The argument about ”Schindler’s List”
Michel Dolle
1
Steven Spielberg
Steven Spielberg is a good director. He did nice cute films like E.T, and
a series of very entertaining films. But he is nothing of the caliber of the
likes of Tarkovsky, Fellini, Bergman, Welles and many others whose films are
profound. The films of Spielberg should not be in those list of best films.
He does emotional films and powerful in that but they are shallow films.
They are black or white films with little grey area if at all. I would only put
Schindler’s List among any best films list. Many of his films are landmarks
with respect to box office perspective. For quite a long time E.T was the most
lucrative film ever done. There were times Spielberg had 3,4 films in the list
of the most lucrative films. Jurassic Park was the first film to make over a
billion dollars. Today Spielberg has no films among the 10 most lucrative.
In place 18 we have Jurassic Park. The next one is E.T. in place 50. He lost
in his own game.
Spielberg without wanting to, together with Lucas ruined American cinema. The films Jaws but especially Star wars changed the American cinema
and made him ill, until after a long while the American cinema is barely alive.
Star Wars is also a boring film. I have no idea why was it so popular. Lucas
is not Spielberg. And will never be Spielberg.
After these two films the concept of the Auther, the director that does
his own films at his own image, with art in his mind was lost. The greedy
producers took over. Again. They realized that with one film they could be
set for life. The caused almost all big budget films to be sequels. Everything
is about money. I cant remember in the last 20 years but a handful of good
1
American films.
Good American directors are scarse. And its getting worse and worse.
Scorsese lost his touch ages ago, and so did Woody Allen.
My list of good American directors is
1. The most important group working today (in the entire world) is the
Cohen brothers that made one of the best films of all times ”Barton
Fink”. But this was done in 1992. On the other their masteroiece ”No
country for old man” is recent.
2. Paul Thomas Anderson with ”There will be blood”. I forgive him for
the ugly ending of ”Magnolia” that at the end turns to be a terrible
film. We also talk on a man that did 7 films so far.
3. Besides the genius of the Cohen brother maybe Darren Aronofsky is
the director I have hope for the most. Noah, Black Swan, The Wrestler,
The Fountain (maybe his best film) Requiem for a Dream (an amazing
film) And Pi which will take me some time to settle my opinion on.
This is terrible. I couldmention 3 directors. Eastwood is over the hill.
Coppola does not do films. David Lynch is over the hill. His best film was
done in 1986. And there are many such cases of have been directors that its
just sad to mention. Quentin Tarantino is an important director. But he will
never be a great director. He is a bluffer. I will explain this in details some
time in the future. And no David Fincher is not a good director. His talent
is imitation of past films. ”Fight club” and ”Seven” are super evil films.
I hated ”Birdman”. I could not finish seeing ”The artist”. Remarkably
boring. ”In the mood for love” not from the USA is the most highly raved
films among recent films I simply cant stand ”In the mood for love”. Even
though its a visual beauty. I hated ”Pan’s Labyrinth” thats was raved.
”Avatar” is a boring movie. ”Titanic” is kitsch. Now do you understand
what I think of American cinema today?
Spielberg lost in his own game. Replaces by mediocre directors like Peter
Jackson and James Cameron. I saw King Kong of Jackson. The film is
amazingly over long. They try to do big and big and then bigger all the
time. The lord of the ring trilogy I refused to see already. How many more
infantile films must I endure? I saw the first Harry Potter. But sequels?
Sequels I almost do not see. With some exceptions.
Then came the abomination called the three dimensional films. This is
terrible. I hope these kind of films will disappear. But they will not. As a
bitter joke let me ask: When will they screen ”Citizen Kane” in 3 dimensions?
It used to be much better. So many great films they did in the USA in
the 1930’s and the 1940’s. And in the new gold age the 1970’s. And even in
2
the 80’th with ”Blade Runner” and ”The raging Bull” two genius films, it
was fine.
So Spielberg was a good director that gave birth to many mediocre directors that imitated him, without the talent. In France which is important
for me for natural reasons, and in Israel that copies France most critics hate
Spielberg. Godard said that all his films are bad. All those critics that hate
Spielberg are left wing critics. And there are no right wing critics. Not in
cinema.
What one of these left wing critics said on ”Indiana Jones” stands out.
