It is acceptable for the Polish government to house its current criminals in Auschwitz-Birkenau

I must admit I am a bit sad that after you described an Auschwitz theme park in such detail you did not use it as an argument or alternative. I would have liked to debate that with you, but you chose to scrap it. "I believe that if the Polish government chose this second option and allowed a private company to exploit the suffering of those interned in Auschwitz-Birkenau for profit, this would represent a grievous insult to the memories of those who died there, and they would, quite rightly, face intense criticism from the international community." Perhaps another time then. Oh well, to start I guess I'll tell you why my opponents entire argument is based on a lieHis entire argument relies on that fact that Auschwitz-Birkenau is not effective at educating its visitors-especially children, in the horrors that happened there. Forgive me my dear Sir, you are obviously quite educated, even brilliant and are a phenomenal debater, but anyone who visits Auschwitz-Birkenau as it is today and is not moved and spellbound is either a blockhead or just insensitive. All of the horrors of the place still exist today, when tour groups walk by the still bloodstained wall where prisoners who were discovered to be pregnant were executed, it is common for many of them to burst into tears. Even a child could understand the significance when he walks under the Iron letters "Arbeit Macht Frei", I felt a chill run cold down my spine when I walked under those. Auschwitz is not a "sterile collection of austere-looking buildings, the reconstructed crematorium and a dusty old museum full of faded documents and black and white photographs." The place is already a theme park-it is a sadists dream vacation and captures the attention of all who come, it needs no more visual examples or prisoner reeancatment to get the point across. The place has thousands of miles of razor wire, the "austere" buildings gaze down on every person with malice, each one with many horrifying tales to tell what went on in there. It is filled with gruesome exhibit after gruesome exhibit, you can see the electric fence where prisoners preferred to commit suicide, because it had higher voltage than the others, or the appelplatz where prisoners were hung for stealing a slice of bread, or even the gallow where Kommandant Rudolph Hess was hung-one of the first people to be tried for crimes against humanity! Point is Auschwitz is much more effective as a ghostly remnant than a living museum, where would you rather go, an old abandoned Western Ghost town in the southern US, that oozes history, or an old Ghost town that looks ridiculous and modern because of renovations, and annoying tour guides dressed up in ugly costumes and that have bad accents? This leads to my second point: Using Auschwitz-Birkenau as a living museum will decrease its integrity and effectivenessNo one wants to go to a place that has 1000 violent criminals shoved in it. They'd be dangerous and probably throw bodily fluids at the tourists. Also, it is an innacurrate re-enactment because the majority of people that were housed there were innocent-that is why its so notorious, so putting violent criminals in Auschwitz-Birkenau is like putting an actors in an opera. it would confuse people what the place was used for. So basically what I've said is that A-B is much more effective as a lifeless ghost town, and live prisoners will detract from the message and ruin its integrity. The only difference between A-B and any other prison is that innocent people were kept there so again putting prisoners there is like putting actors in an opera. They have no historical relevance being there, but A-B is already effective as it is.