

Description

The Armenian Genocide that began in World War I, during the drive to transform the plural Ottoman Empire into a monoethnic Turkey, removed a people from its homeland and erased most evidence of their 3000-year-old material and spiritual culture. For the rest of this century, changing world events, calculated silence, and active suppression of memory have overshadowed the initial global outrage and have threatened to make this calamity “the forgotten genocide” of world history.Fourteen leading scholars here examine the Armenian Genocide from a variety of perspectives to refute those efforts and show how remembrance and denial have shaped perceptions of the event. Many of the chapters draw on archival records and court proceedings to review the precursors and process of the genocide, examine German complicity, and share the responses of victims, perpetrators, and bystanders.

User’s Reviews

Editorial Reviews: Book Description A fresh look at the forgotten genocide of world history. About the Author Richard Hovannisian is a professor of Armenian and Near Eastern History and holder of the Armenian Educational Foundation Chair in Modern Armenian History at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐I’m a upset about the holocaust denial / denialist comment below .. history should be told exactly how it was and not how it should have been.

⭐12 essays broken into 3 sections: Authoratiative Sources for the Genocide. Of these Stephan Asturian reveals how the restatement of Turkish identity in the late Ottoman, as reflected in the pan-Turkic writings of Yusuf Akchura, Muis Tekip Alp and Ziya Goya, led to the othering of minority Christian communities, paving the way for ethnic cleansing and exterminations. Alp saw the Turks as the “real” owners of the country and the Armenians as an outsider element who became rich off the Turks due to their European connections. Asturian claims thatTurkish envy led to widespread persecution, massacres and forced expropriations only to find, in the words of US consul in Aleppo at the time, “one does not become a trader by killing a trader”. A second excellent historical piece, “The Baghdad Railway and the Armenian Genocide” by Hilmar Kaisar is both fascinating and horrifying. Though the construction of the railway employed large number of Armenians the rail was also the earliest known use of rail for the purposes of mass deportations. Nearly every rail station along the deportation route became a concentration camp where thousands to tens of thousands perished. Kaisar documents the mixed record or German nationals some of whom favored deporting the Armenians and others such as “Engineer Winkler” protected them claiming that they were essential workers, even though they were not, much in the way that Oskar Schindler protected Jews during the Holocaust.Editor Richard Hovannisian contributes a detailed side by side comparison between patterns of Holocaust denial denial that of Armenian Genocide. In both cases deniers resort to rationalizing, relativization and trivialization, minimizing the numbers and echoing the propaganda of the era. Tropes such as the claim that Armenians/Jews were real security threats, that the intent was only to “relocate” not annihilate, that “powerful lobbies” exist that oppose the truth, that the victims’ goal was and is to enrich themselves and attempts to obscure and demean their history and culture are common threads of both denier communities.Another significant set of topics in the book consists of Turkish attempts to counter and suppress the Genocide narrative. Some of the controversy rested on a matter of definition, not outright denial. Middle eastern and Turkish scholar Bernard Lewis was only prepared to recognize the event massacres but not call it a genocide, which was the issue of Chapter 10. Historian Deborah Lipstadt was initially reluctant to do so as well but changed her mind. Yehuda Bauer however has noted that the proportion of Armenians killed matched the proportion of European Jews and today most if not all Holocaust scholars acknowledge the parallels.I thought it an excellent book. It was informative and gives one much to consider.

⭐Deniers:and of course we see well-funded Deniers in History trying to justify their hateful stance and sentiments with no valid points made … on Amazon Mitchell got 5 people who find him to be “helpful” whatever that means …Shutting the doors on History.Charlatan Propagandist Hater wannabe Revisionist is what Mitchell tries to be.Chances are , the likes of you will go down in flames.

