The Holocaust
The Holocaust
I'm curious---------does anyone on Forum Garden dis believe The Holocaust? I am particularly interested in knowing the views of our latest member M.A.S.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
The Holocaust
MAS has an exam and has gone to revise. Said he'll be back in a fortnight or so.
Yes, the Holocaust happened, the death camps were real, and it was a deliberate policy.
Yes, the Holocaust happened, the death camps were real, and it was a deliberate policy.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
The Holocaust
I believe the evidence ......the Holocaust happened unfortunately.
A smile is a window on your face to show your heart is home
The Holocaust
What an odd question, Lon. How can an event of historical record be a matter of belief?
Various medieval expulsions of Jews from countries around Europe involved demands that they ether convert or leave, often with associated deaths. The burning of Ghettoes and destruction of their inhabitants was commonplace during plague outbreaks. Restrictions on where they lived, how they could acquire education and what trades they could practice applied for most of the last thousand years in England. The 19th century persecutions in Eastern Europe led to mass emigration, quite a lot of it to London. None of that counts as The Holocaust. What happened across Europe under the Third Reich was unique in that it was so bureaucratically efficient. It's that scale and efficiency which qualifies The Holocaust as a distinct event in the history of genocides.
The process was equally directed as an elimination of Jews, the Roma people and homosexuals from territories administered under the Reich, mostly by way of extermination through labour camps and death squads. Some of those camps had no other function than extermination but most exploited their prisoners by working them for as long as they remained capable of work. A small minority were physically expelled from the Reich, most were judicially killed. None of what happened was illegal under Reich laws though it was subsequently declared to have been in breach of back-dated International law. The invention of new law at Nuremberg and its back-dating to cover the events of The Holocaust was an extreme reaction to an extreme series of events.
What's to believe? All that happened, it's better documented than most history. Whether the numbers involved are a matter of dispute or not scarcely matters, the numbers were colossal. Whether there were camp complexes whose sole function was extermination, or whether all camp complexes involved an element of labour as well as the killing of those who arrived unfit or became unfit, is a matter of interpretation and yet people who discuss those possibilities, or question the totals processed, or establish comparisons with other genocides, get labelled Holocaust Deniers by frenzied zealots. To make those matters no-go areas where to discuss is to risk such labelling is an outrage. It was an event, limited in time and space, which carries the unique label of The Holocaust. Nobody in their right mind would "disbelieve" the core statements I've included here. Or does my even discussing it in these terms make me a Holocaust Denier too?
Various medieval expulsions of Jews from countries around Europe involved demands that they ether convert or leave, often with associated deaths. The burning of Ghettoes and destruction of their inhabitants was commonplace during plague outbreaks. Restrictions on where they lived, how they could acquire education and what trades they could practice applied for most of the last thousand years in England. The 19th century persecutions in Eastern Europe led to mass emigration, quite a lot of it to London. None of that counts as The Holocaust. What happened across Europe under the Third Reich was unique in that it was so bureaucratically efficient. It's that scale and efficiency which qualifies The Holocaust as a distinct event in the history of genocides.
The process was equally directed as an elimination of Jews, the Roma people and homosexuals from territories administered under the Reich, mostly by way of extermination through labour camps and death squads. Some of those camps had no other function than extermination but most exploited their prisoners by working them for as long as they remained capable of work. A small minority were physically expelled from the Reich, most were judicially killed. None of what happened was illegal under Reich laws though it was subsequently declared to have been in breach of back-dated International law. The invention of new law at Nuremberg and its back-dating to cover the events of The Holocaust was an extreme reaction to an extreme series of events.
What's to believe? All that happened, it's better documented than most history. Whether the numbers involved are a matter of dispute or not scarcely matters, the numbers were colossal. Whether there were camp complexes whose sole function was extermination, or whether all camp complexes involved an element of labour as well as the killing of those who arrived unfit or became unfit, is a matter of interpretation and yet people who discuss those possibilities, or question the totals processed, or establish comparisons with other genocides, get labelled Holocaust Deniers by frenzied zealots. To make those matters no-go areas where to discuss is to risk such labelling is an outrage. It was an event, limited in time and space, which carries the unique label of The Holocaust. Nobody in their right mind would "disbelieve" the core statements I've included here. Or does my even discussing it in these terms make me a Holocaust Denier too?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Holocaust
I believe Lon was asking M.A.S. about this, not for some long winded diatribe from the board know-it-all.
