478
Ms. Apfelbaum replies:
Professor C homsky's re–
sponse is focused la rge ly on the
global ques ti on o f freedom of
speech (including academi c free–
dom).
Some times, howeve r ,
whe n thi s issue is brought to
center stage a nd the spotli ght o f
a na lys is shined upon it , a ll o ther
moral a nd political considera–
ti ons become ove rshadowed a nd
relegated to the obscuri ty o f the
wings; thi s can res ult in a n im–
bala nced view of drama ti c
even ts. C homsky quest ions, fo r
exampl e, whethe r the commo–
tion surrounding rev isioni sm is
ma inl y the result of Faurisson's
academi c suspension a nd trials.
In lookin g a t these eve nts solely
from a "freedom o f speech" pe r–
spective, one find s the
content
itself of the revi sioni st ideas
somehow being moved back–
stage a nd downpl ayed . T he
"efforts of a tiny group of rev i–
sioni st hi stori a ns" a nd their
deni al of the H olocaust may
then seem neither worthy of
conside rat ion nor problema tic,
a nd no a ttempt therefo re need
be made to a nalyze the ha rmful
consequences of their fa lsifi ca–
tions, incita ti ons, a ppropria ti ons
by others, etc. But one cannot
simpl y neglect to ta ke these into
account - es pec ially when there
a re the p sychosoc ial effec ts on
people's lives a nd on the ir socia l
identities . Neithe r can one
PARTISAN REVIEW
igno re the poli tical a nd soc ial
dynami cs whi ch accompa ni ed
the ri sing v isibility of the rev i–
sioni st theses: lo r ma ny o f us
who li ved these last few yea rs in
Fra nce, se nsiti zed to eve nts ob–
se rved within tha t context–
whi ch included both the coll a pse
o f ce rta in left-win g ideological
bel iefs a nd the ri se o f the Ri ght
- there was indeed a sense both
of u rge ncy to understa nd in
depth , a nd of immedi acy to react
towa rds, the rev isioni st phenom–
enon in its vari ous ma nifesta–
ti ons, coroll a ri es, a nd implica–
ti ons.
Whi le we may agree with
C homsky tha t rev IsIOnism is
limited to a " tiny group ," we
none theless should keep in mind
the lessons o f hi sto ry about how
ma rgina l phe nomena a nd initi–
a ll y small political groupings can
become e nergized by a pa rticu–
la r soc iopolitical context a nd
have a devas ta ting impact. In
fac t, I
do
concur with C homsky's
assessmen t tha t the phe nome non
of "no-Holocaus t rev isioni sm" is
limited , tha t Fauri sson is just an
"obscure" professo r , a nd that
those who champi on him are
indeed onl y a sma ll minority;
but thi s, by no means, precludes
the phenome non from be ing sig–
nificant. It can only a ppear in–
signifi cant - a nd invite has ty or
uncri tical compa ri sons to U .S.
revisioni sts such as Butz - if one
igno res the la rger realities o f the
