“Why do governments give millions each day for war, when
they spend nothing on medicine or poor people?
Anne Frank, Diary of a Young Girl, entry of 3 May
1944.
"I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human
beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality
helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never
the tormented."
— Elie Wiesel
"First they came for the socialists, and I did not
speak out—because I was not a socialist... Then they came for me—and there was
no one left to speak for me." — Martin Niemöller.
"It is possible to imagine without difficulty what
awaits the Jews at the mere outbreak of the future world war. But even without
war, the next development of world reaction signifies with certainty the
physical extermination of the Jews.
Leon Trotsky
In 2022, Rosemary Sullivan’s The Betrayal of Anne Frank was
withdrawn by its Dutch publisher after its main claim was proven unfounded.
This wasn’t just a correction of an academic error but also a revealing sign of
how Holocaust historiography is progressively degrading under modern
capitalism. The book falsely claimed there was a “Jewish betrayer” responsible
for the Frank family’s arrest—an allegation based on guesswork,
misinterpretation, and pseudo-forensic showmanship. Despite its flaws, major
media outlets endorsed and heavily promoted the book, only retracting it after
experts showed its claims fell apart under minimal examination.
The Sullivan affair exemplifies a wider trend: the shift of
the Holocaust from a historical event tied to capitalism, imperialism, and
class conflict into a depoliticised morality story, a detective mystery, and
ultimately a tool used by the ruling class for ideological purposes.
The Individualisation of Fascist Crime
Sullivan’s core argument in “Who betrayed Anne Frank?” is
flawed. It suggests that the moral failure of a single person is the key to
understanding Anne Frank’s death, which resembles crime fiction more than
historical analysis. Anne Frank was not betrayed by an informant; she was
murdered by the Nazi regime—an instrument of German financial capital in its
most brutal form. The relentless search for a single betrayer serves an
ideological purpose: it simplifies a complex historical atrocity into a moral
failure, shifting focus from social forces to finding a villain.
This pattern is now widespread. Popular Holocaust
stories—memoirs, films, museum exhibits, and “cold case” investigations—mainly
highlight personal accounts, moral conflicts, and psychological profiles. The
Holocaust is seen as a platform for individual heroism or guilt, while the
broader social, economic, and political factors that led to fascism are
overlooked. This focus on individualisation is deliberate, aligned with modern
bourgeois ideology, which struggles to recognise the link between fascism and
capitalism without condemning itself.
From Historical Event to Cultural Commodity
The public perception of the Holocaust has significantly
evolved over time. In the years right after World War II, its memory was
influenced by survivors, scholars, and political groups who saw fascism as
stemming from a crisis within capitalism. The genocide was closely linked to
the fall of bourgeois democracy, the betrayal of the working class by Social
Democracy and Stalinist regimes, and Germany's imperialist ambitions for
dominance.
By the late 20th century, the way Holocaust memory was
presented changed significantly. Museums, films, memoirs, and educational
programs multiplied, but their focus shifted mainly to personal stories, moral
lessons, and emotional engagement. As a result, the Holocaust evolved into a
universal symbol of “evil,” losing touch with its specific historical context.
This commodification fulfils a specific ideological role by
turning the Holocaust from a political incident into a commercial commodity. It
replaces critical analysis with emotional appeal, factual history with
storytelling, and class conflict with individual tragedy. As a result, the
Holocaust is transformed into a brand—one that is referenced, consumed, and
marketed—rather than a cautionary tale about risks associated with capitalist
crises.
The Reactionary Function of the “Jewish Betrayer”
Narrative
Sullivan’s book specifically aimed to identify a Jewish
betrayer, not just any traitor. This choice is deliberate and significant. The
image of the Jewish collaborator—such as a Judenrat official, kapo, or
informant—has historically been employed to blur the moral distinctions of the
Holocaust and suggest a false “shared responsibility” between victims and
perpetrators. In reality, these individuals operated under extreme coercion and
degradation, and their actions, though morally complex, were driven by the
totalitarian system of extermination. However, the political implications of emphasising
these figures depend entirely on the surrounding context.
