|
On November 13 2012 11:53 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 11:40 m4inbrain wrote:On November 13 2012 11:28 Grimmyman123 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:45 Blackfeather wrote:On November 13 2012 06:09 Grimmyman123 wrote: The solution is simple, and it was done 67 years ago, but it was not maintained.
Demilitarize Germany like we did at the end of World War 2. Maintain and enforce a zero military policy. We didn't learn the first time after World War 1 and allowed germany to rearm itself, and look what happened. If Germany is allowed to be run by some radical group again, with their current military, its a problem.
For referrence, if you didn't know, Germany's military budget is EQUAL to Austria, Switzerland, Czech, Belguin, Poland, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands military budgets COMBINED. Take a look at that list of countries and their proximity to Germany. Scary isn't it?
After World War 1, and then World War 2, we should have learned. There should not have been a wall dividing Germany. There should have been a wall surrounding it.
So, that way it doesnt matter who leads Germany or what their views are. Let them scwabble among themselves.
(Yes, I know this is an extreme point of view and is not wholy realistic due to the need for a country to be able to defend itself. However, the statistics and numbers are a bit frightening when it comes to Germany's military budget, military size, and the country's past history of conflicts.) your comment is quite racist on a side note. and according to wikipedia germany's military budget is 1,3% of their gdp, less budget than both france's or the united kingdom's, while germany's gdp is about 50% higher. btw if you isolate germany now the european market it will outright collapse. Thank you for your concern. My post was not racist at all, please do study up. GDP percentage is not an accurate gauge. Actual currency spent is more accurate when comparing militaries. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expendituresAs for isolating Germany, I don't think that they would care if the rest of europe has hard times. Yes, economy will take a dump, thats a given, globally. But, that's to be expected and could be worked around. Germany does not contain a natural resourse stockpile, with natural minerals and uranium as its main resourses, along with grown crops, at least that could not be offset globally. Meaning, Germany isnt the supplier of its surrounding countries with critical natural resources. Your post wasn't racist. But borderline stupid. Germany had a history of wars, right. But to hear from a canadian (a neighbor of, lol, the US) that he is "frightened" of our military.. Yeah, wow. Btw, guess what nation had the most wars in the last 200 years (including a fair share of war crimes). Oh, and then look how much they still spend on military. And keep in mind that they're actually a nation with nuclear capabilities. What a bunch of bullshit, seriously. Even if the right wing would suddenly take over in germany, which actually does not happen at all, a war as aggressor against poland, czech? With france and the UK (you know, nuclear weapons and stuff) directly next to us.. God, i can't really fathom how stupid someone has to be to actually think there are any possibilities to have that scenario. Except Canada shares a relationship with US that Germany doesn't with its neighbours - especially given the history of wars. Canada and US had like 1 war with bayonets that Canada won or something? lol
So Austria shares a relationship with Germany .... especially given the history of wars. Modern Germany and Austria are very young countries and there were so many wars between fractions of Germany and Austria-Hungary, Germanic and Celtic tribes, the Roman empire (which todays Austria was a part of) against German Hippies on Mushrooms, HOW FAR DO I GO BACK HERE ? What is shared history ? Are we only talking about the 2 World War ? You obviously aren't in your example. But the history between European countries, for obvious reasons, goes much deeper. Where do I make the cut ? Most likely almost all the countries were allied, occupied, fought wars etc.
What on earth is shared history ? Okay Poland might go "Well, we have been occupied by Austria, Russia, Prussia, Communists, Nazis ..." and you might not find many positive feelings towards Germany (historically speaking) ... If we actually sum up all the things that happened in Europe and let ourselves be trapped by it, its everyone against everyone.
EDIT : In the last 200 years, Germany was more divided than unified if you measure years.
|
On November 13 2012 17:37 Tufas wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 11:53 plogamer wrote:On November 13 2012 11:40 m4inbrain wrote:On November 13 2012 11:28 Grimmyman123 wrote:On November 13 2012 07:45 Blackfeather wrote:On November 13 2012 06:09 Grimmyman123 wrote: The solution is simple, and it was done 67 years ago, but it was not maintained.
Demilitarize Germany like we did at the end of World War 2. Maintain and enforce a zero military policy. We didn't learn the first time after World War 1 and allowed germany to rearm itself, and look what happened. If Germany is allowed to be run by some radical group again, with their current military, its a problem.
For referrence, if you didn't know, Germany's military budget is EQUAL to Austria, Switzerland, Czech, Belguin, Poland, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands military budgets COMBINED. Take a look at that list of countries and their proximity to Germany. Scary isn't it?
After World War 1, and then World War 2, we should have learned. There should not have been a wall dividing Germany. There should have been a wall surrounding it.
So, that way it doesnt matter who leads Germany or what their views are. Let them scwabble among themselves.
