Behind the lies of Holocaust denial | Deborah Lipstadt

Prevodilac: Ivana Krivokuća Lektor: Tijana Mihajlović

I come to you today to speak of liars,

Dolazim pred vas danas da bih govorila o lažovima,

sudskim parnicama

lawsuits

and laughter.

i smehu.

The first time I heard about Holocaust denial,

Prvi put kada sam čula za negiranje Holokausta,

I laughed.

smejala sam se.

Holocaust denial?

Negiranje Holokausta?

Holokausta koji se problematično ističe

The Holocaust which has the dubious distinction

of being the best-documented genocide in the world?

kao najbolje dokumentovani genocid na svetu?

Who could believe it didn't happen?

Ko bi mogao da poveruje da se nije dogodio?

Think about it.

Razmislite o tome.

Da bi negatori bili u pravu,

For deniers to be right,

who would have to be wrong?

ko bi morao da greši?

Well, first of all, the victims --

Pa, pre svega, žrtve -

the survivors who have told us their harrowing stories.

preživeli koji su nam ispričali svoje užasne priče.

Who else would have to be wrong?

Ko još bi morao da greši?

The bystanders.

Posmatrači.

The people who lived in the myriads of towns and villages and cities

Ljudi koji su živeli u mnogim gradićima, selima i većim gradovima

on the Eastern front,

na Istočnom frontu,

who watched their neighbors be rounded up --

koji su posmatrali svoje susede kako ih okupljaju -

men, women, children, young, old --

muškarce, žene, decu, mlade, stare -

and be marched to the outskirts of the town

i odvode na periferiju grada

to be shot and left dead in ditches.

da bi ih ubili i ostavili mrtve u jarugama.

Or the Poles,

Ili Poljaci,

who lived in towns and villages around the death camps,

koji su živeli u gradićima i selima u okolini logora smrti,

who watched day after day

koji su dan za danom gledali

as the trains went in filled with people

dok su vozovi odlazili puni ljudi

i vraćali se prazni.

and came out empty.

But above all, who would have to be wrong?

Ali pre svega, ko bi morao da greši?

The perpetrators.

Počinioci.

The people who say, "We did it.

Ljudi koji kažu: „Mi smo to učinili.

I did it."

Ja sam to učinio.“

Now, maybe they add a caveat.

Možda dodaju napomenu.

Kažu: „Nisam imao izbora; bio sam primoran da to uradim.“

They say, "I didn't have a choice; I was forced to do it."

But nonetheless, they say, "I did it."

Ali ipak kažu: „Uradio sam to.“

Think about it.

Razmislite o tome.

In not one war crimes trial since the end of World War II

Ni na jednom suđenju za ratne zločine od kraja Drugog svetskog rata

has a perpetrator of any nationality ever said, "It didn't happen."

počinilac nijedne nacionalnosti nikada nije rekao: „To se nije desilo.“

Again, they may have said, "I was forced," but never that it didn't happen.

Opet, možda su rekli: „Bio sam primoran“, ali nikada da se nije dogodilo.

Having thought that through,

Razmislivši o svemu tome,

I decided denial was not going to be on my agenda;

rešila sam da se negiranje neće naći na mom rasporedu;

I had bigger things to worry about, to write about, to research,

imala sam veće stvari o kojima bih brinula, pisala i istraživala,

and I moved on.

pa sam produžila dalje.

Fast-forward a little over a decade,

Nešto više od decenije kasnije,

and two senior scholars --

dva starija akademika -

two of the most prominent historians of the Holocaust --

dvojica među najistaknutijim istoričarima Holokausta -

approached me and said,

prišli su mi i rekli:

"Deborah, let's have coffee.

„Debra, hajdemo na kafu.

We have a research idea that we think is perfect for you."