’An exaggerate mixture of voice and sound that was done in order to
bring dark ugly urges and make a bunch of despicable dirty dollars’.
Oh yes? So what about ”The matrix”. Or even ”Requiem to a dream?”
My father loved Indiana Jones. It reminded him of his childhood. There
were giving in Argentina double features. An adventure movie first and then
a ”serious movie”. Of course ”Indiana Jones” was much better than the
films my father saw. But he was a child when he saw these adventure films.
Spielberg made my father get reminded of his childhood. What an amazing
achievement of Spielberg.
A blind hate of Spielberg rules in France and in Israel. Spielberg is a
humanist director. His films are naive and shallow but completely earnest.
And emotionally moving. He is not an intellectual. Fine we all agree. But
only intellectuals are allowed to make films?
When Schindler’s List came out a famed satire writer Efraim Kishon
that is a Holocaust survival wrote a thank you note to Spielberg. I think this
person (that was also a remarkable director) is the best satire writer to ever
exist. Better than ”Catch 22” and all the rest.
And I value his opinion on ”Schindler’s List” much more than the full of
hate opinions of the left wing critics from France and Israel.
2
Schindler’s List
If Spielberg has a masterpiece it has to be this film Schindler’s list about the
Jewish Holocaust.
If I were a critic in France or Israel, this line above would have made me
an outcast. Liking such a film is not permitted.
The Holocaust is the vile crime against humanity of killing 6 million of
Jewish men women and children. This was planned in advance in a very
orderly fashion. The German have a tendency to be very efficient. A million
to million and a half children were murdered. This is one of the worst crimes
3
in history of humanity and those who did it, the vile Nazi is one of the most
vile political movement ever.
The reaction to ”Schindler’s List” in the USA was sane. But I care
more about the reaction in France critics. Its natural. But also the French
critic school is much deeper than the USA one. And the Israeli critic model
themselves after French critics.
The best comments I heard is that this film was that it is despicable.
Both in France and Israel. An Indiana Jones on the Holocaust. Later they
found even more nasty things to say.
I loved the movie. From day one. Its one of the movies I loved most.
The critic in France and Israel reminded me of Stalin when talking on
”Schindler’s List”. They all talked with one voice. I was reminded by ”Breaking the waves”. A vile film. Still at the time the lefty critics raved it in one
voice. It took them years to understand that I was right and ”Breaking the
wave” is a vile film. This is what they think now. But why did you write
rave reports then? Why were you not shocked of the evilness then? Like I
was?
3
Human nature: is there still a place to argue
The left wing critics hold humanistic notions on humans. Like Chaplin said:
”We want to live by each other happiness and not by each other misery”.
Unfortunately, this is absolutely untrue. This is untrue as validated in the
20 century. The speech of ”The great dictator” was wrong.
Before we go to the obvious namely the how people behave when they are
afraid a few facts. Since 1900 to today there were 237 wars. Darwin explains
that we are animals that resulted from other simpler animals. The closest
to us in the DNA (97 percent is the same) are the Chimps which are evil
aggressive animals.
The real nature of humans comes out when people can be speak incognito.
All the amazing evilness the internet brought. Disgusting.
To quote Freud: ”men are not gentle creatures, who want to be loved,
who at the most can defend themselves if they are attacked; they are, on the
contrary, creatures among whose instinctual endowments is to be reckoned a
powerful share of aggressiveness.
Its much more fair to quote Thomas Hobbs because he got it right first:
”the life of man in his natural state is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and
short. All men were equally capable of killing. When two groups want the
4
same thing then war is unavoidable.”
That is why Hobbs wanted a government. To curve our brutishness,. It
did not help. Government is the incarnation of evil. And we take it because
we do not trust ourselves to live properly in a genuinely free world. Then
chaos and murders and gang rapes will dominate.
In summary in the words of Kubrick. We are killer apes and did not
change emotionally from our ape time. Its only that we are smarter and
have more dangerous machines.
And now to the main reason. A quote from the movie ”Chinatown”:
”You see mister Gitis, most humans did not have to face the fact that in the
right time and in the right place they are capable of everything”.
The name of the detective is Gittis. Not Gits. But evil Noah Cross never
managed to learn it. But this man that is so evil, said one of the greatest
truth ever told. And amazingly, it was told in cinema.
