The camp of social death

On February 23, 2020, The Sunday Times published an article by Andrew Holgate Holocaust novelists blur Nazi fact and fiction in bestsellers. Here is my comment.

Quote from the article:
In one of the novel’s most important scenes, the number he tattoos on the arm of his future wife is seen by several critics as being incorrect. The Auschwitz Museum has said the mistakes and “misinterpretations” in the book make it “dangerous and disrespectful to history”.

While agreeing that these mistakes, whether deliberate or not, are dangerous and disrespectful, I would like to point out that the Auschwitz Museum is also capable of acting in a dangerous and disrespectful way. The Museum did not invite Witold Pilecki’s son Andrzej and daughter Zofia, to the 70th anniversary of the Camp’s liquidation in 2015. Witold Pilecki was a Polish officer, who went to Auschwitz voluntarily, organised an underground resistance organisation there and sent reports about the Camp to the Polish resistance and the Polish government in exile in London.

At the same time, Museum issued an invitation to Rainer Hoess, 51, a grandson of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Camp commandant Rudolf Hoess, to participate in the 70th anniversary ceremonies. Rainer is a well-known anti-Nazi.

After WWII, Witold Pilecki was executed by the functionaries of the Communist dictatorship in 1948. This is clearly the reason behind refusing to invite Zofia and Andrzej Pilecki to the 70th anniversary. The concentration camp lives on under new leadership and with new guards. This is the camp of social death and elimination from history. The narrative is being actively managed and controlled.