-
Betty Boop
- Posts: 16987
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 1:17 pm
- Location: The end of the World
The Holocaust
hoppy;1328183 wrote: I believe Lon was asking M.A.S. about this, not for some long winded diatribe from the board know-it-all.
Takes one to know one Hoppy. :rolleyes:
Takes one to know one Hoppy. :rolleyes:
The Holocaust
Betty Boop;1328184 wrote: Takes one to know one Hoppy. :rolleyes:
You certainly wouldn't know.:p
You certainly wouldn't know.:p
The Holocaust
hoppy;1328183 wrote: I believe Lon was asking M.A.S. about this, not for some long winded diatribe from the board know-it-all.That's the trouble with belief, hoppy, it disregards inconvenient facts in order to serenely conform with prejudice. What Lon wrote was "does anyone on Forum Garden disbelieve The Holocaust", to which I gave an answer.
Belief, in my opinion, is a wicked avoidance of intelligent thought.
Belief, in my opinion, is a wicked avoidance of intelligent thought.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
The Holocaust
Well, my definition of a holocaust denier is someone who claims that there was no particular persecution of the Jews, that the Death Camps weren't really death camps, that the gas chambers never existed and - usually - that Hitler was a Really Nice Guy.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
The Holocaust
Clodhopper;1328187 wrote: and - usually - that Hitler was a Really Nice Guy.You know, I'm sure that anyone meeting him by chance before the First World War and spending a few hours chatting over coffee would have found him unexceptionally interesting and pleasant. We don't all set out to act monstrously, it creeps up on perfectly normal people who find themselves in extraordinary situations. Demonising them afterwards is a mistake, it suggests there's a qualitative difference between Someone Like That and Someone Like Us.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Holocaust
spot;1328174 wrote: What an odd question, Lon. How can an event of historical record be a matter of belief?
Various medieval expulsions of Jews from countries around Europe involved demands that they ether convert or leave, often with associated deaths. The burning of Ghettoes and destruction of their inhabitants was commonplace during plague outbreaks. Restrictions on where they lived, how they could acquire education and what trades they could practice applied for most of the last thousand years in England. The 19th century persecutions in Eastern Europe led to mass emigration, quite a lot of it to London. None of that counts as The Holocaust. What happened across Europe under the Third Reich was unique in that it was so bureaucratically efficient. It's that scale and efficiency which qualifies The Holocaust as a distinct event in the history of genocides.
The process was equally directed as an elimination of Jews, the Roma people and homosexuals from territories administered under the Reich, mostly by way of extermination through labour camps and death squads. Some of those camps had no other function than extermination but most exploited their prisoners by working them for as long as they remained capable of work. A small minority were physically expelled from the Reich, most were judicially killed. None of what happened was illegal under Reich laws though it was subsequently declared to have been in breach of back-dated International law. The invention of new law at Nuremberg and its back-dating to cover the events of The Holocaust was an extreme reaction to an extreme series of events.
What's to believe? All that happened, it's better documented than most history. Whether the numbers involved are a matter of dispute or not scarcely matters, the numbers were colossal. Whether there were camp complexes whose sole function was extermination, or whether all camp complexes involved an element of labour as well as the killing of those who arrived unfit or became unfit, is a matter of interpretation and yet people who discuss those possibilities, or question the totals processed, or establish comparisons with other genocides, get labelled Holocaust Deniers by frenzied zealots. To make those matters no-go areas where to discuss is to risk such labelling is an outrage. It was an event, limited in time and space, which carries the unique label of The Holocaust. Nobody in their right mind would "disbelieve" the core statements I've included here. Or does my even discussing it in these terms make me a Holocaust Denier too?
Not really an odd question Spot-----------there are many that don't believe it ever happened-----------just this past week a group of Imam's were taken to Dachau by a Jewish organisation to try and clear this matter up. Some just question the six million deaths and think it was more like 200,000 or so that were slaughtered. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran publicy questioned the figure.