Its hard to understand how true this line is. Now I explain what consequences can we learn from the basic evil ways of humans. And its not
pretty.
3.1
How do you define a Nazi?
Who should be called a Nazi? Is a Nazi only someone who lived in
Germany in the thirties and fourteens and belonged to the Nazi party?
In my view, a Nazi is simply a person that if he (or she, and I apologize
for not adding she all over) would have been living in Germany at the time,
he would have become a supporter of the Nazi ideas.
If such a person, was lucky enough not to be living in the right time and
in the right place he is still a Nazi to me. I view being a Nazi not as a
circumstantial issue (the time you were born at, and the place) but rather
as an internal thing. The merit of people should not be judged by luck. Is a
rapists that rapes and kills a 10 years old girl not a Nazi? I am sure he is. If
he would have been there he would be one of the happy fellows to use this
legal authorization to kill. He would murder, rape, wound, with pleasure and
positive surprise that his hobbies became legal.
The majority are those who did not care about anything but themselves.
in Nazi times. They saw the Jews being dragged at night to Dachau. Trains
full of Jewish children sent to their extermination. They did not even blink.
Could not care less. They are Nazi too. If you dont care on the burning of
children, you are a Nazi.
A smaller group and the very problematic group and a very hard to judge
group are Nazi enablers. This comes from what M.L King once said:
5
At the end we are not going to remember the words of our
enemies, but the silence of our friends.
So Nazi enablers were those who despised the Nazi but were too cowards
to fight against them.
This is the category I belong to. I am a Nazi enabler. A person that
would have hated the Nazi ideas. I never go with the majority. And I hate
lynching. I hate the way Muslim are lynched today in the USA. I hate the
way immigrants are vilified. But I am a coward. I would not have helped the
Jews. I would not have fought the Nazi. I am part of the problem. Nobody
says anything bad about me, because I was lucky. I was not a German in the
right time and the right place. My luck does not change what I am. And I
am punished quite badly for that. I am a Nazi enabler and I know it and I
have to live with myself for the rest of my life.
What happened in the Jewish Holocaust could have been predicted from
the huge amount of genocide that came before the Jewish Holocaust. History
is a string of hate killing and genocide. History is series of crimes. A vile
vile history of violence. This is just a fact. So the naive ideas of the left are
mistaken. The ideas of the right on human nature are true but they draw
absolutely wrong conclusions from this fact. But that is for another story.
Say you are a person that means well. Then the worse quality you can
have is being a cowards. The second worse quality is being irrational. Mark
my word: a person can never be great unless he is brave. All the great
humans in history were brave.
Why did the German behave in a way they did. Are they different then
us? Sorry, but no. Its easy to think that something is wrong with the
German. The German were in panic. They felt a disaster is looming. They
had a democracy but were too humiliated from WWI. They felt like a big
stone bends their backs. There were many broken parts in their democracy.
The Nazi party was elected in a democratic election. George W Bush should
have understood that elections is not always good. The Hamas could win for
example.
The Germans lived in terrible fear. The homeland, Germany, is in danger,
they were told over and over. They were afraid that Russia and communism
will conquer Germany. They were afraid of all other countries close to them.
And this induced fear of Germans to other Germans. Are Jews loyal to
Germany or to their religion? After being afraid of their neighbors, the last
step is being afraid from themselves. What will I do if I face danger? This
is the worst fear.
And when we are afraid, we become animals. This was verified countless
times in history. This is what Noah Cross meant.
Now comes Hitler. First he improves the economy. This make him pop-
6
ular but does not remove the fear. The gain the admiration of the Germans
he says: Lift your head. Be proud to be a German. There are devil among
us. Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, Liberals, Communists. After we kill them,
your misery will go away.
As Ernest Janning said in the film ”Judgment at Nuremberg”” this tool
of Hitler was the old old story of the of the sacrifice of the lamb. Killing a
scapegoat.
After all Hitler did not hide his opinion. Everybody read ”Mein Kampf”
(”My Homeland”) and knew what he planned for Jews. Why did the German not speak against the clear lies in Mein Kampf? Because they love their
country. But more, because they were afraid. We have to tolerate the less
appealing ideas of Hitler, they said to themselves. They will go away eventually. But they did not go away. The homeland is in danger. And Hitler
will take us FORWARD! They discovered very fast that the Nazi do not like
descent. So Nazi enablers were born. But Hitler meant removing the fear of
the German. They loved him so.
