{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028128821850794947, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006930289441500204, 'mean_word_length': 5.596774193548387, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Third World views of the Holocaust1

For many observers, the United Nations Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance held from August 31 to September 7, 2001 in Durban, South Africa, constituted a throwback to an earlier era of Third World, and not only Arab, antipathy towards the Jewish state. While Israel was not supposed to be a focus of UN and related NGO deliberations, and while other controversial issues also intruded on the anti-racism agenda (e.g. reparations for slavery, compensation for colonialism), concurrent violence between Israel and the Palestinians ensured that the very legitimacy of Zionism would again be open to debate. Given Israel’s international image as the successor state to the Nazi-targeted Jewish nation, ideological assaults on Zionism inevitably affect the framing of the role of the Holocaust in modern history. For sure, the Durban conference did not officially restore the “Zionism is Racism” 1976 proclamation of the General Assembly of the United Nations; yet anti-Israel (and anti-Semitic) language in some working groups and among some official delegations was enough to occasion a walkout by both the Israeli and US delegations. Gauging among non-Western intellectuals objective, sober, or unpolemical sentiments with regards to the Shoah would appear a whimsical, naı̈ve, or illusory endeavor. Nevertheless, a more comprehensive treatment of perspectives on the Shoah emanating from the developing world, based on both scholarly literature and proceedings from the first conference convened specifically on this topic, reveals a more balanced, nuanced, and illuminating set of observations: (1) intellectual globalization includes the Shoah within the emerging universal consciousness of world history; (2) reparations claims for other people’s historical injustices derive their moral authority and tactical moorings from precedents established for Holocaust victims; (3) H/holocaust parallelism is a strategy employed by otherwise ignored groups under fire to gain support and sympathy from the West; (4) post-Shoah moral responsibility redounds upon an Israel whose overall legitimacy, despite criticism of certain policies, is respected; and (5) denial of Holocaust (along with fictionalization and self-suppression) is replicated in instances of Third World genocides. In short, the Third World indigenizes the Holocaust and its legacies in diverse manners.