⭐It just astonished me as how certain discursive formations can actually lead people to believe as the ‘real’ reality. It does not matter whether for an event to ‘really happen’ or not. What matters is that you hear it on a radio or read it on a newspaper or website or even talk about it at the water-cooler. Those who have had the chance to watch ‘Wag the Dog’ might get the idea of how such ‘reality’ is constructed.On a more advanced level ‘discursivity’, a la Foucault, is a building block of a discourse in which certain linkages, here and their, add to what ordinary people believe on the street.Now obviously Hitler was one of the worst things that happened during the 20th century. This is commonsense. But to add certain ‘material’ so as to advance another claim by building upon Hitler, is something that should be carefully approached, at least for people who at least visit and read stuff through Amazon.If a chain in a series of discursive formations can be shown to be weak or invalid than it would be proven that that chain of a discourse is on shaky grounds, and that most of what is known about it is likely to be false.Unfortunately we see certain ‘material’ is attached to certain claims so as to resemble the Holocaust. Let us revisit a single claim on part of those would like to exploit the events during the early 20th century. A reviewer, for instance, obviously bought one claim and thus knows it to be the ‘truth’Adolf Hitler: “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?”Now has anybody bothered to investigate it. No, of course. “It sounds like as if it is true, so why not believe it”. Well fortunately there are still people who like investigating such stuff.Read for example :Heath W. LowryWashington, D.C.Political Communication and Persuasion, Volume 3, Number 2 (1985)Abstract This article traces the history of a purported Adolf Hitler quote which cites the perecent of the world’s lack of reaction to the fate of Armenians during the First World War as a justification for his planned extermination of European Jewry in the course of the Second World War. By a detailed examination of the genesis of this quotation the author demonstrates that there is no historical basis for attributing such a statement to Hitler…[…]If one is serious about really getting into history, rather than believing simply what is out their in the popular press,I would additionally suggest to take a tour of the documents of Ambassador Morgenthau. First let us not take any word for having a Godly truth ‘Its ambassador so its gotta be true’ mentality is ok if you’re ok with it (respect of thought). But there are historical evidence that suggests that Morgenthau did not even know Ottoman scripture, and that this is proved throughout his letters when he attempts to translate ‘words’ and ‘dates’ of events. Do not hesitate to read…[…]For those who have CAREFULLY read what I have written so far, notice I am not either on one side of the argument between Armenian historians or historians of the Ottoman empire, but that I have just thrown out some thought provoking information so that one will at least ask some questions before believing what they read. Doubtless there will be those occasional pointless replies to this review, but again all I am saying is, think before you react. Now one could argue that I am saying is a postmodernist crituque and historical relativism. That would be false. I believe in historical analysis, as a scientific enterprise (and only the scientific version of it). But then again let us not forget that some American historians who were studying the case at hand were bombed by Armenians. Now if history is written by historians and that some historians (i.e. UCLA professor Stanford Shaw)are bullied so as not to investigate certain historical matters than, at least if you have a capacity to think critically than be suspicious about it. […]By the way absolutely nothing is mentioned about the equal ammount of civilian Turks that were slaugthered by Russian backed Armenian militia. Nor anything about the terrorism campaign of Armenians during the 1970’s that left thousands of people dead and wounded. To say “denying genocide is a wrong thing” is one thing. But in doing so if one is denying the death of tens of thousands of innocent Turks, is called hypocrism and puts one in ethically shaky grounds.The latest British governemeents acceptance that the “blue book”, which Armenian claims are based upon, have been declared by the government itself to be a WW1 time propaganda material. Yes you heard it right!Here’s another eye opener: Often the claim is made there 1 million Armenians were murdered. What they do not say that the same material they indicate that a “genocide” happened says thatthe ENTIRE Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire was 800 thousand (200 thousand difference!) MOREOVER Keep in mind that the Armenian diaspora, that builds its own desire to have a national identity, has a population of more than 9 million people across the world. HOW CAN this be??? Well thats how nationalism is formed: impossibile numbers, man on white horse, the evil “other” etc…. So this “genocide” attitude is more of identity building rather than real history.Well I hope I contributed on an intellectual level and I hope ‘thought thugs’ would not misunderstand what I have suggested.

⭐”Remembrance and denial” is an excellent account of the Armenian Genocide perpetraded by the Turks.The book talks about how the Armenians were looked down upon and hated by the Turks. And how the CUP wanted to eliminate the Armenians (mind you citizens of the Ottoman Empire) forever.Dr. Hovannisian has done a wonderful job accounting for facts on the Armenian genocide, and his book flows very well. He has show once again that the Armenian Genocide is not a hoax conjured up by the Armenian people, but a crime against humanity, for which Turkey, the government, and most of its people still do not take responsibilty for.A must read for anyone interested in the Armenian Genocide.

⭐

Keywords

Free Download Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide (Armenian Studies) in PDF format
Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide (Armenian Studies) PDF Free Download
Download Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide (Armenian Studies) 1999 PDF Free
Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide (Armenian Studies) 1999 PDF Free Download
Download Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide (Armenian Studies) PDF
Free Download Ebook Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide (Armenian Studies)