ePub Saving the Jews: Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Holocaust by Robert N. Rosen in History

Review

17 of 19 people found the following review helpful. Uneven; But a Very Good Place to StartBy Conrad von MetzkeThere has long been a myth that Franklin D. Roosevelt in effect ignored the Jews of Europe in 1933-45 when in fact he might well have saved most of them. Older books that treat with the topic have developed this myth to the point that it has become a "popular fact;" along with the one about knowing in advance about Pearl Harbor; or giving Eastern Europe away to Stalin without a fight. FDR was hardly perfect and had some serious failures mixed with his monumental successes; but the "popular facts" mentioned above are blatant rubbish; and in the case of the salvation of the Jews; Robert N. Rosen has made a major contribution to the debunking process. (Fortunately; newer general biographies of FDR - e.g. those by Jean Arthur Smith and Conrad Black (both very much worth reading) - are no longer repeating these shabby legends; but they persist nonetheless.) Rosen's is primarily a scholarly approach: Citations abound and the references used comprise a formidable list indeed. And on that basis alone this is a magnificent first encounter with its topic; especially for one who has the interest and resources to pursue the matter further via the bibliographic material. Though not particularly even-handed in its treatment; Rosen's book nevertheless is very clear when it comes to what Roosevelt tried to do; what he in fact achieved and what he didn't; and in each case why things went as they did. And Rosen is not above faulting FDR in matters where Rosen feels there is fault; though he hardly belabors these elements (as he does in a few cases of the opposite assessment). But the book is not overly well written for general reading; the style is abrupt; sometimes fairly mechanical; occasionally repetitious; and too often a bit awkward when viewed primarily from a literary vantage. In short; Rosen is a brilliant scholar and a magnificent researcher; he is not however a terribly good writer. (Lord Black has somewhat the same problem in his monumental biography; but not even remotely on the same level.) In addition there are a few proof-reading lapses that it would be well to fix; lest readers who know better confuse errors of minutiae with errors of real substance. As examples; Governor Herbert Lehman was not "Herman" (p.21); Vice-President John Nance Garner was not "James" (p.135); and Robert H. Jackson was not one of the judges at the Nuremberg Tribunal; he was the chief prosecutor (p.206). In summary; Rosen's book is a superb treatment of its topic in terms of depth of fact and support for the material; and in solidly-researched debunking of persistent myths that really ought never to have been allowed to grow in the first place. Rosen's work could; however; do with a bit of touch-up in places; and perhaps a bit of help with the mechanics of narrative would have made it a smoother read for the non-scholar.4 of 6 people found the following review helpful. Wyman ComparisonBy Cabin DwellerDirectly after reading David Wyman's "The Abandonment of the Jews;" I read this work by Rosen. While Wyman dedicated all of his book to a thorough examination of policies only concerning Jewish rescue; Zionism; State Department conferences; bombing; the voyage of the St. Louis; etc. between 1941 and 1945; Rosen feels compelled to write the following less scholastic; more subjective "Roosevelt could not understand Adolf Hitler and thought him insane" on page 2. On page 495; for example; he wastes more words with "Neither FDR nor the leaders of American Jewry were perfect" and "Roosevelt had sworn to utterly destroy the Axis war machine". I was encouraged to see Rosen start in 1933; but quotations like this set a trend for an agenda. Ironically; it is Rosen who writes to refute Wyman's "agenda" of revisionism. The mind-reading that Rosen frequently relies on subordinates his history to Wyman's; not their feelings about Roosevelt. Page 446 is the low point: Rosen writes a mock letter to "St. Louis" refugees to show Roosevelt's conflict of interests. I found here that Rosen considered winning an argument more important than tact and taste. Does he even win the argument about the St. Louis?He certainly supplies all readers with enough information about bombing Auschwitz to convince us just how big of a mistake that would have been. And he does a great job of showing us why Roosevelt; rightly; resisted these bombings out of hand.Perhaps the most enlightening aspect of this history is the Jewish effort to attack Great Britian; lest Winston Churchill appease Near Eastern Arabs and Indian Muslims by so strictly limiting Jewish access to Palestine. The Irgun discussion; although obviously very important; was somehow not a priority for Wyman.Other issues would seem to put the conflicted sides to this argument on the same page. The US State Department; the Bermuda Conference; and especially Breckenridge Long; to the extent that even the president has limited power; are the real villains here. Although "Abandonment" and "Saving" are idealogically opposed and marketed as such; the facts within both texts make those errors and indifferences a consensus.2 of 3 people found the following review helpful. saving the jewsBy STING1this is an outstanding book on debunking incorrect rumors about fdr's care of the jews and about his having to contend with americas fifth column during wwii