Imamo ideju za istraživanje za koju mislimo da je savršena za tebe.“

Intrigued and flattered that they came to me with an idea

Zaintrigirana i polaskana time što su prišli meni sa idejom

and thought me worthy of it,

i pomislili da sam vredna toga,

I asked, "What is it?"

upitala sam: „Šta je u pitanju?“

And they said, "Holocaust denial."

A oni su rekli: „Negiranje Holokausta.“

And for the second time, I laughed.

Po drugi put sam se nasmejala.

Holocaust denial?

Negiranje Holokausta?

Ljudi koji misle da je Zemlja ravna ploča?

The Flat Earth folks?

The Elvis-is-alive people?

Ljudi koji misle da je Elvis živ?

I should study them?

Njih treba da izučavam?

And these two guys said,

A ova dvojica su rekli:

"Yeah, we're intrigued.

„Da, zaintrigirani smo.

What are they about?

U čemu je stvar sa njima?

What's their objective?

Koji im je cilj?

How do they manage to get people to believe what they say?"

Kako uspevaju da ubede ljude da poveruju u ono što govore?“

So thinking, if they thought it was worthwhile,

Pomislih, ako oni misle da je to vredno truda,

I would take a momentary diversion --

prihvatila bih se trenutne razonode -

maybe a year, maybe two, three, maybe even four --

možda na godinu dana, možda dve, tri, možda čak i četiri -

in academic terms, that's momentary.

u akademskom smislu, to je na trenutak.

(Laughter)

(Smeh)

We work very slowly.

Radimo vrlo sporo.

(Laughter)

(Smeh)

And I would look at them.

I posmatrala bih ih.

So I did.

Tako sam i uradila.

I did my research, and I came up with a number of things,

Sprovela sam istraživanje i došla sam do mnogo stvari,

two of which I'd like to share with you today.

a dve među njima bih želela da danas podelim sa vama.

One:

Prva -

deniers are wolves in sheep's clothing.

negatori su vukovi u jagnjećoj koži.

They are the same: Nazis, neo-Nazis --

Svi su isti: nacisti, neonacisti -

you can decide whether you want to put a "neo" there or not.

možete da odlučite da li ćete staviti „neo“ ili ne.

But when I looked at them,

Ali kada sam ih pogledala,

I didn't see any SS-like uniforms,

nisam videla nikakve uniforme kao iz Šucštafela,

swastika-like symbols on the wall,

simbole na zidu poput svastike,

Sieg Heil salutes --

pozdrave „zig hajl“ -

none of that.

ništa od toga.

What I found instead

Umesto toga sam pronašla

were people parading as respectable academics.

ljude koji su paradirali kao ugledni akademici.

What did they have?

Šta su imali?

They had an institute.

Imali su institut.

An "Institute for Historical Review."

„Institut za istorijski pregled“.

They had a journal -- a slick journal --

Imali su časopis - uglađen časopis -

a "Journal of Historical Review."

„Časopis istorijskog pregleda“,

One filled with papers --

takav da je bio pun radova -

footnote-laden papers.

radova krcatim fusnotama.

And they had a new name.

Imali su i novo ime.

Not neo-Nazis,

Ne neonacisti,

not anti-Semites --

ne antisemiti -

revizionisti.

revisionists.

They said, "We are revisionists.

Rekli su: „Mi smo revizionisti.

We are out to do one thing:

Rešeni smo da uradimo jednu stvar -

to revise mistakes in history."

da ispravimo greške u istoriji.“

But all you had to do was go one inch below the surface,

Međutim, sve što je trebalo da uradite je da zađete malo ispod površine,

and what did you find there?

i šta biste tu pronašli?

The same adulation of Hitler,

Isto ulagivanje Hitleru,

veličanje Trećeg rajha,

praise of the Third Reich,

anti-Semitism, racism, prejudice.

antisemitizam, rasizam, predrasude.

This is what intrigued me.

To je ono što me je zaintrigiralo.

Bio je to antisemitizam, rasizam i predrasude

It was anti-Semitism, racism, prejudice, parading as rational discourse.

koji su paradirali kao da su racionalni diskurs.

