An open letter to Sen. John Curtis
You recently asked for input on four places you described as spots 'where American principles aren't just spoken, but also felt.' Those places, you said, are the Holocaust Museum, The National Museum of African American History and Culture, Arlington National Cemetery, and Ensign Peak in Utah.
This open letter to you, in advance of your maiden speech on the Senate floor, is about one of those places: the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.
Twenty years ago, our very large family went on a trip around the country. We visited national sites with historical significance, including the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall in Philadelphia and the Statue of Liberty in New York.
When we arrived in our nation's capital, we had a long list of places to see: Smithsonian Museums, the Washington Monument, the Capitol Building, the White House and the Lincoln Memorial. But, on the very top of my list was the Holocaust Museum.
One of the reasons I felt it was important for my children to see and understand what happened during the Holocaust was that many of the children in our family would not have been spared. You see, in our family, a number of our children have disabilities, are Black, have Jewish heritage or other attributes that would have made them targets during the Holocaust.
People with disabilities were some of the first to be targeted under the Nazi regime, literally beginning the same day the war began. The Holocaust Museum Encyclopedia estimates that some 250,000 people with disabilities were 'euthanized' (murdered) during the regime. At first, doctors and staff in hospitals were encouraged to neglect patients, letting them die of starvation and disease. Infants and small children were also killed by lethal injection. Later, gas chambers were used.
Next, we have children who have Jewish ancestry. Gone. My Black children? Obviously 'inferior' to the 'ideal' race envisioned by Hitler and his goons. Black people in Germany faced discriminatory laws and policies that restricted their economic and social opportunities. They were also harassed, imprisoned, ostracized, unable to find work, involuntarily sterilized and yes, murdered.
In 1935, the Nazi government enacted two Nuremberg Race laws. The first, the Reich Citizenship Law, restricted German citizenship to those 'of German or related blood.' The second outlawed interracial marriage and any sexual relations between Germans and Black or Roma people.
As we moved through the museum and its special exhibit at the time on medical 'experimentation,' several of my older children were indignant. 'That's not right!' they exclaimed. 'That's not fair!' Of course, they were right. They, like many people, wondered how things could have gotten so bad that mass killings became just a job.
That leads me to my second reason for taking my children to the Holocaust Museum. I wanted them to understand that genocide does not start with killing. In fact, Sen. Curtis, when I talked to one of my children about this letter, I asked them what had stood out to them about the visit. My son was 15 at the time and told me that first, the museum had made a deep impact on him and is something that still comes to his mind. Second, what really stuck with him is just what I had hoped: that genocide does not begin with killing. That's where it ends.
Dr. Gregory Stanton, founding president of Genocide Watch, has observed that every genocide has predictable processes, or ten 'stages,' although he is careful to clarify that this is not a linear process. Multiple stages can happen simultaneously.
The first four stages all have to do with 'othering' people. The first stage is classification, when we classify the world into 'us versus them', including separation by race, ethnicity, religion and national origin.
The second is symbolization, when we begin to give names to those classifications: Jew and Aryan, Hutu and Tutsi, Turk and Armenian. Sometimes the symbols are more than just naming, but are physical, like the Nazi yellow star, or the blue scarves the Khmer Rouge forced people from the eastern zone of Cambodia to wear.
The third stage is discrimination, when laws and customs prevent groups of people from exercising their full rights as citizens or as human beings. Groups of people can't work, can't marry, can't send their kids to school and can have citizenship stripped away. They can't get redress in courts, can't vote and can't get passports. The list is extensive on how laws are used to further the othering.
The fourth stage is dehumanization — calling people cockroaches, vermin, animals, a 'cancer' or disease. The dehumanization makes it easier for people to kill those they classified, symbolized and discriminated against. It becomes an act of patriotism to 'cleanse' society rather than seeing it as the murder it is.
The fifth stage is organization, usually by the state, often using militias and armies. Sometimes, hate groups are militarized. The organization can be formal or informal, centralized or decentralized.
The sixth stage is polarization, when 'moderates are targeted who could stop the process of division, especially moderates from the perpetrators' group.'
The seventh stage is preparation, when plans for deportation and eventually killing are made by leaders. Perpetrators who support the leaders plans are usually trained and armed.
The eighth stage is persecution, when victims are 'identified, arrested, transported, and concentrated into prisons, ghettos, or concentration camps, where they are tortured and murdered.'
The ninth stage is extermination, or genocide, the intentional destruction, in whole or in part, of a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.
Finally, the tenth stage is denial. Denial continues the genocide, because it is an ongoing attempt to destroy the victim group psychologically and culturally, and to deny its members even the memory of the murders of their relatives.