Various medieval expulsions of Jews from countries around Europe involved demands that they ether convert or leave, often with associated deaths. The burning of Ghettoes and destruction of their inhabitants was commonplace during plague outbreaks. Restrictions on where they lived, how they could acquire education and what trades they could practice applied for most of the last thousand years in England. The 19th century persecutions in Eastern Europe led to mass emigration, quite a lot of it to London. None of that counts as The Holocaust. What happened across Europe under the Third Reich was unique in that it was so bureaucratically efficient. It's that scale and efficiency which qualifies The Holocaust as a distinct event in the history of genocides.
The process was equally directed as an elimination of Jews, the Roma people and homosexuals from territories administered under the Reich, mostly by way of extermination through labour camps and death squads. Some of those camps had no other function than extermination but most exploited their prisoners by working them for as long as they remained capable of work. A small minority were physically expelled from the Reich, most were judicially killed. None of what happened was illegal under Reich laws though it was subsequently declared to have been in breach of back-dated International law. The invention of new law at Nuremberg and its back-dating to cover the events of The Holocaust was an extreme reaction to an extreme series of events.
What's to believe? All that happened, it's better documented than most history. Whether the numbers involved are a matter of dispute or not scarcely matters, the numbers were colossal. Whether there were camp complexes whose sole function was extermination, or whether all camp complexes involved an element of labour as well as the killing of those who arrived unfit or became unfit, is a matter of interpretation and yet people who discuss those possibilities, or question the totals processed, or establish comparisons with other genocides, get labelled Holocaust Deniers by frenzied zealots. To make those matters no-go areas where to discuss is to risk such labelling is an outrage. It was an event, limited in time and space, which carries the unique label of The Holocaust. Nobody in their right mind would "disbelieve" the core statements I've included here. Or does my even discussing it in these terms make me a Holocaust Denier too?
Not really an odd question Spot-----------there are many that don't believe it ever happened-----------just this past week a group of Imam's were taken to Dachau by a Jewish organisation to try and clear this matter up. Some just question the six million deaths and think it was more like 200,000 or so that were slaughtered. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran publicy questioned the figure.
The Holocaust
Lon;1328191 wrote: Not really an odd question Spot-----------there are many that don't believe it ever happened-----------just this past week a group of Imam's were taken to Dachau by a Jewish organisation to try and clear this matter up. Some just question the six million deaths and think it was more like 200,000 or so that were slaughtered. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran publicy questioned the figure.I'm sure he did, but I doubt whether he offered 200,000 in its place.
There's a good discussion of his statements and views at The Explanation We Never Heard by Shiraz Dossa - The Literary Review of Canada which put his various comments in context. His central issue is why the Palestinians should end up paying the price, a not unreasonable question. He's also keen to find out why Holocaust Denial is a criminal offence in Europe instead of a matter for academic enquiry, again something I'd consider reasonable.
There's a good discussion of his statements and views at The Explanation We Never Heard by Shiraz Dossa - The Literary Review of Canada which put his various comments in context. His central issue is why the Palestinians should end up paying the price, a not unreasonable question. He's also keen to find out why Holocaust Denial is a criminal offence in Europe instead of a matter for academic enquiry, again something I'd consider reasonable.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Holocaust
spot;1328194 wrote: I'm sure he did, but I doubt whether he offered 200,000 in its place.
There's a good discussion of his statements and views at The Explanation We Never Heard by Shiraz Dossa - The Literary Review of Canada which put his various comments in context. His central issue is why the Palestinians should end up paying the price, a not unreasonable question. He's also keen to find out why Holocaust Denial is a criminal offence in Europe instead of a matter for academic enquiry, again something I'd consider reasonable.
It takes more than superficial reading or listening to snippets of news to really know and understand issues doesn't it? You seem to dig deeper than most.
There's a good discussion of his statements and views at The Explanation We Never Heard by Shiraz Dossa - The Literary Review of Canada which put his various comments in context. His central issue is why the Palestinians should end up paying the price, a not unreasonable question. He's also keen to find out why Holocaust Denial is a criminal offence in Europe instead of a matter for academic enquiry, again something I'd consider reasonable.
It takes more than superficial reading or listening to snippets of news to really know and understand issues doesn't it? You seem to dig deeper than most.