A significant part of the German population was happy to see the Jews
die because they hated them. Not many of them participates in the extermination of Jews, but all of them knew. There is countless evidence for that.
”They did not know it was happening” is a lie. Again see the speech of Ernst
Janning from ”Judgment at Nuremberg” and I quote: ”Where were we when
they (the Jews) cried to us for help in the middle of the night? Blind! Def!
Mute!”.
Ernest Janning, while being fictional character resembles many real life
characters that failed the same way. His story is a tragedy. Ernst Janning
was a kind honest judge. He was known for his pursuit of justice. He wrote
books on giving right to minorities.
But when the real challenge came, he became a Nazi enabler. And worse,
because of his position he became a murderer. He hated the Nazi and despised
them. But he cooperated. At the end he ruled a death sentence to a Jew
that he knew was not guilty. He was just unlucky. He was a judge so he had
to murder to survive. Many Nazi enablers were more lucky and were never
punished.
We are talking here on a great human. Janning was special. He was
known all around Germany as a promoter of Justice. He failed. So of course
I would have failed.
The question if Nazi enablers should go to jail is answered by pure lack.
Janning was a judge and murdered a Jew that he knew was not guilty. He
went to jail. Most Nazi enablers, did not go to jail. They were not judges
most of them. Indeed, the question if Nazi enablers should go to jail or not
is not an easy one and I will not solve it here.
7
Now we get to 3 percent (more or less) of the population. The heroes
(that sadly, I am not one of them). People actively opposing the Nazis, that
at the time was a crime punished by death. They went underground and had
a resistance. They saved Jews by hiding them in their houses fully knowing
that if this is discovered, the punishment for that is death.
What about you? In which group would you have been? Are you among
the 3 percent? Before you answer be careful: Most people do not know
themselves that well.
If you never did it, its time to understand what the above lines imply
about your own life. Maybe you never thought about it this way. But no
matter were you live, what do you think about the people around you? You
think that they are heroes and nice people? Hardly. We know that almost
all humans are Nazi or Nazi enablers by the definition I gave. The number
of heroes whenever there was a genocide in the past was in the low digits.
The 3 percent that I chose was typical to all genocide. So now look again on
you and on those who live near you.
The people around you either Nazi or Nazi enablers. The Nazi or Nazi
enablers are all around us. Including me. The Nazi are here.
All these ”kind” and ”nice” people around you and you think they are
good people. They are not good people. They are just lucky. Have you seen
them in a situation they are afraid for their lives? Unlikely.
OK, lets make a test on how do American reacted (more precisely did not
react) in the time of the Iraq war. Did they oppose the super evil Iraq war?
No. The lies were super clear. Where were the Americans when we needed
to stop the war? I was not only against it, but I predicted precisely what
will happen in the war. This should be limited to one important detail. I
never predicted the rise of ISIL. How could I? I thought that the region now
dominated by ISIL would be dominated by Al Qaeda. I forgot that humans
can stoop even lower.
Do the American care about the 200000 innocent Iraqis that died in the
war? They do not even know this happens. They only care of themselves. If
I would to have an argument with a typical American it would go more or
less like this.
Me: Do you know that 200000 innocent people died by the hands of the
American army in the Iraq war?
American: Maybe. But did you see what a great sale there is now in
Macy?
Did the media show even one funeral of an innocent Iraqi? One child left
without a father because of the evil war. Did they show the funeral of one of
the American soldiers that died? No. Were were we when all those 200000
Iraqi cried to us from their graves? When their children and woman and
8
husbands cried to us to stop the indiscriminate collateral damage? Where
were we? Def! Mute! Blind! How many voted against the war in congress?
Was it 3 percent? Probably less.
Take a good look at those around you. They are not good people and
are lucky to never being tested. I enlisted to the army and they forced basic
training on me. Not to mention that later I was in a war. The basic training
was a sick display of sadistic actions. And everybody but everybody of the
soldiers failed. All of them. They took their misery on the weak. They
all became animals. All of them. Not a single person behaved like the left
wants. Sodom and Gomorrah. Not one righteous person. (I was one of the
victims so acting nicely would not have changed anything). Where are the
3 percent that I was promised? I wanted my 3 percent. No. This time they
all vulgar animals sadist. Nobody was brave. They were all evil. Not only
the soldiers. The commanders as well. A bunch of sadistic pigs if there ever
was one.
