I once posted
"The allies we potentially lose are those interested in ending genocide in general who may have nothing invested in JUST saving a single minority for persecution
OTOH there was a unique anti-Semitic aspect. Pragmatically what is best? Eradicating anti-Semitism or eradicating all forms of genocidal tendencies and inhumanities?
That is what I ponder! What are the trade-offs!"
This issue can be approached from several distinct yet complementary positions.
A The factual history of the Nazi Holocaust
B. The current benefits to the victims and to the Jewish People
C The future legacy
The Holocaust was a uniquely Jewish event and it virtually excludes Gentiles as victims.
A this may or may not jibe with the facts. Others were persecuted
B+C While it may elicit sympathy for Jews, it also means that only Jews have a vested interest. That means that Gentiles have no vested interest in countering Holocaust deniers. It also means that the future emotional investment would be exclusively a Jewish one.
The Holocaust was not a uniquely Jewish event and it includes many other minorities
A Facts seem to support this
B Other Minorities will take ownership, too. Instead of centering upon Jewish victimhood, it focuses upon inhumanity.
C while this won't be an exclusively Jewish tragedy like Tisha B'av, it will resonate as a universal tragedy to remind all peoples about the evils of brutality and genocide
Thus it may lose its potency for us, but increase its longevity via a more universal appeal