The Holocaust
I believe the holocaust happened. I'm living in Germany now and all the Germans I know believe it happened. They speak about it frequently so that they constantly remind themselves of it to make sure nothing like it ever happens again.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
The Holocaust
You know, I'm sure that anyone meeting him by chance before the First World War and spending a few hours chatting over coffee would have found him unexceptionally interesting and pleasant. We don't all set out to act monstrously, it creeps up on perfectly normal people who find themselves in extraordinary situations. Demonising them afterwards is a mistake, it suggests there's a qualitative difference between Someone Like That and Someone Like Us.
Oh, I don't deny it. I'm sure most people meeting him in Vienna wouldn't have given him a second thought. I was being a bit sarcastic and shorthand, always risky in a written environment.
There are many references to his extraordinary charisma in person after he'd got involved in extremist politics in the early 1920s. One observer claimed that he saw blue lightening come out of him when he was making a speech and apparently reported that he believed Hitler was, at least at times, possessed by the Devil! (Though I can't at present recall where I read that). During the War he was able regularly to sway generals who went to him desperate for a change in strategy. Apparently his staff called it the "sun-ray treatment".
Now, while I'm sure there are some here who are in awe of your mighty charisma and powerful sun-ray treatment skills:sneaky:, I wouldn't put you in the same class as Hitler. I don't think he was "just like us". Before WW1, yes; after WW1 he was, or rapidly became, an evil monster. I think it was Speer who commented that meeting Hitler shortly before the end of the war, he was aware of being with a man whose soul had died. Though Speer's testimony in general has to be viewed with considerable suspicion, the comment does seem to sum up the impression of many by that time.
Oh, I don't deny it. I'm sure most people meeting him in Vienna wouldn't have given him a second thought. I was being a bit sarcastic and shorthand, always risky in a written environment.
There are many references to his extraordinary charisma in person after he'd got involved in extremist politics in the early 1920s. One observer claimed that he saw blue lightening come out of him when he was making a speech and apparently reported that he believed Hitler was, at least at times, possessed by the Devil! (Though I can't at present recall where I read that). During the War he was able regularly to sway generals who went to him desperate for a change in strategy. Apparently his staff called it the "sun-ray treatment".
Now, while I'm sure there are some here who are in awe of your mighty charisma and powerful sun-ray treatment skills:sneaky:, I wouldn't put you in the same class as Hitler. I don't think he was "just like us". Before WW1, yes; after WW1 he was, or rapidly became, an evil monster. I think it was Speer who commented that meeting Hitler shortly before the end of the war, he was aware of being with a man whose soul had died. Though Speer's testimony in general has to be viewed with considerable suspicion, the comment does seem to sum up the impression of many by that time.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
The Holocaust
spot;1328186 wrote: That's the trouble with belief, hoppy, it disregards inconvenient facts in order to serenely conform with prejudice. What Lon wrote was "does anyone on Forum Garden disbelieve The Holocaust", to which I gave an answer.
Belief, in my opinion, is a wicked avoidance of intelligent thought.
What Lon wrote was "does anyone on Forum Garden disbelieve The Holocaust", to which I gave an answer
So it does spotty, so it does. In that case, I apologize. Once again my lack of sleep has clouded my understanding.
Belief, in my opinion, is a wicked avoidance of intelligent thought.
What Lon wrote was "does anyone on Forum Garden disbelieve The Holocaust", to which I gave an answer
So it does spotty, so it does. In that case, I apologize. Once again my lack of sleep has clouded my understanding.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
The Holocaust
Holoocaust denial is a crime in 16 countries: : Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Switzerland (wiki). Not in Britain, Scandinavia, Spain or Italy, though. A curious mix. I think the reason it is a crime is a misguided effort to attack neo-nazism.
I have long held a theory that a person or people who hate too much run a serious risk of becoming what they hate. I very much fear that the Israelis are a long way down that road. I won't soon forget an Israeli man who moved over here explaining to me, entirely seriously, that the Palestinians weren't really proper humans...
I have long held a theory that a person or people who hate too much run a serious risk of becoming what they hate. I very much fear that the Israelis are a long way down that road. I won't soon forget an Israeli man who moved over here explaining to me, entirely seriously, that the Palestinians weren't really proper humans...