The other thing I found --

Druga stvar koju sam otkrila -

many of us have been taught to think there are facts and there are opinions --

mnogi među nama su naučeni da misle da postoje činjenice i mišljenja -

after studying deniers,

nakon izučavanja negatora,

I think differently.

imam drugačije mišljenje.

There are facts,

Postoje činjenice,

there are opinions,

postoje mišljenja

and there are lies.

i postoje laži.

And what deniers want to do is take their lies,

A ono što negatori žele jeste da uzmu svoje laži,

dress them up as opinions --

zaodenu ih kao da su mišljenja -

maybe edgy opinions,

možda zaoštrena mišljenja,

maybe sort of out-of-the-box opinions --

možda mišljenja koja izlaze iz uobičajenih okvira,

but then if they're opinions,

ali ako su to mišljenja,

they should be part of the conversation.

onda bi trebalo da budu deo razgovora.

And then they encroach on the facts.

A zatim zadiru u činjenice.

I published my work --

Objavila sam svoj rad -

the book was published,

objavljena je knjiga

"Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory,"

„Negiranje Holokausta, uznapredovali napad na istinu i sećanje“

it came out in many different countries,

i izašla je u mnogo različitih zemalja,

including here in Penguin UK,

uključujući ovde, kod „Pingvina“ u Britaniji.

and I was done with those folks and ready to move on.

Završila sam sa tim ljudima i bila sam spremna da produžim dalje.

Then came the letter from Penguin UK.

Onda je stiglo pismo od britanskog „Pingvina“.

And for the third time, I laughed ...

Po treći put sam se nasmejala -

mistakenly.

greškom.

I opened the letter,

Otvorila sam pismo

and it informed me that David Irving was bringing a libel suit against me

i ono me je obavestilo da Dejvid Irving protiv mene podnosi tužbu zbog klevete

in the United Kingdom

u Ujedinjenom Kraljevstvu

for calling him a Holocaust denier.

jer sam ga nazvala negatorom Holokausta.

David Irving suing me?

Dejvid Irving tuži mene?

Who was David Irving?

Ko je Dejvid Irving?

David Irving was a writer of historical works,

Dejvid Irving je pisac istorijskih dela,

most of them about World War II,

većinom o Drugom svetskom ratu,

and virtually all of those works took the position

a praktično svi ti radovi zauzimali su poziciju

that the Nazis were really not so bad,

da nacisti nisu stvarno bili tako loši,

and the Allies were really not so good.

a saveznici nisu zaista bili tako dobri.

And the Jews, whatever happened to them,

A Jevreji, šta god da im se dogodilo, na neki način su to zaslužili.

they sort of deserved it.

He knew the documents,

Poznavao je dokumenta,

he knew the facts,

znao je činjenice,

but he somehow twisted them to get this opinion.

ali ih je nekako obrnuo da dobije ovo mišljenje.

He hadn't always been a Holocaust denier,

Nije oduvek poricao Holokaust,

but in the late '80s,

ali je krajem '80-ih godina

he embraced it with great vigor.

prihvatio to sa velikim žarom.

The reason I laughed also was this was a man

Razlog mom smehu je takođe bilo to što ovaj čovek

who not only was a Holocaust denier,

ne samo da je negirao Holokaust,

već je delovao prilično ponosno na to.

but seemed quite proud of it.

Here was a man -- and I quote --

U pitanju je bio čovek - citiram -

who said, "I'm going to sink the battleship Auschwitz."

koji je rekao: „Potopiću bojni brod Aušvic.“

Here was a man

U pitanju je bio čovek

who pointed to the number tattooed on a survivor's arm and said,

koji je pokazao broj tetoviran na ruci preživelog i rekao:

"How much money have you made

„Koliko novca si zaradio

from having that number tattooed on your arm?"

od tog istetoviranog broja na ruci?“

Here was a man who said,

U pitanju je bio čovek koji je rekao:

"More people died in Senator Kennedy's car

„Više ljudi je umrlo u automobilu senatora Kenedija

at Chappaquiddick

na Čapakvidiku

than died in gas chambers at Auschwitz."

nego što je umrlo u gasnim komorama u Aušvicu.“

That's an American reference, but you can look it up.