Yes that is true. That is what the human race is, except for a negligible
minority. Humans are ”Natural born killers”. We are born without a super
ego. The part that tells you what is right and what is wrong. If you live in
a wild, you will try to kill any human you see (such things happened and
were documented). We are born Nazis all of us. But with education many
of us become ”Just” Nazi enablers. So the Nazi and Nazi enablers are all
around us. They are here. In the place you live. Even if its a democracy.
Even if you live in a tolerant place like Norway and Sweden. 97 percent of
the people are evil because they are part of the problem.
To quote the lord god: After the flood, god said that he regrets what he
did to humanity. God says: ”I will no longer punish humanity in this way in
the future. Because the urges of the heart of Human is evil from his youth”.
From his youth means: when the human is born. God is saying in other
words: ”Humans are born evil” How do we cope with this fact? We ignore
it.
Or like Verbal (Kevin Spacy) says in the film “The usual suspects”:
“The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he
didn’t exist”
Closing the eyes for our evil nature by no means solves anything. This is
why history is a series of terrible crimes.
And my position here makes me an enemy of the humanistic left.
9
4
4.1
The Jewish Holocaust: rare or the norm?
The Jewish Holocaust as the religion of the left in
Israel
They created a new religion. The Jewish Holocaust is taken like something
sacred; And different. And unique. You cant really study it, you cant argue
about it. Its all monolith. When I learned about the Jewish holocaust in
school, to my shame I did not know that there were non Jews in the caps.
They lied to me in school.
The film “Schindler’s List” is a secular (non religious) film on the Jewish
Holocaust. The first ever. And the reason for the anger against this film is
because he did not present the Holocaust as sacred. His film is not religious.
Its a regular film.
I think it is terrible to say that the Jewish Holocaust is unique. Its such
evilness to say so. Are other genocide inferior? No they are not and its evil
to say something like that. Please dont count people and do not compare
genocide.
The Holocaust did not happen in another planet like one famous writer
claimed. It happened here and it could happen in any place.
4.2
Other genocide
A holocaust takes place now in Sudan. The Holocaust is the norm. Learn
History. The history is a series of genocide. A series of rapes murders and
genocide. Rape was the main weapon used in the Bosnia Serbia war. This
was so systematic that it was amazing. Of course, everyone was against
Serbia because they were stronger. And some because Bosnia is a Muslim
country. But who started the rapes? The Bosnia soldiers that the world said
are the better ones. They started the rapes.
Since I think that there is a holocaust frequently its the norm. And its
backed by historical events (see below).
Consider the fascist and violent regime nowadays in Turkey. Fanatic
regime. Friends of the Hamas and Hizballa whose manifests call again for
killing all Jews. Turkey should be kicked out of NATO yesterday. But its
worse. They maliciously deny the Armenian genocide (around world war one.
Roughly 1.5 million people). If somebody acknowledges this historical fact,
Turks start their bullying. They are a bully nation and do it systematically.
Of course I mean the leaders. In this case Erdogan and not on the Turkish
people.
10
What about Congo? A recent genocide. 6 million people butchered by
tribe wars. This is a Holocaust. No different than the Jewish Holocaust. Or
what happens now in Sudan? A Holocaust. A Holocaust just like the Jewish
Holocaust. Again Muslim killing Muslims. Millions were murdered.
And the genocide of the natives by the Americans? Just like the Jewish
Holocaust. Almost no natives were left. And the black slavery? Being slave
for life. Being worked to death. Not being considered humans. They women
being raped consistently. They limbs of black that ”misbehave” are cut.
They treated them like the Nazi treated the Jew, and they did not kill them
mainly because they were needed at work. And being a slave was for life is
a Holocaust. The same as the Jewish Holocaust.
The biggest in numbers Holocaust that happened in the 20 century is the
so called ”Asian Holocaust”. Its just that because of propaganda reasons
and the influence of Japan, its well hidden.
