Newsletter for Generation 2 Generation

Editorial

Spring is on the way, but before we move on to brighter days we would like to reflect for a moment on our very busy January, marking the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. Anita Peleg writes below of the number of talks we gave. Our speakers also gained some fantastic coverage in the media. Anita was interviewed on Woman’s Hour; John Wood appeared on Sky News and Radio 4’s The World at One; Calum Isaacs, Anita and survivor Dr Martin Stern appeared on Radio 5 Live; an article by Ella Garai-Ebner was published in The Guardian; Avital Menahem appeared on the BBC with her grandfather Yisrael Abelesz, and Helen Stone was interviewed on Teachers’ Talk Radio. And, not least, Baroness Brown talked about G2G in the House of Lords! It’s fair to say, only five years since becoming a registered charity, that G2G is now very much launched into public awareness.

Thank you also to the many who have sent us such positive feedback on past editions of this G2G newsletter. We are always interested in hearing responses to our bi-monthly full newsletter. Please keep them coming, along with any suggestions for future content.

Whilst all these successes may lead us to think that Holocaust education has undisputed legitimacy, however it is not quite so. Following our recent online event, this month’s newsletter looks at the flipside – the unfortunate phenomenon of Holocaust distortion. It makes for hard but necessary reading.

Vivienne Cato

G2G Upcoming Events

Recent Events

What a Busy Year!  

Anita Peleg

This year to date has kept G2G extremely busy.

During January and February 2025, our speakers presented at 277 Holocaust Memorial Day events, an increase of 18% over the previous year. Indeed, this academic year (2024/25) we have seen an increase of 20%, with 405 bookings to date and we estimate that by July 2025, our speakers will have spoken at 440 Holocaust education events.

The increase in interest in hearing a personal Holocaust story was particularly noticeable amongst schools, our target group, with 75% of presentations received by young audiences. We also continue to educate about the Holocaust at community, religious and civic events, in prisons and in public and private organisations.

Overall, the demand to hear a second or third generation speaker continues to grow and since 2020 we have delivered 1300+presentations to more than 140,000 people.

---

Jewish Volunteering Network Awards Ceremony  

Maralyn Turgel

On Sunday 19 January, Gloria Silver, Vera Bernstein, John Wood and I had the privilege of representing G2G at the JVN Awards at The Grove in Bushey-a mini–Jewish Oscars!

It was astounding and humbling to see over 350 volunteers all attending this very worthwhile event and to know that there are so many more silent heroes who give endless time and care to such a variety of causes, from caring for cancer patients to maintaining ancient cemeteries such as Willesden Green.

Every year each charity chooses one of its teams to be its team of the year and this year G2G chose its speakers’ team. We were very honoured to receive a trophy even though we feel that every G2G volunteer deserves this, especially our amazing committee who work so tirelessly. We collected it very much, we felt, on behalf of us all.

None of us do what we do to get public praise. We do it to keep our family stories alive, to keep the memory of the Holocaust alive and to teach communities what can happen by following extremism and hatred, so that we can all hope for a better future.

Reviews

Holocaust distortion 80 years after the liberation of Auschwitz

Vivienne Cato

On 26 February G2G and NHEG jointly hosted an online symposium on Holocaust distortion. It featured four speakers, whose contributions are reflected below. 

Alex Maws: AJR Head of Education and HERITAGE and a founding member of IHRA, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance

Alex explained that Holocaust distortion covers a lot of ground and can be traced back as a phenomenon to the time of the Holocaust itself. When the Nazis used euphemistic terms such as ‘resettlement to the East’ or ‘special operations’ or destroyed the crematoria at Auschwitz in anticipation of the arrival of the Soviets – these forms of evidence-hiding were really a form of Holocaust denial.