To je američka referenca, ali možete je potražiti.

This was not a man who seemed at all ashamed or reticent

Ovo nije bio čovek koji je bio iole posramljen ili suzdržan

about being a Holocaust denier.

u vezi sa negiranjem Holokausta.

Now, lots of my academic colleagues counseled me --

Dosta akademskih kolega me je savetovalo:

"Eh, Deborah, just ignore it."

„Eh, Debra, jednostavno ignoriši to.“

When I explained you can't just ignore a libel suit,

Kad sam objasnila da se tužba zbog klevete ne može prosto ignorisati,

they said, "Who's going to believe him anyway?"

rekli su: „Ko će mu uopšte poverovati?“

But here was the problem:

Ali evo u čemu je bio problem.

British law put the onus, put the burden of proof on me

Britanski zakon mi je dodelio obavezu, teret dokazivanja,

to prove the truth of what I said,

da dokažem istinitost onoga što sam rekla,

in contrast to as it would have been in the United States

za razliku od onoga kako bi to bilo u Sjedinjenim Državama

and in many other countries:

i mnogim drugim zemljama -

on him to prove the falsehood.

on bi dokazivao neistinitost tvrdnje.

What did that mean?

Šta je to značilo?

That meant if I didn't fight,

To je značilo da, kada se ne bih borila,

he would win by default.

on bi samim tim pobedio.

And if he won by default,

A ako bi on time pobedio,

he could then legitimately say,

mogao bi legitimno da kaže:

„Moja verzija Holokausta, verzija Dejvida Irvinga, je legitimna.

"My David Irving version of the Holocaust is a legitimate version.

Deborah Lipstadt was found to have libeled me

Ustanovljeno je da me je Debra Lipstat oklevetala

when she called me a Holocaust denier.

kada me je nazvala negatorom Holokausta.

Ipso facto, I, David Irving, am not a Holocaust denier."

Samim tim, ja, Dejvid Irving, nisam neko ko negira Holokaust.“

A koja je to verzija?

And what is that version?

There was no plan to murder the Jews,

Nije postojao plan za ubijanje Jevreja,

there were no gas chambers,

nije bilo gasnih komora,

there were no mass shootings,

nije bilo masovnih streljanja,

Hitler had nothing to do with any suffering that went on,

Hitler nije imao nikakve veze sa bilo kakvom patnjom koja se dešavala

and the Jews have made this all up

i Jevreji su sve ovo izmislili

to get money from Germany

da dobiju novac od Nemačke

and to get a state,

i da dobiju državu,

and they've done it with the aid and abettance of the Allies --

a to su uradili uz pomoć i podsticaj saveznika -

they've planted the documents and planted the evidence.

podmetnuli su dokumenta i dokaze.

I couldn't let that stand

Nisam mogla da dopustim da to prođe

and ever face a survivor

i ikada se suočim sa nekim preživelim

or a child of survivors.

ili detetom preživelog.

I couldn't let that stand

Nisam mogla da dozvolim da to prođe

and consider myself a responsible historian.

i smatram sebe odgovornim istoričarem.

So we fought.

Zato smo se borili.

And for those of you who haven't seen "Denial,"

Upozorenje za one među vama koji nisu gledali „Negiranje“,

spoiler alert:

we won.

pobedili smo.

(Laughter)

(Smeh)

(Applause)

(Aplauz)

The judge found David Irving

Sudija je ustanovio da je Dejvid Irving

to be a liar,

lažov, rasista, antisemita.

a racist,

an anti-Semite.