In my mind, one of the key lessons we should learn as individuals and society is that, believe it or not, actions have consequences. There was a musical a number of years back that had a song with the words: 'When I choose the very first step on the road, I also choose the last.'
I want my children, my grandchildren, my neighbors, friends and fellow residents of planet Earth to deeply internalize that when we say 'never again,' we must start at the beginning of the process and not the end.
The Holocaust Museum is sacred ground, not only because of its deliberate efforts to remember those that some would prefer forgotten, but also because of its hopeful belief that genocide can be averted.
As you pointed out in your letter, you do not want to be a politician that fits Aesop's insight, 'After all is said and done, more is said than done.' The Holocaust Museum should be a stark reminder that action must be taken when society begins to head down the road that leads to destruction of an entire population.
I wish you all the best in your time as a Senator. My plea to you is to please take action and stand for those being 'othered.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
38 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Could Somerville mayoral hopeful Willie Burnley fairly represent Zionist constituents?
Councilor Willie Burnley Jr.'s seat was empty except for a keffiyeh while constituent Daniel Engel spoke at a Somerville City Council meeting on March 27. Courtesy David Lichter Burnley told me he left not to insult Engel but to protect the protesters after council chair Judy Pineda Neufeld threatened to have police remove them if they continued chanting. 'I stood up to use my presence as a city councilor to potentially protect many residents who were expressing their political beliefs,' Burnley said. (According to Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Advertisement To Engel, Burnley's actions epitomized his approach. 'My experience with him has been he wants to pander to his people and doesn't necessarily want to work with anybody who disagrees with him,' Engel said in an interview. Burnley is running for Somerville mayor against incumbent Mayor Katjana Ballantyne and Councilor Jake Wilson in the Sept. 16 preliminary election. Burnley's been compared to New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani. Both are democratic socialists. Both are raising fears among many Jewish, Zionist constituents who worry that amid Advertisement In a recent Burnley said he would implement the ballot question if it passes. Many Jews see the measure as discriminatory against Israel and local businesses with Israeli ties. How broadly it applies would depend on interpretation, but there are concrete impacts. For example, divestment supporters Two photographs of Burnley at pro-Palestinian protests amplify some voters' fears. In one, which Burnley posted on social media, Burnley poses at a Washington, D.C., rally while in the background, someone holds a sign with a Nazi swastika flag next to an Israeli flag. In another, at a 2024 Tufts University encampment, Burnley poses in front of posters reading 'Glory to the martyrs,' 'Zionist tactics were used to kill Eric Garner, George Floyd … ' and other victims of police violence, and a picture of American and Israeli flags on fire. Advertisement Burnley has a right to protest. But those signs are offensive. A swastika represents the Nazi regime that killed 6 million Jews and millions of others. 'Glory to the martyrs' extols political violence, since Islamist terrorist groups Burnley said he didn't create the artwork or know who was holding the swastika sign. He removed the swastika photo from his social media last year, after some people asked him to. But he wouldn't disavow the sentiments. Because some US police officers have He suggested 'martyrs' could refer to 'all people murdered by Israeli genocide,' including children. Burnley said the swastika sign was a 'comparison about two governments' actions, two governments that many … view to have committed a genocide.' (The genocide accusation itself is Anti-Zionism isn't always antisemitism, and Burnley says he's I spoke to nearly a dozen Jewish Somerville residents, including some acquaintances from my time living in the area. Many moved there seeking a liberal, diverse, welcoming community. Now, they feel unwelcome and ostracized. Advertisement Brian Sokol, a Somerville human rights commissioner speaking for himself, said his pro-Israel lawn sign After the Somerville City Council Group members told me they often see anti-Israel graffiti in public spaces. Some expressed discomfort with protests that block access to public places. In a letter to the state's antisemitism commission, Shalom Somerville said an Israeli child had his locker vandalized with pro-Palestinian graffiti his first day at a Somerville public school. Teachers posted pro-Palestinian signs in classrooms, according to Shalom Somerville and a photograph one member emailed me. 'I don't want to live in a community where I have to worry if my mayor or city council will all of a sudden say if you're Israeli, you're not welcome here, or if you work for an Israeli company, you're not welcome here,' resident Bruce Kaplan told me. Elana Bloomfield, a Somerville physician, told me she feels like almost every public city event becomes a platform for pro-Palestinian signs and rallies, and she worries about electing a mayor who encourages that activism. 'It's really hard to live like that. It's not a comfortable environment,' she said. Advertisement I asked Burnley if he could represent Zionist constituents. Burnley said he has neighbors with different political views, and Zionist constituents 'might not always agree with my analysis, my decisions, my approach, but they will always know where I stand.' Somerville residents need to know their mayor will clean graffiti; enforce time, place, and manner restrictions on protests; take harassment seriously; and ensure events are welcoming to all residents, including Jews, Zionists, and Israelis. Voters must decide if they believe Burnley can. Shira Schoenberg can be reached at


Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Israeli-American Council HQ Targeted With Swastika Graffiti: What We Know
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The national headquarters of the Israeli-American Council (IAC) in Los Angeles were vandalized with swastikas and Nazi symbols at the weekend, the organization said. The vandalism — including the words "F*** Jews, BDS" and the letters "SS," a reference to the Nazi Schutzstaffel — was seen on the sidewalk, the building's entrance and barriers near the Shepher Community Center in the Woodland Hills region, KTLA reported. "The Shepher Community Center is home to the Israeli-American and Jewish communities in Los Angeles," IAC Los Angeles wrote on its Facebook page on Sunday night. "We will remain strong and united against all hatred and antisemitism." Vandalism seen outside the Israeli-American Council headquarters in Los Angeles this weekend. Vandalism seen outside the Israeli-American Council headquarters in Los Angeles this weekend. Israeli American Council Los Angeles This is a developing story. More to follow.


