Talk:History of the Jews in the Netherlands
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hey, I just changed some things:
- Changed "a Jew" to "a Jewish person" \ - Defined Rabbinic Law in the article's context (specifically having a Jewish mother, in this case)
Hope everything works out! - Jay Kay 11:49, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! Any input is welcome! Rick86 00:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Explanation: List Of Dutch Jews
As being one of the main contributors to this article, I wish to explain why I have put people on the 'Dutch Jews' list who are not Jewish by Rabbinical law (because they only have a Jewish father).
Of what I am aware of, all these so-called 'father-Jews' have portrayed in the media a special connection with their Jewish heritage, and therefore feel a stronger bond towards Judaism. That includes, for example, Loretta Schrijver, who's father is a Holocaust survivor, and which, she has said several times in the Dutch media, has strongly influenced her as a human being.
The same goes for Xaviera Hollander, who also mentions her Jewish father and her own Jewish heritage in some of her books. However, I do understand that these people are nevertheless not Jewish. It is considered to be a fairly difficult subject in modern Judaism, and has caused a lot of debate, not only in the United States within Reform Judaism, but also in the Netherlands, where there is a large group of people with a Jewish father, of whom some feel a strong bond with the Jewish community, although there are not seen as Jewish by Rabbinical law. Can anyone help me out here? Rick86 00:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Another piont of interest: the article mentions Jews not being welcome in Utrecht. It might be clarifying to note, that Utrecht was a Bishopry since 722, and therefore under Roman-Catholic rule. Lokimaros 11:31, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Shoah
The following text is included in the Holocaust part on Dutch Jewry:
Yet even more recently this view too is now seen as too simplistic. The high amount of jewish victims is not that easily to blame on anyone and wartime sources make it clear most Dutch were very concerned with the Jews but helping wasn't easy. Indifferent were very few. Also finally people are daring to look at the fact that many jews (1 in 7) didn't even try to find a hidingplace and that many went voluntarily and without resistance to the camps. Also we now understand why the civil servants could do little to help and that most resistance they took part in has remained invisible. It seems the Dutch media in the 1950s was too positive about the Dutch role during the war, from the 60s onwards the media was too negative, today historians finally are putting forward a more balanced opinion. Many did support and help the Jews but it was nearly impossible to do something that really did something to change the situation. Recent books have supported and proven this new and more balanced view on the Dutch history. "Victims & Survivors,The Nazi persecution of the Jews in the Netherlands 1940-1945" By Bob Moore was the first English book since the 1960s that looked at original sources and creates a very new and more understanding view of the Netherlands and the Dutch Jews during the war. Another book is "We leven nog" (were still alive" by Bart van der Boom, reporting on the research of Dutch wartime diaries and German secret reports, proving that the majority of Dutch indeed was very concerned with what was happening to the Jews. We must also not forget the February strike in 1941 when thousands of Dutch protested in public against the way the Germans treated the Dutch Jews. The only strike of its kind in any occupied country.
I have several objections to the text: 1) It does not state a SINGLE source. Allegations as "Indifferent were very few", "Many Jews [...] didn't even try to find a hiding place", "the Dutch media in the 1950s was too positive about the Dutch role during the war, from the 60s onward the media was too negative" etcetera etcetera. Two books are reported as source afterwards (one by Bob Moore, one by Bart van der Boom) but the least thing the author of this text could have done is referring to one of these sources when making the allegations as shown above. Rick86 15:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
