The Dreyfus Affair

This time in history was a very pivotal point in journalism expression, many journalists used this trial to express themselves and ideas that would normally not expressed.

“I cannot recognize the verdict of guilty. . . . It was my misfortune to become entangled in these atrocities. But these misdeeds did not happen according to my wishes. It was not my wish to slay people. . . . Once again I would stress that I am guilty of having been obedient, having subordinated myself to my official duties and the obligations of war service and my oath of allegiance and my oath of office, and in addition, once the war started, there was also martial law. . . . I did not persecute Jews with avidity and passion. That is what

Clay Shirky who wrote Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable (1993) argues that society doesn’t need newspapers society needs journalism to save society. Shirky supports this argument by giving a historical background to the problems newspapers face and how the problems have developed over time and the solutions society has came up with. The blogger concludes that in order for journalism to go farther new models must be created in place of past molds. Shirky directs this blog toward the current and future generations in attempt to motivate new models and methods of journalism.

This highlighted not only Stalin’s fear of being subsided as leader of the USSR, but his ruthlessness in the face of opposition. Then followed the 1936 Show Trials, in which there were many arrests of party members, ex-opponents, military figures and non-party members. The first involved Zinoviev, Kamanev and their allies, who confessed under force for falsified crimes of being responsible for attempts to wreck Soviet industry and to kill Soviet leaders, and subsequently were shot after being convicted. The second followed in January 1937, in which Karl Radek, a well known Trotskyite and Pyatakov was shot, again on falsified crimes. In March 1938, Bukharin and 20 members of the old Right Deviation were tried, and found guilty of working with Trotsky and foreign governments against the USSR. All confessed and were shot, with Tomsky being so crippled by fear that he committed suicide. The Show Trials were a grotesque sham by which Stalin cast immense fear into the hearts and minds of Russia’s political clout, ensuring total control over any opposition through fear alone. Removal of any potential opposition was extended in July 1937 when Yezhov (Stalin’s head of the secret police from 1936) drew up a list of over 250,000 ‘Anti-Soviet elements’, which included intelligentsia such as artists, writers, musicians, priests and so forth. This became known as the Anti-Soviet List, ad anyone unfortunate enough to be found on it was arrested,

A significant reason the courts continued with prosecuting Kwidzinski was that reversing the charges would make people question the legitimacy of the case all together. The state’s attorney’s office had already charged three alleged attackers. If there was any doubt of Kwidzinski being involved in the case there would be a problem with the lawyers of the other two attackers by trying to jump on the bandwagon to freedom. Even though Kwidzinski may have been justifiably innocent and wrongly accused, the attorneys for Jasas and Caruso would have claimed their clients were wrongly accused as well.

mysteries which occurred in 1953 was the electrocution of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg under the Espionage Act. They were convicted for giving the secret information about the atomic bomb to the Soviet Union. The anti-communist sentiment that characterized the Cold War and McCarthyism led to their trial and execution. Even though there is some evidence of the Rosenbergs' guilt, numerous facts which were discovered after the death of Ethel and Julius argue more convincingly that they were innocent victims of Cold War hysteria.

The justice system back then wasn’t as advanced as it is today, but people are still getting punishments that far outweigh their crime that person has committed.Some historians might argue about other conspirators had punishments that far outweighed their crime, George Atzerodt had a punishment that far outweighed his crime, he was assigned to kill the Vice president but he made no attempt to even go to the VP’s room yet he still got a punishment. The country back then was in shock and was trying to find a way of revenge for the president’s death. So they executed Atzerodt in public to make the humiliation even more outstanding.

The Dreyfus case was the trigger that caused the social and political explosion of the unstable France of the late nineteenth century. The

Post World War II, many Nazi leaders were put on trial by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. At the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials Speer was charged with, conspiracy to commit crimes against peace, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Twelve out of twenty-one accused Nazi leaders were sentenced to death. Speer was found guilty but he was sentenced to twenty years imprisonment, thus escaping the hangman’s noose. Historian Van der Vat

The person that took advantage of this and supported him being condemned was the prosecutor who held very little pity towards Meursault. This is shown many times during the trial one example would be by this quote, “After asking the jury and my lawyer if they had any questions, the judge called the caretaker.”(Camus.90) The reason that this show a lack of pity and how the prosecutor clearly wished for Meursault’s sentence is because it shows that the prosecutor had done extensive research into the personal background of Meursault even going as far as to bring up Mamon’s death to gain leverage during the