Black America Web
5 hours ago
- Black America Web
Trump Moves Obama and Bush Portraits to Hidden White House Hallway
Source: STAN HONDA / Getty The White House isn't just a seat of power—it's a stage for American history and a canvas reflecting the nation's leaders. Once, presidential portraits, including those of President Barack Obama and President George W. Bush, occupied celebrated public spaces where millions could appreciate their legacies. That changed during Donald Trump's presidency, when both portraits were quietly moved to a discreet, staff-only hallway—an act that resonated especially strongly with communities close to both leaders, and provoked a broader conversation about respect, representation, and the power of symbols. Presidential portraits have always carried weight—especially Obama's, as the first Black president and a powerful symbol of breaking barriers for African-Americans and all Americans who value representation. His portrait's removal from the Grand Staircase, a place where history breathes and visitors reflect on leadership, was far more than a simple change in décor. But Obama's wasn't the only portrait to be relocated. George W. Bush's was also moved out of public view—a decision that raised questions, given Bush's notable relationship with the Obamas. Over the years, Presidents Bush and Obama, and their families, have demonstrated deep mutual respect and even genuine friendship at public events—sending a message of unity and civility across the political aisle RELATED STORY: Daughter of George W. Bush Endorses Harris What Michelle Obama Said About Trump's 1st Inauguration Could Be Why She's Skipping His 2nd We care about your data. See our privacy policy. Why was Bush's portrait moved too? One clear factor is that President Bush notably never endorsed or supported Donald Trump, choosing to be a rare Republican voice who, along with the Obamas, represented a vision of leadership distinct from Trump's. Their visible friendship highlighted a different standard for presidential behavior—one grounded in decency and common ground, traits that many saw as starkly contrasting with the Trump years. By relocating the portraits of both Obama and Bush, Trump didn't just alter the visual landscape of the White House; he signaled a sharp departure from the legacy—and alliances—these two men represented. It's impossible to ignore the political tensions influencing these moves. Trump's infamous clashes with Obama and the public 'birther' claims are well known, but Bush, too, had a complicated relationship with Trump, marked by a lack of support and public silence during Trump's campaigns. Moving both men's portraits has been widely interpreted as an attempt to minimize their presence and legacy in the nation's house, especially for visitors. For the African-American community, and Americans who value unity, this act raises real questions: Whose stories do we honor? Whose images deserve to inspire the next generation when they walk the halls of history? For Black Americans, the very presence of Obama's portrait is deeply meaningful—but the message is amplified when paired with Bush's, given their visible friendship and mutual respect. Together, those portraits once reflected a rare and hopeful moment of bipartisanship and inclusion. Removing them is more than a symbolic sidelining; it's a reshaping of the narrative about whose leadership belongs at the forefront. The decision to relocate Obama's and Bush's portraits, in the context of their legacies and their relationship, makes it clear that vigilance is necessary—not just to preserve the legacy of the first Black president, but to protect a more inclusive, honest story of America's leadership. As history continues to unfold, it's up to all of us to insist on a White House—and a nation—that honors the full truth and diversity of its past and present. LIKE US ON FACEBOOK . FOLLOW US ON INSTAGRAM & TWITTER . SUBSCRIBE TO OUR YOUTUBE . STAY INFORMED! CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER! HEAD TO THE HOMEPAGE SEE ALSO