Usually, at least in an American context, the argument is that applying “Holocaust” to the killing of Jews is offensive because the word basically means “burnt offering”, so “Shoah” (Hebrew for “catastrophy”) should be the name instead of “Holocaust”.
I agree with that, but I don’t think it’s a pressing issue and we’re already talking about an institute that emphatically uses the older term, if you’re wondering why I didn’t mention it.
Richard of Devizes a 12th century monk was the first person to use the word in regards to mass killings, and it was to describe Richard I’s killing of Jews in London in 1189.
I’ve heard it suggested that “Shoah” be used to refer to the genocide of Jews specifically, and Holocaust for the general project of Nazi genocide.
Usually, at least in an American context, the argument is that applying “Holocaust” to the killing of Jews is offensive because the word basically means “burnt offering”, so “Shoah” (Hebrew for “catastrophy”) should be the name instead of “Holocaust”.
I agree with that, but I don’t think it’s a pressing issue and we’re already talking about an institute that emphatically uses the older term, if you’re wondering why I didn’t mention it.
The Holocaust has direct links to Judaism.
Richard of Devizes a 12th century monk was the first person to use the word in regards to mass killings, and it was to describe Richard I’s killing of Jews in London in 1189.
Genocide is the all encompassing term.