March 5, 2014
Netanyahu's inaction to Obama's provocations sends powerful message
Kerry, after apparent criticism by Schumer, seeks to allay skepticism on diplomacy
How to ruin a perfectly good kid in 10 simple steps
2014 Oscars played it safe, but was faith lost in the shuffle?
Apple joins Hobby Lobby in touting corporate values beyond profit
March 3, 2014
Alina Dain Sharon: In the Hebrew calendar, a leap year has extra month, not day
Latest Obama appointment to prove Prez set on emasculating so-called Israel Lobby
Jewish World Review
May 1, 2006
/ 3 Iyar, 5766
In January 2005, Britain's Prince Harry attended a birthday party dressed as a Nazi. When the London Sun published a
picture of the prince in his German desert uniform and swastika armband, it triggered widespread outrage and disgust. In
scathing editorials, Harry was condemned as an ignorant and insensitive clod; months later, he was still apologizing for his
tasteless costume. "It was a very stupid thing to do," he said in September. "I've learnt my lesson."
For a more recent example of totalitarian fashion, consider Tim Vincent, the New York correspondent for NBC's
entertainment newsmagazine, "Access Hollywood." Twice in the last few weeks, Vincent has introduced stories about
upcoming movies while sporting an open jacket over a bright red T-shirt on which, clearly outlined in gold, was a large red
star and a hammer-and-sickle: the international emblems of totalitarian communism.
And what was the public reaction to seeing those icons of cruelty and death turned into the latest yuppie style? Furor?
Moral outrage? Blistering editorials?
None of the above.
Nazi regalia may be strictly taboo, but communist emblems have never been trendier. Enter "hammer and sickle" into a
shopping search engine, and up pop dozens of products adorned with the Marxist brand T-shirts and ski caps, bracelet
charms and keychains, posters of Lenin and "Soviet Kremlin Stainless Steel Flasks."
The glamorization of communist imagery is widespread. On West 4th Street in Manhattan, the popular KGB Bar is known
for its literary readings and Soviet propaganda posters. In Los Angeles, the La La Ling boutique sells baby clothing
emblazoned with the face of Che Guevara, Fidel Castro's bloody henchman. At the House of Mao, a popular eatery in
Singapore, waiters in Chinese army uniforms serve Long March Chicken, and a giant picture of Mao Zedong dominates one
"A French government agency, the National Lottery, was crazy enough to use Stalin and Mao in one of its advertising
campaigns," observed Stephane Courtois in his introduction to The Black Book of Communism, a scholarly survey of
communist crimes. "Would anyone even dare to come up with the idea of featuring Hitler or Goebbels in its commercials?"
What explains such "communist chic?" How can people who would never dream of drinking in a pub called Gestapo
cheerfully hang out at the KGB Bar? If the swastika is an undisputed symbol of unspeakable evil, can the hammer-and-sickle
and other emblems of communism be anything less?
Between 1933 and 1945, Adolf Hitler's Nazis slaughtered some 21 million people, but the communist nightmare has lasted
far longer and its death toll is far, far higher. Since 1917, communist regimes have sent more than 100 million victims to their
graves and in places like North Korea, the deaths continue to this day. The historian R.J. Rummel, an expert on genocide
and government mass murder, estimates that the Soviet Union alone annihilated nearly 62 million people: "Old and young,
healthy and sick, men and women, even infants and the infirm, were killed in cold blood. They were not combatants in civil war
or rebellions; they were not criminals. Indeed, nearly all were guilty of . . . nothing."
Yet communism rarely evokes the instinctive loathing that Nazism does. Prince Harry's swastika was way over the line, but
Tim Vincent's hammer-and-sickle was kitschy and cool. Why?
Several reasons suggest themselves.
One is that in the war to defeat Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union fought with the Allies. World War II eventually gave way to
the long-drawn Cold War, but America's alliance with Moscow left in many minds the belief that when it counted most, the
communists were on our side.
Moreover, the Nazis didn't camouflage their hatefulness. Their poisonous rhetoric made only too clear that they loathed
Jews and other "subhumans" and believed an Aryan master race was destined to rule all others. By contrast, communist
movements have typically masked their malice and ruthlessness with appealing talk of peace, equality, and an end to
exploitation. Partly as a result, the myth persists to this day that communism is really a noble system that has never been
Third, the excesses of Joseph McCarthy hurt honest anticommunism. In the backlash to McCarthyism, many journalists and
intellectuals came to dismiss any strong stand against communists as "Red baiting," and conscientious liberals found it
increasingly difficult to take a vocal anti-Soviet stand.
But perhaps the most compelling explanation is the simplest: visibility. Ever since the end of World War II, when
photographers entered the death camps and recorded what they found, the world has had indelible images of the Nazi crimes.
But no army ever liberated the Soviet Gulag or halted the Maoist massacres. If there are photos or films of those atrocities, few
of us have ever seen them. The victims of communism have tended to be invisible and suffering that isn't seen is suffering
most people don't think about.
"Communist chic?" The blood of 100 million victims cries out from the ground. To wear the symbols of their killers is no
fashion statement, but the ultimate in bad taste.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Jeff Jacoby is a Boston Globe columnist. Comment by clicking here.
Jeff Jacoby Archives
© 2006, Boston Globe