The French patrols enforced this belief strongly, as they took away everything many citizens had, but just for Jews. For example, “In the German-controlled zone, Jews were stripped of their jobs, their freedom of movement became restricted, and many were arrested” (Berman). Germany began to create concentration camps and deporting Jews that they had control over. Soon after, Germany started to treat Northern France as a “dumping zone” for Jews. However various small groups were able to save hundreds of Jewish lives, mass murder still occurred throughout France. Many Jewish citizens knew that they were being put on the back burner as well, expressing, “Jews — who have been living in France for 2,000 years and have been full citizens since 1791 — now feel that they are looked upon as second-class citizens” (McAuley). Although split into two very different parts before Germany took over Vichy, France was one of the top three countries in all the countries helping Germany to kill the most Jews throughout the time of the Holocaust. Surrendering to Germany after, one thing France didn’t keep in mind was, “The important thing is that one should not become indifferent to the suffering of others, that one should not stand by and just raise one’s hands and say, “There’s nothing I can do, I’m just a little one person,” because I think what everyone of us does matters” (“Why”). After realizing how powerful Germany could be, France began to collaborate with Germany and their full anti-Semitism

So anti-Semitism arose when a piece of paper containing French army secrets was found in a waste basket in the German Embassy, to which Dreyfus had just left. This resurfaced the stereotype that all Jews were not loyal to anything or anyone but themselves which began when Christianity banned lending money so Jews became tax collectors in Europe stated (https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007172, 2016). The army used Dreyfus’ case to try to set an example to all the other Jews all over France to stay away from France and its army. The reason they felt that they must do this isn’t because they thought Dreyfus was guilty

In addition to this, in the mindset of the day, if someone was suspected of anti-Bolshevik activities, they were automatically guilty. The investigator would look for anything he could find that could possibly make the person guilty at all. Sometimes the investigator would take up a random piece of literature, say it was bad, and have the suspect shipped off, even if the “incriminating” evidence was something as benign as the children’s story Goodnight Moon. The investigator would not be the one to tell the suspect what he was even accused of; he would just take the “evidence” and people would soon kidnap the suspect and toss him in a cattle car to Siberia, which was cramped with a mass of other convicts. When the prisoners reached the Gulag, an official there would take everyone’s valuables and toss the convicts into cramped cells. The interrogation could start at any time. For some the interrogations were that day, and for others it never came and their lives were lived out in the dirty cells. When and if the interrogator got a confession out of someone, a prison sentence was read out and the convict was sent off to the actual Gulag.

Throughout history, journalism has impacted in both the history and the politics of a country. In 1894, a man named Alfred Dreyfus, who was a Jewish military officer in the French army, was used as a scapegoat by being wrongfully accused of sharing French military defense secrets to Germany. Alfred Dreyfus is importance lies in the strong antisemitism movement in France that erupted after (Fischel 119). The Affair began in September 1894 when The French Army Intelligence Bureau intercepted a letter supposedly written by Alfred Dreyfus. Alfred Dreyfus was court-martialed for treason and revealing military secrets to the Germans in his letter. This false accusation was easily accomplished given the antisemitism of the time, combined with the

The film Prisoner of Honor (1991) draws attention to Dreyfus affair in 1894. Alfred Dreyfus was a Jewish French Army Captain who, accused and convicted of treason for selling military secret to the Germans in 1895, was sentenced to a life of imprisonment on Devil’s Island. Colonel Georges Picquart represents a man with too much honor, who risks his own life to expose the truth behind Dreyfus Affair. Upon further investigation by Picquart, a level of the conspiracy was uncovered that Dreyfus was wrongly accused of a treason. In 1898 Major Hubert Henry confessed that he forged a document against Dreyfus and later Henry committed suicide. The Dreyfus affair was very significant to the French politics of the 20th century because it split France in two. The Dreyfus affair demonstrated that the French of the Republic was very devoted to the France. French Army protected the traitor in order to keep the public trust in them. The primary source J’ Accuse (1898) by Emile Zola, a French novelist wrote a letter to the President of France which was published in the newspaper all over the France. Zola accused the Government of antisemitism and French Army General Staff officer for accusing an innocent man. The second primary source is The Beilis trial (1913) by New York Times; it describes that Mendel Beilis was a Jew, also accused of the murder of the Russian boy for ritual purpose in 1911, Russia. Beilis case is indeed comparable to the Dreyfus Affair because in both cases injustice