In 1931, Japan invaded Manchuria, that was a part of China. Japan
withdrew from the League of Nations in 1933 because of the critic of this
invasion. Japan invaded the rest of China in 1937. In 1941 and later the
Japanese invaded Malaysia, Singapore, Borneo and Burma, Indonesia, and
the Philippines.
They killed between 1931 and 1945, about 23 million people. In war
crimes. They used it all, torture, forced labor, weapon of mass destruction
(chemical and biologic). The people from Japan had only contempt for the
prisoners of war. I Japan becoming a prisoner of war is considered a disgrace.
You should die and not be that.
Given their contempt they worked the prisoners of war to death. The
Jewish Holocaust is unique? I think only a blind person can think so.
5
5.1
The film
Oscar Schindler: a few words
At start of the film “Schindler’s list” Oscar Schindler is greedy and does
not care about Jews or anything else. A Nazi enabler (he never liked the
Nazi) that just cares on himself. But he slowly changes. Its gradual. He
sees Jews being shot. Tortured. Humiliated. And after a while he could
not live with hiring Jews at starving wages. Recall that this story really
happened. Spielberg study the history of this story to the last detail. And
never deviated from it. And he did not agree to change the past even if it
was unpleasant. Except for one important lie that Spielberg used at the end
so that his humanistic view will not be spoiled by religion.
11
The time in which Schindler cracks is when he sees the girl with the red
coat. Later he see’s her dead. He snaps. This is the most important moment
of the film and so the main message of Spielberg is: the most terrible of all,
was the murder of children.
The only color shot in the film (save the ending) is the red coat girl. It
is also the turning point in which Schindler. From this moment he is one of
the 3 percent. He tries as much as he can to save as many Jews as he can.
He risked his life terribly. And lost all the vast money he had. Before the
war he was a really rich person. After the war, penniless. Later in his life
Schindler survived by contributions from the Jews he saved. They knew he
was a great humanitarian even though throughout the war he was a member
of the Nazi party. A great and rare human.
5.2
Answering the critic: the terrible things they said
on the film
Lets answer a few questions:
1. Why should he have a gentile as the “hero”? One that employs Jews at
starving rates? A member of the Nazi party? Maybe because this story
is true? The truth. Remember this concept? A concept the left and,
any religion for that matter abandons as soon as it conflicts with its
dogma. If faced with the religion version versus the truth, the answer
for them is immediate: kill the truth. This is exactly what they did
to Galileo Galilee. The Muslims fanatics, call Christian and Jews pigs
and monkeys.
Not all the gentile were bad. Its a fact. There were people that behaved
bravely as to hide their Jewish neighbors in their homes, risking death.
Righteous gentiles, they are called.
The state of the Jews (I mean Israel. I know that the Europe left wants
Israel destroyed. By the way, this is possible only if a new holocaust
will happen. But I think this happy event will not happen) recognized
those rare individuals, and in a kind act helped them survive (gave
them money) in their older years. And Commemorate their names.
The names of the righteous gentiles.
2. The critics looked hard to find reasons to hate the movie. For example,
near the beginning there is a scene of Schindler discussing business in
a Synagogue. This is antisemite, said the reviewers. Because Schindler
does his business in the Synagogue with a Jew. The complaint is that,
again, Jews are portrayed like only caring of money.
12
But I want to say: wait! There are two people in the scene. One that
is a gentile. Why does this scene not say that gentiles only care about
money? Is your answer that everybody has this notion that Jewish
people are the money seeking scams and gentiles are not? The scene
that is fully symmetric so this critic is no less than antisemite.
3. Is it wrong to show the Jews of this era in Germany dealing only in
commerce? Its a fact. The truth will set you free. Dealing in commerce
is not a bad thing. But the Jews exclusively worked in that simply
because they were pushed out from other jobs. In Israel, Jewish people
work on all kind of stuff. In farming for example. Writing Poetry.
Making films. Excel in math. Jews do not love money more than
gentiles. Most Wallsreet capitalistic pigs are not Jews. Give me only
the truth, I say. Its the safe way. If you do a movie on the Holocaust,
the Jews there must work ONLY in commerce.
4. Are the Jewish victim heros? Absolutely not. First, they did not fight
and to be a hero you must fight. Moreover, many of them were scam.