His view of history was tendentious,

Njegov pogled na istoriju bio je tendenciozan,

he lied, he distorted --

lagao je, izvrtao stvari

and most importantly,

i, što je najvažnije,

he did it deliberately.

to je činio namerno.

We showed a pattern, in over 25 different major instances.

Pokazali smo obrazac na preko 25 različitih većih primera.

Not small things -- many of us in this audience write books,

To nisu male stvari - mnogi među nama u ovoj publici pišu knjige,

are writing books;

bave se spisateljstvom;

we always make mistakes, that's why we're glad to have second editions:

uvek pravimo greške.

Zato nam je drago što postoje druga izdanja, ispravljanje grešaka.

correct the mistakes.

(Laughter)

(Smeh)

But these always moved in the same direction:

Međutim, ovde se uvek kretalo u istom pravcu:

blame the Jews,

okriviti Jevreje,

exonerate the Nazis.

osloboditi naciste odgovornosti.

But how did we win?

Ali kako smo pobedili?

What we did is follow his footnotes back to his sources.

Sledili smo njegove fusnote do njegovih izvora.

And what did we find?

I šta smo otkrili?

Not in most cases,

Ne samo u većini slučajeva

and not in the preponderance of cases,

i ne samo da to preovlađuje,

but in every single instance where he made some reference to the Holocaust,

već je u svakom pojedinačnom primeru gde je pomenuo Holokaust

that his supposed evidence was distorted,

njegov navodni dokaz bio izvrnut,

half-truth,

poluistinit,

date-changed,

promenjen je datum,

sequence-changed,

izmenjen je redosled dešavanja,

someone put at a meeting who wasn't there.

neko ko nije bio na sastanku je ubačen tamo.

In other words, he didn't have the evidence.

Drugim rečima, nije imao dokaze.

His evidence didn't prove it.

Njegovi dokazi nisu dokazivali.

We didn't prove what happened.

Mi nismo dokazali šta se dogodilo.

We proved that what he said happened --

Dokazali smo da je ono što je on rekao da se dogodilo -

and by extension, all deniers, because he either quotes them

i samim tim svi negatori,

jer ih ili on citira ili oni preuzimaju argumente od njega -

or they get their arguments from him --

is not true.

nije istinito.

What they claim --

Ono što tvrde -

they don't have the evidence to prove it.

nemaju dokaza da to potvrde.

So why is my story more than just the story

Zašto je moja priča više od obične priče

of a quirky, long, six-year, difficult lawsuit,

o uvrnutoj, dugoj, šestogodišnjoj, napornoj parnici

sa američkom profesorkom koju je dovukao u sudnicu

an American professor being dragged into a courtroom

čovek koga je sud po svom mišljenju proglasio

by a man that the court declared in its judgment

za neonacističkog polemičara?

was a neo-Nazi polemicist?

What message does it have?

Kakva je njena poruka?

I think in the context of the question of truth,

Mislim da u kontekstu pitanja istine

it has a very significant message.

ima veoma značajnu poruku.

Because today,

Jer danas,

as we well know,

kao što to dobro znamo,

truth and facts are under assault.

istina i činjenice su pod napadom.

Social media, for all the gifts it has given us,

Društvene mreže, uz sve dobro što su nam pružile,

has also allowed the difference between facts -- established facts --

takođe su dopustile da se razlika između činjenica -

ustanovljenih činjenica -

and lies

i laži umanji.

to be flattened.

Third of all:

Treće - ekstremizam.

extremism.

You may not see Ku Klux Klan robes,

Možda nećete videti odore Kju Kluks klana,

you may not see burning crosses,

možda nećete videti krst koji gori,

you may not even hear outright white supremacist language.

možda nećete čuti ni otvoreno rasistički jezik.

It may go by names: "alt-right," "National Front" -- pick your names.

Možda će koristiti nazive „alternativna desnica“,

„Nacionalni front“ - birajte.

