• sleepundertheleaves@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Take Auschwitz for example - a horrible place, but worth preserving so that future generations can see history in person and learn from the past.

    I understand your argument, and I see the merit in it, but I deeply disagree. Some history doesn’t deserve to be preserved. We can learn from the worst of our past - we can celebrate the lives of the Nazis’ victims, mourn their deaths, and learn about the evil that killed them and the apathy and bigotry that enabled it - without turning genocide into a tourist attraction.

    They paved over Hitler’s bunker and put a parking lot on top of it. A much more fitting end.

    • uniquethrowagay@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Auschwitz became a museum because Auschwitz survivors made sure it was. Survivors fought to preserve it and created what we see today. Otherwise it would long have been paved. It’s a place to remember the victims but also the atrocities commited there.

      It’s not so much a tourist attraction, rather a monument to warn about fascism. It’s very different to visit than to just read about it in a book. Also, it’s not for-profit. It’s publicly funded.

    • groet@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The parking lot was built specifically to keep Nazis from having a place of worship