Nobody becomes sacred because he was killed. A person should be
judged by what kind of person he was before his death. And you mean
to tell me that between 6 million people there are no scumbags? You
must be joking. There were a huge amount of evil Jews in the camps.
Because among any group of 6 millions there are many evil people.
Those who were in the camps and who where a piece of trash should
be depicted as trash. The truth. Not the religion. The same way,
the film Schindler’s list describes a member of the Nazi party that is
gradually transformed into an humanitarian. A hero. An historical
truth.
5. The critic complained: Jewish people are described in bunches; not as
individuals, like faceless masses Its a lie but lets assume its true for a
moment.
All these claims smell bad. Why would Spielberg show evil Jews like
you complain? There is no other answer but: Spielberg hates Jewish
people, namely himself. Because this great humanitarian is, of course,
evil. You know dear lefty critics? Here you already crossed the point
of being evil. Your critic on Spielberg in this way is evil.
They also seem to never have seen the film. At one instance Schindler’s
stops an entire train and saves his book keeper Itshak Stern. One
person out of a whole train. All the rest of the Jews continue with
their “trip”. Not the mention the last scene (to be later discussed)
that gives the victims real faces.
Spielberg chose many Israelis to play the part of the Holocaust victims,
including a relatively large role for some unknown Israeli actor. Why
13
did he do it? Because he gave these characters special attention. To
each one of them. Also, remember the girl in the red coat. Is she a
faceless person? What are you talking about?? She is so unique in her
different color. A cry against killing children, the most terrible thing
possible is the heart of the film. The red color says so, and also the
change in the way Schindler acts immediately after this scene, says so.
It is almost always the case that when you have a unique element of
color in a black and white film, this element is the essence of the film (a
well known example, the fish in “Rusty James”). But people found it in
themselves reasons to criticize this scene as well. So much ”kindness”
in so few critics.
6. The film was an ordinary film. In that it was by no means propaganda
like most films on the subject.
In ”The pianist” the pianist is saved at the end by a Nazi officer. So
now you would blame Roman Polanski of being antisemite?
He experienced the holocaust as a Jewish child. Dont tell a Jewish
survival that he is antisemite. There should be limits.
What do I mean by it is not a religious film. For example it showed
the everyday life as it was. The film was not always on how evil were
the Nazi. Chooses the truth over the religion. Germans having sex,
drinking wine and eating gourmet food while Jews are slaughtered.
Germans were having fun at these harsh times. The Nazis liked classical
music so much (Hitler said that to understand the Nazi movement you
need to understand Wagner). Of course, if the holocaust is scared,
mundane acts should not be shown.
7. It is an historical fact, that a large part of those who established the
Nazi movement were homosexuals. Later the Nazi turned against them.
So what should we do? Rewrite history like in the USSR? Just to
save face for homosexuals? Give me a break. Those homosexual have
nothing to do with gay that live today. Nothing. What I say here is the
truth. I saw myself a person verbally lynched for saying this historic
fact. He should not have been lynched. They should have thanked him
for telling them the truth.
8. They found the smoking gun! There is this scene the critics celebrated
with hate when the naked Jewish women took a bath after arriving to
the wrong concentration camp. No gas this time. Just water. Some
critics said that this help those who deny the Holocaust. I just suspect
this: Spielberg did research on all these incidents and this was simply
what happened. It was the truth. Most of the things, if not all of
the things happening in this film are not fiction. For example, the
story about the factory for weapon not manufacturing any usable kind
14
of weapon, is true. And its also true that Schindler got away with it
because he spent all his money on BUYING alternative weapons. He
had no money left at the end of the war. Survivors took care of him.
Spielberg shows this scene because its the historical truth. He is a naive
childlike person at times. But a good person, to say the least. He did
not understand how this scene would be taken and he made a mistake.
This scene is a mistake. This scene should not have been there. But he
is not an intellectual. He had good intentions. Is this not what counts?
9. They like the film Shoha. Its a test of will. Nine hours of interviews on
the banality of evil. I could not seat 9 hours and see this film (albeit
I saw parts). The director is called Claude Lanzmann. A very bad
director. All of a sudden this film is chosen as one of the best ever.
Yes, its a religious choice only because this film is on the Holocaust.
Could I not do such a film? What is so hard in asking questions? In
addition the film does not exist. Why? Because nobody saw it.