But underneath, it's that same extremism that I found in Holocaust denial

Ali ispod toga se nalazi isti ekstremizam koji sam otkrila u negiranju Holokausta,

parading as rational discourse.

a koji paradira kao da je racionalni diskurs.

We live in an age where truth is on the defensive.

Živimo u dobu u kome je istina u odbrambenom položaju.

I'm reminded of a New Yorker cartoon.

To me podseća na jedan strip iz „Njujorkera“.

A quiz show recently appeared in "The New Yorker"

Nedavno se u „Njujorkeru“ pojavio kviz

where the host of the quiz show is saying to one of the contestants,

u kome voditelj kviza kaže jednom od učesnika:

"Yes, ma'am, you had the right answer.

„Da, gospođo, dali ste tačan odgovor.

But your opponent yelled more loudly than you did,

Ali vaš protivnik je vikao glasnije od vas,

so he gets the point."

tako da on dobija poen.“

Šta možemo da učinimo?

What can we do?

First of all,

Pre svega,

we cannot be beguiled by rational appearances.

ne smeju nas prevariti prividi racionalnosti.

We've got to look underneath,

Moramo da sagledamo stvari iznutra,

and we will find there the extremism.

a tamo ćemo pronaći ekstremizam.

Second of all,

Drugo,

we must understand that truth is not relative.

moramo shvatiti da istina nije relativna.

Number three,

Kao treće,

we must go on the offensive,

moramo krenuti u napad,

not the defensive.

a ne u odbranu.

When someone makes an outrageous claim,

Kada neko iznese nečuvenu tvrdnju,

even though they may hold one of the highest offices in the land,

čak i ako se možda nalazi na jednom od najviših položaja u zemlji,

if not the world --

ako ne i na svetu -

we must say to them,

moramo reći toj osobi:

"Where's the proof?

„Gde je dokaz?

Where's the evidence?"

Gde su činjenice koje to potvrđuju?“

We must hold their feet to the fire.

Moramo vršiti pritisak na nju.

We must not treat it as if their lies are the same as the facts.

Ne smemo se ophoditi kao da su njene laži isto što i činjenice.

And as I said earlier, truth is not relative.

Kao što sam prethodno rekla, istina nije relativna.

Many of us have grown up in the world of the academy

Mnogi od nas su odrasli u akademskom svetu

and enlightened liberal thought,

i uz prosvećena liberalna razmišljanja,

where we're taught everything is open to debate.

pri čemu su nas učili da je sve otvoreno za raspravu.

But that's not the case.

Međutim, nije tako.

There are certain things that are true.

Postoje izvesne stvari koje su istinite.

There are indisputable facts --

Postoje nepobitne činjenice -

objective truths.

objektivne istine.

Galileo taught it to us centuries ago.

Galilej nas je tome naučio pre mnogo vekova.

Even after being forced to recant by the Vatican

Čak i nakon što ga je Vatikan naterao da javno oporekne

that the Earth moved around the Sun,

da se Zemlja okreće oko Sunca,

he came out,

izašao je

and what is he reported to have said?

i šta se navodi da je izjavio?

"And yet, it still moves."

„Ipak se okreće.“

The Earth is not flat.

Zemlja nije ravna ploča.

The climate is changing.

Klima se menja.

Elvis is not alive.

Elvis nije živ.

(Laughter)

(Smeh)

(Applause)

(Aplauz)

And most importantly,

I što je najvažnije,

truth and fact are under assault.

istina i činjenice su pod napadom.

The job ahead of us,

Posao koji je pred nama,

the task ahead of us,

zadatak pred nama,

the challenge ahead of us

izazov pred nama

is great.

je veliki.

The time to fight is short.

Vreme za borbu je kratko.

We must act now.

Moramo da delujemo sada.

Later will be too late.

Kasnije će biti prekasno.

Thank you very much.

Mnogo vam hvala.

(Applause)

(Aplauz)