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
The Holocaust
posted by spot
Belief, in my opinion, is a wicked avoidance of intelligent thought.
isn't punctuation wonderful?
Belief in my opinion is a wicked avoidance of intelligent thought.
posted by clodhopper
Now, while I'm sure there are some here who are in awe of your mighty charisma and powerful sun-ray treatment skills, I wouldn't put you in the same class as Hitler. I don't think he was "just like us". Before WW1, yes; after WW1 he was, or rapidly became, an evil monster. I think it was Speer who commented that meeting Hitler shortly before the end of the war, he was aware of being with a man whose soul had died. Though Speer's testimony in general has to be viewed with considerable suspicion, the comment does seem to sum up the impression of many by that time.
The real horror of the nazis is that they were just like us. You can find almost exactly the same kind of arguments about jews and global conspiracies being put all over the place at the time, anti -semitism was rife all over the world even after it was known what was happening in germany countries round about weren't exactly welcoming of jewish immigrants. Scratch the KKK, the BNP any right wing group look for bizarre conspiracies theories and you will find the same kind of attitudes that brought the nazis to power. The present obsession some seem to have about attempts to create a new world order are no different from the idea that jewish bankers controlled everything, an element of fact and a bit of hysteria that's all it takes.
War makes monsters of us all.
Belief, in my opinion, is a wicked avoidance of intelligent thought.
isn't punctuation wonderful?
Belief in my opinion is a wicked avoidance of intelligent thought.
posted by clodhopper
Now, while I'm sure there are some here who are in awe of your mighty charisma and powerful sun-ray treatment skills, I wouldn't put you in the same class as Hitler. I don't think he was "just like us". Before WW1, yes; after WW1 he was, or rapidly became, an evil monster. I think it was Speer who commented that meeting Hitler shortly before the end of the war, he was aware of being with a man whose soul had died. Though Speer's testimony in general has to be viewed with considerable suspicion, the comment does seem to sum up the impression of many by that time.
The real horror of the nazis is that they were just like us. You can find almost exactly the same kind of arguments about jews and global conspiracies being put all over the place at the time, anti -semitism was rife all over the world even after it was known what was happening in germany countries round about weren't exactly welcoming of jewish immigrants. Scratch the KKK, the BNP any right wing group look for bizarre conspiracies theories and you will find the same kind of attitudes that brought the nazis to power. The present obsession some seem to have about attempts to create a new world order are no different from the idea that jewish bankers controlled everything, an element of fact and a bit of hysteria that's all it takes.
War makes monsters of us all.
The Holocaust
I'd be shockingly upset if anyone ever believed in my opinion - I do my best not to. It clouds the mind if I don't immediately ask myself Why.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
The Holocaust
The real horror of the nazis is that they were just like us. You can find almost exactly the same kind of arguments about jews and global conspiracies being put all over the place at the time, anti -semitism was rife all over the world even after it was known what was happening in germany countries round about weren't exactly welcoming of jewish immigrants. Scratch the KKK, the BNP any right wing group look for bizarre conspiracies theories and you will find the same kind of attitudes that brought the nazis to power. The present obsession some seem to have about attempts to create a new world order are no different from the idea that jewish bankers controlled everything, an element of fact and a bit of hysteria that's all it takes.
War makes monsters of us all.
I agree with most of that, especially the last line. After WW1 The Germans had Freikorps all over the place; we had the Black and Tans. Neither were very pleasant in their behaviour; both, I think, showed signs of the brutalising effects of war. What saved us was (a) although impoverished by the war, we at least weren't paying massive reparations, (b) our political system was more stable (partly as a result of (a) but also because we weren't trying to change systems from autocracy to democracy in one big wallop at the time, which Germany was after the Kaiser) and (c) although there was quite a bit of support for the "new politics" of the far right, there was also serious public opposition in places like the East End where iirc there was a huge riot when the Blackshirts tried to march through. (Can anyone remember the name? I think it was called the Battle of Silver Street, or something like that.)
