First, Condemnation Over an "Unacceptable" Outrage, then a String of Concessions, then Craven Suggestions About Blame Share, Finally Weakening Resolve

…and surrender.

…the usual response of governments is mere condemnation of an atrocity, describing an outrage as "unacceptable"

writes James Molyneaux, who witnessed the dead of Belsen (danke zu Franz Hoffmann, who also points to Dissent's Paul Berman article, und zu Jon Baum).

Next come a string of concessions to the offender, leading to a craven suggestion that the victims must share some of the blame, and then concessions to the demands of the perpetrators.

Opinion formers appear to have forgotten Kipling, who warned of the outcome.

"It is always a temptation
To a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say:
'Though we know we should defeat you,
We have not the time to meet you,
We will therefore pay you cash to go away.'
And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That, if once you have paid him the Dane-geld,
You never get rid of the Dane."

Increasingly, the general public weakens in its resolve. Under the label of moderation, it is fashionable to plead for understanding; to do a Chamberlain and settle for a piece of crumpled paper in the mistaken belief that the word of dictators and terrorists can be trusted. Today, we should reflect on our responsibilities, and those of our governments, to stand up to the prejudice and tyranny that can still, today, lead to genocide. These events happened in my lifetime. They are not lost in the past; they could still happen again today.