The notorious David Irving/ Deborah Lipstadt trial of 2006 put paid to the concept of outright Holocaust denial. Holocaust distortion, conversely, is more complex to deal with. It is a manifestation of antisemitism, very much linked to conspiracy theories. Alex pointed out, as Karolina did subsequently, the use made of the Holocaust by pandemic protesters. He finished with the example of Hungary, which in its public memorial marking the occupation of Hungary by the Nazis (and then the Soviets) not only does not mention Jews, but paints Hungary as an unwilling victim rather than an active collaborator. 

continued…

continued…

Holocaust distortion 80 years after the liberation of Auschwitz

Karolina Placzynta: academic researcher at Aston University, formerly a consultant for UNESCO 

Holocaust distortion is found on every social media platform, as well as online (blogs, websites etc). It can be broken down into categories:

• Omitting Excusing or minimising the impact of the Holocaust; cutting down the number of victims or the severity of what happened. The Holocaust becomes ‘just another’ war or historical event.
• Equating The Holocaust is equated to another event, without regard to the integrity of the suffering of the victims. During the Covid pandemic, measures intended to protect people were equated by protesters with the persecution of Jews – for example, by wearing the yellow star. 
• Blaming Deflecting responsibility and guilt for the Holocaust onto Jews. 
• Smearing Claims that Jewish people have benefitted from the Holocaust either then or now. Evidenced in such terms as ‘the Holocaust industry’. 
• Celebrating Claiming that it was good that it happened and that, for example, ‘six million was not enough’. 

Social media perpetrators of Holocaust distortion are not as easily identifiable as David Irving was, but often are influential public figures whose views then filter down into their followers. If it is implicit, humorous or ironic it is more palatable for the average reader and more likely to bypass both human and AI moderation. 

Dr Jaime Ashworth: educator and researcher, G2G historical adviser 

Does the Holocaust have a discoverable essence? A key challenge for those defending against Holocaust distortion is that its meaning can vary at different times, to different people in different places. For example, ‘survivor’ no longer automatically refers to someone who was in the camps; it now includes refugees and Kinder. The Holocaust is not a fixed thing and one real challenge with distortion is that there must therefore be a fixed thing that you start from. We also have the complicating issue that the Holocaust is a central reference point in modern culture and society which means that it is perceived somehow as public property. Holocaust denial is simpler than distortion as it can be relatively easily challenged. With distortion you actually have to know your stuff. That’s one reason, Jaime said, that he works to educate G2G speakers, because the only way to deal with someone who is distorting the Holocaust is to know it better than they do.

Dr Martin Stern MBE: child survivor of Westerbork and Terezin

Martin Stern’s contribution focussed very much on how factual distortion, particularly relating to Israel, continues into the present day. Those who hold certain fixed positions are, in his opinion, unwilling to listen to a contrary argument but wish only to have their biases confirmed. In his words, ‘Distortion isn’t passive, it’s active’.  Such distortion is never motiveless, even if it is difficult to ascertain those motives. It may be a wish to feel virtuous, after which, believes the distorter, that belief does not need any further defending. Instead, they multiply lies that will cause the challenger to run out of energy. It is a matter of psychology rather than rational argument. 

---

Features

Generative AI and Antisemitism – modern technology and the oldest hatred

Danny Morris 

Please note that this piece contains images and themes which some readers may find deeply offensive and hurtful.  are to make it more difficult for them to be used online.

Extremists and antisemites have always relied on developments in technology to find new ways of delivering their message and radicalising others. From the printing press to the telephone and now social media – these developments have provided new ways of communicating antisemitism. The same is true today of the most recent developments in Artificial Intelligence (AI). 

Much like those previous developments, we once again find ourselves standing on the precipice of a technology we don’t fully understand coupled with extremists who are exploiting it at pace. 

So, what does this look like in practice? At a presentation I delivered to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Plenary on AI at the beginning of December I started my presentation with a video – an AI-generated transliteration of Mein Kampf. The video takes Hitler’s written German and translates it into spoken English, the voice engineered to sound, at least in part, speaking in the same forthright, angry tone as Hitler. 

Crucially the video is overlayed with generative AI imagery. Scenes and faces that are meant to reflect Hitler’s words – of grotesque Jewish faces, a young Hitler and of what appear to be Orthodox Jews counting money, amongst other antisemitic scenes. The words are Hitler’s, written nearly 100 years ago, but the medium couldn’t be more modern, technology that is able to visually translate text to moving images, critically in a way which is highly engaging for its audience.