But Mosley wasn't a Hitler, and there wasn't a power vacuum for him to move into. If there had been, yes, we might well have ended up like nazi Germany, seduced, bewildered, panicked and lied into evil. And the Milgram experiments tell us that almost all of us can be made to do the most appalling things if an authority figure insists. (Btw, the best defence against this appears to be a knowledge of the Milgram Experiments)
War makes monsters of us all.
I agree with most of that, especially the last line. After WW1 The Germans had Freikorps all over the place; we had the Black and Tans. Neither were very pleasant in their behaviour; both, I think, showed signs of the brutalising effects of war. What saved us was (a) although impoverished by the war, we at least weren't paying massive reparations, (b) our political system was more stable (partly as a result of (a) but also because we weren't trying to change systems from autocracy to democracy in one big wallop at the time, which Germany was after the Kaiser) and (c) although there was quite a bit of support for the "new politics" of the far right, there was also serious public opposition in places like the East End where iirc there was a huge riot when the Blackshirts tried to march through. (Can anyone remember the name? I think it was called the Battle of Silver Street, or something like that.)
But Mosley wasn't a Hitler, and there wasn't a power vacuum for him to move into. If there had been, yes, we might well have ended up like nazi Germany, seduced, bewildered, panicked and lied into evil. And the Milgram experiments tell us that almost all of us can be made to do the most appalling things if an authority figure insists. (Btw, the best defence against this appears to be a knowledge of the Milgram Experiments)
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
The Holocaust
hoppy;1328183 wrote: I believe Lon was asking M.A.S. about this, not for some long winded diatribe from the board know-it-all.
Lon was asking anyone on fg, but I like your answer anyway!:yh_rotfl
Unfortunately it did happen.........
Lon was asking anyone on fg, but I like your answer anyway!:yh_rotfl
Unfortunately it did happen.........
Life is just to short for drama.
The Holocaust
Cable Street, Clod. I'm sat about a half mile from it at the moment.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
The Holocaust
Aaah. Thank you, spot.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
The Holocaust
Clodhopper;1328247 wrote: I agree with most of that, especially the last line. After WW1 The Germans had Freikorps all over the place; we had the Black and Tans. Neither were very pleasant in their behaviour; both, I think, showed signs of the brutalising effects of war. What saved us was (a) although impoverished by the war, we at least weren't paying massive reparations, (b) our political system was more stable (partly as a result of (a) but also because we weren't trying to change systems from autocracy to democracy in one big wallop at the time, which Germany was after the Kaiser) and (c) although there was quite a bit of support for the "new politics" of the far right, there was also serious public opposition in places like the East End where iirc there was a huge riot when the Blackshirts tried to march through. (Can anyone remember the name? I think it was called the Battle of Silver Street, or something like that.)
But Mosley wasn't a Hitler, and there wasn't a power vacuum for him to move into. If there had been, yes, we might well have ended up like nazi Germany, seduced, bewildered, panicked and lied into evil. And the Milgram experiments tell us that almost all of us can be made to do the most appalling things if an authority figure insists. (Btw, the best defence against this appears to be a knowledge of the Milgram Experiments)
It was cable street. We had a government ready to use tanks and troops against a left wing revolt. In Glasgow they sent in english troops because they were worried scots might not obey orders to open fire. It's the mind set of the times that is hard to understand from a 21st century perspective. Would modern day europeans go to war with the same ferocity? I think we would in the right circumstances and probably would have done so if nuclear weapons had not been on the scene.
As to morality and what is right and wrong, in warfare it goes staright out the window after the first battle.
But Mosley wasn't a Hitler, and there wasn't a power vacuum for him to move into. If there had been, yes, we might well have ended up like nazi Germany, seduced, bewildered, panicked and lied into evil. And the Milgram experiments tell us that almost all of us can be made to do the most appalling things if an authority figure insists. (Btw, the best defence against this appears to be a knowledge of the Milgram Experiments)
It was cable street. We had a government ready to use tanks and troops against a left wing revolt. In Glasgow they sent in english troops because they were worried scots might not obey orders to open fire. It's the mind set of the times that is hard to understand from a 21st century perspective. Would modern day europeans go to war with the same ferocity? I think we would in the right circumstances and probably would have done so if nuclear weapons had not been on the scene.
As to morality and what is right and wrong, in warfare it goes staright out the window after the first battle.