Schindler’s list is very influential and brought the story of the Jewish Holocaust to many who did not know that. A film of 9 hours of
interviews on the Holocaust that nobody sees except for a bunch of selfimportant people and critics does not change the situation. If the point
is to make many people know the story, not to forget, then Schindler’s
list is a bit more important than Shoha
10. The main ideology:
We know that Schindler took as many Jews as he could to work in his
factory, to save as many lives. Schindler forbids the SS guards from
entering factory. In a kind act he allowed the Jews to observe the Sabat.
Observing Sabat is one of the most important things a Jew must do.
Ad I said before, he did not really let the Jews produce weapon. Its
an historical fact. But without weapon they will kill the Jews. So
Schindler spent all his money (and is left without money after the war)
buying weapon that other did and giving them to the Nazi.
Near the end of the film this happens: The war ends. Germany looses.
The SS guards who have orders to kill all Jews in the factory but
Schindler persuades them not to do so.
The workers give Schindler a present a engraved ring. And here for the
first time Spielberg is forced to lie. Because he cant handle the truth.
They told Schindler that the line engraved on the ring is from the
Jewish Talmud. And they said that what was engraved is: ”Whoever
saves one life saves the entire world”. This is a lie. The Talmud says
something completely different. Spielberg was trying as usual to be
kind, so he lied here. This Jewish saying is: ”A person that saves a life
of a single Jew its like he saved the whole world.”
15
The humanitarian Spielberg could not cope with the evilness of the
religion so he removed the word ”Jew”.
Religions are racist by definition. The one who writes the religion
always gets all the perks. The three major religions are super racist.
But this is hidden like in a military operation. This time the racist
nature of the Talmud was in contrast to the humanism of Spielberg.
But like it or not this is what Spielberg means. Spielberg means this
for all humans. And that SHOULD have been the point of view of the
left. But they lost the way, and betrayed the humanism they should
represents. What a monumental failure of the left.
If this critics of the left will read my words (and they wont) they will
have an answer to anything I said. This is their strong suit. Talking. The
Jews say that ”Nobody declares himself evil”. I am simply not interested in
the reasons that the lefty critics treated this film so badly. For me, it was a
crime.
6
The ending:
Schindler suddenly feels huge guilt. He feels he should have done more. Why
did I keep this car? I could have saved one more Schindler cries. I could have
saved at least one more! He starts to cry. The Jews hug him.
Yes. One human never mind what is religion is is the entire world. This
is my humanistic opinion that I share with Spielberg. This is why the film
should have been embraced by everyone. Including the intellectual left critics.
After that the black-and-white film changes to color. We see the original
Schindler Jews at Schindler’s grave in Jerusalem. Accompanied by the actors
who portrayed them. They put two stones, one of the survivors and one of
the actor. Unfortunately, many survivors were represented by family as they
passed away.
Every person is unique in one way or another. To the very least, he is
almost always loved by his family. His family does not love another person.
So this is unique for this human. Spielberg gave us a lesson in what a
humanitarian is. ”I could have saved one more” This is the lesson. Not ”I
could have saved one more Jew”.
Saving just one more person. This is the whole idea. Its like you saved all
the world. The opposite is also true. If you can kill an innocent person, or
go about doing your plans when these plans could kill one innocent person,
just one person that would die in vain, then ask yourself: are you sure you
are not a Nazi?
16
Spielberg did later a film (“Amistad”) on the crimes against the blacks.
He did not fear that this film would degrade the Jewish Holocaust or make
it less “important”. And it does not. Spielberg did the invaluable action
of recording the Jewish survivors before they all die. Maybe this will help
contrast those “scams of the earth” that deny the Holocaust happened. This
denial rapes the survivors that still live, for a second time. I dare the critics
to find what is wrong with this act. In his recording the survivors. Do speak!
Only one thing remains for me to do. And I have no choice in that matter
as its my ethical duty and honor to say:
“Thank you Steven Spielberg. I personally will never be able to properly
thank you for your wonderful film. And all of those recordings you did I
thank you for this two. You are a great humanitarian. I apologize in the
name of the critics that spoke so badly on you. Like Jesus said on the cross:
”Forgive them father as they dont know what they are doing”.
Bless you Steven Spielberg.
17