So, what is generative AI? I t is a subset of Artificial Intelligence that can essentially generate new content, this can be audio, text, video and images, by using large data models and machine learning – essentially smart computer systems that can learn and generate content. Whilst it has been around for a few years now, the technology has become more freely accessible to the public more recently. 

If we jump back a few years, here are some of the earlier examples of AI-generated imagery. Images that are meant to denote Adolf Hitler and Anne Frank embracing, the image on the right showing what appears to be an older Anne Frank with a younger Hitler.

These images reflect one of the overriding ways in which AI is being used by far-right extremists – to distort and damage the memory of the Holocaust. They are unlikely to reflect an attempt to genuinely trick the viewer into believing they are real, not least because when looked at more closely – there are clear signs that they are fake.

What is most concerning however, has been the scale and pace at which the accessibility and sophistication of AI tools has increased. Below is a more recent example of that same theme of characters meant to denote Hitler with Anne Frank – made more warped and disgusting by an attempt to make Anne Frank look pregnant. You’ll note the dramatic increase in quality and realism of the image as opposed to the previous examples. 

You may well ask how is this allowed? Many generative AI tools do have embedded safety mechanisms, guardrails that are designed to ensure that they cannot be exploited by malicious actors. However, by using something known as ‘prompt injection’ you can bypass these moderation mechanisms. 

We can for example assume that direct or explicit references to the Holocaust or Hitler are not allowed. A user who is attempting to generate imagery related to these words would find the AI tool does not permit it. However, by using prompt injection and a more literal, context-free description – the model is unable to recognise it is being exploited. 

This method of gaming AI models is how many extremists are exploiting some of the free-to-use AI tools. In fact, at CST we have noted online conversations in which malicious actors advise each other on how to use these tools, focused on ways to bypass safety features. This includes utilising creative prompts, as well as suggesting that users utilise positive words when generating their prompts. By using more positive language, the AI model is less likely to realise it is being exploited to create hateful content. 

Generative AI and Antisemitism – modern technology and the oldest hatred

Danny Morris 

Please note that this piece contains images and themes which some readers may find deeply offensive and hurtful

The result of this has been a wave of AI-generated content that is now being pumped out by extremists, much of it focused on abusing the memory of the Holocaust. 

Examples include this propaganda artwork showing what appears to be a victim of the Holocaust reclining on a sun lounger, by a pool, with a cocktail in hand, building on a Holocaust Denial tactic first used by the Nazis that served as an important propaganda function. Namely that concentration camps were in fact ‘spa towns’ where Jews could live in safety and comfort, some even had swimming pools. This was of course, totally false, and yet this image is the most modern incarnation of that same attempt to deny the crimes of the Nazis and deny the true nature of the Holocaust, made using AI.

And this image, another created using generative AI – based on the false, far-right claim that the doors to the gas chambers were made from wood and therefore proof that no gassings ever actually took place. 

All of this unfortunately just scratches the surface when it comes to the ways in which AI is now being used by extremist actors to create vast volumes of new antisemitic propaganda. What may have taken a committed propagandist hours or days to complete, can now be achieved in just a few moments by using the right AI tool and the right words. The implications are clear – the challenges that we face and have faced by the developments in the digital space will continue to be at the forefront in the fight against contemporary antisemitism. 

Whilst Holocaust denial is not new, it is important that we are equipped to deal with the latest challenges posed by extremists and developments in technology, and we should remember that the themes, messages and hate driving this phenomenon is something we have been dealing with for decades now. 

At the very least is the requirement for a unified, global approach. The challenges we face in this space are international – extremists in the UK are communicating with their counterparts in the US, Australia, Europe and South America. We cannot expect to solve a global problem by working within strict national limits. 

There are of course a range of other areas that we need to be thinking proactively about – from online regulation to digital literacy and of course, Holocaust education itself – it is clear that antisemitism and the way it is communicated has changed and is continuing to do so. Our responses at the very least need to be prepared to be just as adaptable.

Danny Morris is Community Security Trusts’s Tech Policy Manager

Partner Events