Currently, promoting a “Jewish betrayer” narrative serves
reactionary goals: it downplays fascist crimes by implying Jews were partly
responsible for their own fate. It fuels far-right ideas that aim to diminish
accountability for German imperialism. Additionally, it supports the German
state’s cynical use of Holocaust remembrance to justify its backing of Israel’s
actions in Gaza and its wider militarist goals. Institutions like the
Buchenwald memorial have prohibited criticising Israel under the pretence of
fighting antisemitism, thus exploiting Holocaust memory for modern imperialist
aims. In this environment, seeking a Jewish betrayer is not just misguided but
also politically perilous.
The Pseudo‑Science of the Cold Case Method
Historians like Johannes Houwink ten Cate, Bart van der
Boom, and others challenged Sullivan’s claims by showing that the book’s main
accusation was based on speculation, misinterpretation, and a lack of
understanding of historical context. The so-called "smoking gun,” an
anonymous note from after the war, lacked any real evidence. The supposed
betrayer, Arnold van den Bergh, was already in hiding by 1944. When examined
critically by scholars, the entire case fell apart immediately.
The core problem is methodological. The cold-case approach
views history as a solvable puzzle using forensic clues, rather than
recognising it as a complex social process influenced by class forces. This
pseudo-scientific method, borrowed from criminal investigation and the
true-crime genre, appeals to the desire for narrative closure and a definitive
villain.
This method is fundamentally anti-historical. It fails to
recognise the Holocaust as a result of capitalism in crisis, imperialism, and
the collapse of the working-class movement. Instead of providing analysis, it
resorts to speculation; instead of offering context, it leans on conjecture;
and rather than presenting history, it seeks entertainment. The appeal of these
approaches mirrors the ideological demands of bourgeois culture, which favours
soothing stories over confronting uncomfortable realities.
The Real Betrayal: The Collapse of Working‑Class
Leadership
From a Marxist perspective, the key betrayal enabling Anne
Frank’s death was not carried out by any single informant, but rather by the organisations
professing to represent the working class, which ultimately betrayed them.
The Social Democratic parties surrendered to their national
bourgeoisies well before Hitler rose to power. Meanwhile, the Stalinist
bureaucracy placed the fight against fascism behind its diplomatic tactics,
resulting in the 1939 Hitler–Stalin Pact. The Communist Party of the
Netherlands, which had organised the brave February 1941 strike—the first
large-scale protest against the Nazis in Europe—was politically rendered
powerless by Stalinism and unable to lead a revolutionary movement. Without a
revolutionary socialist movement, the working class was left vulnerable to
fascism.
This is the true historical lesson of the Holocaust. It is
also the lesson that bourgeois historiography tries to hide by focusing on
individual morality and betrayal stories.
The Contemporary Stakes: Memory as Ideology
The Sullivan affair must be seen within a larger crisis in
our understanding of history today. As capitalism encounters new
difficulties—such as war, authoritarian states, and economic recessions—the
ruling class often manipulates historical memory for its
Three key trends are apparent: firstly, the commercialisation
of Holocaust remembrance, turning it into a product disconnected from its
political significance and aimed at consumerism; secondly, the depoliticisation
of fascism, viewed as a moral flaw or anomaly rather than a result of
capitalist crises; and thirdly, the exploitation of Holocaust memory to justify
modern militarism, nationalism, and imperialism. Within this context, the
Sullivan affair exemplifies how Holocaust history is being ideologically
compromised in a capitalist system.
Conclusion: The Necessity of Revolutionary Leadership
Anne Frank’s words from May 3, 1944—“Why do governments
give millions each day for war, when they spend nothing on medicine or poor
people?”—challenge decades of ideological distortion. Her question isn’t a
moral dilemma; it’s a political critique of a capitalist system that fosters
war, poverty, and genocide.
Her death teaches us that the real lesson isn't to pursue
informants after eighty years, but that the working class must create its own
revolutionary party—free from capitalist, nationalist, Stalinist, and
social-democratic influences—to stop the barbarism that took her life from
returning. This barbarism isn't just history; it's an active threat, nurtured
by the same capitalist system that is pushing the world toward a third world
war.
