پن کیا گیا ٹویٹ
I've already responded to this thread by @Alonso_GD here: x.com/buhooooooooooo…
And I've responded specifically to his attempt to discredit and smear Benny Morris here: x.com/buhooooooooooo…
As I mentioned there, Alonso (a supposedly serious scholar at @LSEsociology) has a despicable pattern of lying about other scholars, misrepresenting their words to discredit and smear them.
His strategy is consistent: claim that prominent scholars have "ideological limitations that prevent them from concluding that Israel can commit genocide at all," then dismiss their conclusions about Gaza as biased and predetermined. After targeting Morris with this smear, he now turns his venom on Prof. Yehuda Bauer—with even more malicious distortions.
The Benny Morris thread ended with a direct refutation of Alonso's accusation about Morris being ideologically unable to see Israel as capable of committing genocide, as Morris actually warned that not only is Israel capable of committing genocide, but he fears that, given its current trajectory, this might be where it's headed.
This time let's start with the direct refutation. In a lecture to Danish educators in Jerusalem, Bauer explicitly addressed this possibility, stating: "What we have here between the Israelis and the Palestinians is an armed conflict—if one side becomes stronger there is a chance of genocide." When specifically asked if Israel could commit genocide against Palestinians, Bauer answered bluntly: "Yes."
This statement alone dismantles Alonso's core accusation that Bauer has "ideological limitations that prevent him from concluding that Israel can commit genocide at all."
Regarding Gaza, Bauer has been harsh and unequivocal in condemning Israeli actions and the way Israel has been pursuing the war. In an interview last year, he explicitly called Israeli actions war crimes and atrocities, emphasizing that while Hamas has genocidal goals, Israel's military response is "not justified in the way it is being conducted" because "masses of people are killed there who have no connection to the matter."
This frank condemnation completely contradicts Alonso's portrayal of Bauer as someone ideologically incapable of acknowledging Israeli wrongdoing or potential for atrocities.
Understanding who Yehuda Bauer actually was makes Alonso's distortions even more egregious.
Bauer (who died a few months ago at the age of 98) was one of the world's preeminent Holocaust scholars—Professor Emeritus at the Hebrew University (@HebrewU), director of the International Institute for Holocaust Research at Yad Vashem (@yadvashem), a member of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum's Academic Committee (@HolocaustMuseum), founding editor of the journal Holocaust and Genocide Studies, and senior adviser to the Swedish government on the International Forum on Genocide Prevention. He was also an independent advisor and later honorary chairman of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (@TheIHRA).
His scholarly approach was characterized by rigorous historical analysis over ideological considerations. He extensively studied various genocides—Rwanda, Darfur, Armenia—emphasizing that "the suffering of victims of all genocidal massacres or mass murders is always the same. There is no gradation of suffering."
His approach to genocide studies was characterized by nuanced analyses, rejection of simplistic claims, and recognition of universal human capacity for both good and evil.
His framework consistently emphasized that all humans and societies are capable of both perpetrating and resisting genocide. This universal approach directly contradicts Alonso's claim about "ideological limitations" regarding Israel.
Alonso's characterization of Bauer's position on the Roma genocide is particularly egregious. Bauer's "exclusion" of the Roma, as Alonso chooses to put it, is a gross and intentional misrepresentation of a 1992 correspondence with another scholar where he addresses similarities and differences in Nazi actions and policies toward different groups and argues for the need to consider and analyze them separately on account of those differences.
Bauer extensively discussed the genocide of the Roma and repeatedly stated that the Nazis had committed several genocides in parallel during their years in power and WWII. His discussions of differences in Nazi policy toward Jews versus Roma represent historical analysis of Nazi actions and priorities, not value judgments about victim suffering.
The phrase "not important enough" that Alonso quote-mines from that 1992 letter was specifically about Nazi prioritization, not moral significance of Roma suffering. In that same letter, Bauer explicitly states that this "makes the tragedy of the Gypsies no less poignant, and no less horrible."
This exemplifies Alonso's method: extract fragments, strip context, construct a false narrative. He transforms scholarly analysis of Nazi policy differences into alleged callousness toward genocide victims—character assassination masquerading as academic critique.
Now that we've seen how completely wrong Alonso's claims are, it's worth considering what he was attempting to accomplish with his characterization of Bauer. His attack operates on multiple levels designed to completely delegitimize Bauer's scholarly authority:
The "Ideological Bias" Accusation: By claiming Bauer has "ideological limitations that prevent him from concluding that Israel can commit genocide at all," Alonso attempts to paint him as a partisan hack rather than a serious scholar—someone whose conclusions about Gaza can be dismissed as predetermined rather than evidence-based.
The "Holocaust Exclusionist" Smear: Alonso's second accusation is particularly insidious. By claiming Bauer "excludes Roma and disabled people" and calls them "not important enough," he's trying to paint Bauer as someone who minimizes or dismisses the suffering of vulnerable groups. This portrayal suggests Bauer operates from a hierarchy of victimhood that devalues certain lives.
Together, these accusations attempt to paint a picture of Bauer as both an Israeli apologist and someone callous toward genocide victims—essentially suggesting he's both biased and morally compromised. These are reprehensible smears, and particularly when addressed at a Holocaust scholar, they are vile allegations that strike at the core of professional integrity.
This is character assassination masquerading as scholarly critique—and as we've seen, it's built entirely on lies and distortions.
Perhaps the most revealing aspect of Alonso's smear campaign is his choice of target. In attempting to paint Bauer as someone ideologically incapable of recognizing Israel's potential for genocide, he selected one of the few scholars who has explicitly and publicly addressed this very possibility and who, even at 98 years old, continued to speak out forcefully against Israeli actions in Gaza. This fact alone exposes the fundamental dishonesty of Alonso's critique and raises serious questions about his broader methodology and motivations.
Interestingly, it seems the two scholars Alonso picked to target with this specific smear about "ideological limitations that prevent them from concluding that Israel can commit genocide at all" are not just ones whose entire approach, history, and body of work indicate the exact opposite, but also happen to be the ones who specifically and explicitly addressed this very possibility.
What we see here is not scholarly disagreement but something really troubling: the deliberate distortion of academic work to serve ideological ends.
The stark contrast between Bauer's actual scholarly record and Alonso's characterization serves as a warning about the dangerous erosion of intellectual honesty in certain corners of academia today.
Alonso Gurmendi@Alonso_GD
Bauer, for instance, famously argues that the Holocaust can only be understood as the genocide *of Jews* and excludes Roma and disabled people (presumably LGBTQI+ people too) from it, claiming the *G-words* were “not important enough” to the Nazis jstor.org/stable/494357?…
English