(Yes, I know this is an extreme point of view and is not wholy realistic due to the need for a country to be able to defend itself. However, the statistics and numbers are a bit frightening when it comes to Germany's military budget, military size, and the country's past history of conflicts.) your comment is quite racist on a side note. and according to wikipedia germany's military budget is 1,3% of their gdp, less budget than both france's or the united kingdom's, while germany's gdp is about 50% higher. btw if you isolate germany now the european market it will outright collapse. Thank you for your concern. My post was not racist at all, please do study up. GDP percentage is not an accurate gauge. Actual currency spent is more accurate when comparing militaries. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expendituresAs for isolating Germany, I don't think that they would care if the rest of europe has hard times. Yes, economy will take a dump, thats a given, globally. But, that's to be expected and could be worked around. Germany does not contain a natural resourse stockpile, with natural minerals and uranium as its main resourses, along with grown crops, at least that could not be offset globally. Meaning, Germany isnt the supplier of its surrounding countries with critical natural resources. Your post wasn't racist. But borderline stupid. Germany had a history of wars, right. But to hear from a canadian (a neighbor of, lol, the US) that he is "frightened" of our military.. Yeah, wow. Btw, guess what nation had the most wars in the last 200 years (including a fair share of war crimes). Oh, and then look how much they still spend on military. And keep in mind that they're actually a nation with nuclear capabilities. What a bunch of bullshit, seriously. Even if the right wing would suddenly take over in germany, which actually does not happen at all, a war as aggressor against poland, czech? With france and the UK (you know, nuclear weapons and stuff) directly next to us.. God, i can't really fathom how stupid someone has to be to actually think there are any possibilities to have that scenario. Except Canada shares a relationship with US that Germany doesn't with its neighbours - especially given the history of wars. Canada and US had like 1 war with bayonets that Canada won or something? lol So Austria shares a relationship with Germany .... especially given the history of wars. Modern Germany and Austria are very young countries and there were so many wars between fractions of Germany and Austria-Hungary, Germanic and Celtic tribes, the Roman empire (which todays Austria was a part of) against German Hippies on Mushrooms, HOW FAR DO I GO BACK HERE ? What is shared history ? Are we only talking about the 2 World War ? You obviously aren't in your example. But the history between European countries, for obvious reasons, goes much deeper. Where do I make the cut ? Most likely almost all the countries were allied, occupied, fought wars etc. What on earth is shared history ? Okay Poland might go "Well, we have been occupied by Austria, Russia, Prussia, Communists, Nazis ..." and you might not find many positive feelings towards Germany (historically speaking) ... If we actually sum up all the things that happened in Europe and let ourselves be trapped by it, its everyone against everyone. EDIT : In the last 200 years, Germany was more divided than unified if you measure years.
No use talking to people like that. They see history and warfare as some black and white affair were the good guys fight against the bad guys.
|
On November 13 2012 16:31 Elizar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 15:53 Samba wrote:
Are you fucking stupid?!?! How on earth can you really think that a genepool can inflict a nation this heavily? Society is definite by culture and education, not what my fucking granddad did or didn´t do. That doesn´t affect me at all. And btw what do you think your ancestors came from?! That´s right, Europe. Fuck your genepool! And next time you do "some fact checking" : Hitler wasn´t elected, but i´m not really suprised by that seeing your last posts. And on the whole debate, we just had a really nice event here in cologne where we have an annual concert against racism and intolerance and freakin´ 80000 people showed up, last anti-nazi demo i went we were 15000 against 100 neo-nazis. Tell that your fucking genepool and get some education!
User was temp banned for this post. Well this guy was temp banned for, at least I assume, bad language. But the core point is valid: As a German myself I´m sick of people telling me, that we have to apologize for things that I (including like all of my genereration) actually never did. Also it is very ironic, that people argument now with a "german genepool", which a) doesn´t exist and b) if so is shared everywhere (making it not "german") and c) use arguments like a nazi to brand others as "nazis." You think Germany is full of Nazis? Look somewhere else, because there will be more to find.
I feel the same way and I also understand the emotional response from my fellow german. I´m too getting offended by such statements.
What somewhat put me on the edge decisiviley, was an argument that the current genepool of Germany, is from the populous which survived the war. The people that stood by and watched, doing nothing, as millions of people were exterminated. That actually elected by a massive majority the leadership and future they chose, and the slaugter that followed.
I mean current genepool of Germany ? This is ridiculous. Not to mention all the false information in that statement too.
|
On November 13 2012 16:47 Lecideur wrote: Let's just make a simple test and most of you will understand why there is anti-semitism in this world....
Just imagine the Nazis were right. The Jews really are the root of all problems, killed Jesus. Imagine they control the media and Hollywood, all the money, the banking system and by it the World.
Really try to imagine that this is reality, if you are able to, you understand a simple truth. And the truth is, there are a lot of things in this world YOU believe...
Reality is what we believe... and we believe Israel is the Holy Land, that's why we take it, we expand it and we die for it. These desert monkeys shoot with firecracker rockets at our bunkers, we have bunkers every 100 meters, we have rocket sirenes, who alert us. We have Drones 24/7 flying over Gaza and the West Bank. We are in total control. We will never tolerate another Holocaust. We have the technology and the power to survive everything. When we go down, we will take the world with us. We also got i think a couple of hundred atomic warheads on Jericho 3 rockets, who have a radius of over 5000 kilometers. We have free (yes free) german submarines armed with atomic warheads. If Israel falls, the Samson option will be initiated, trust me.
There is no Israel without the world and there is no world without Israel.
I like to quote David Perlmutter: "Israel has been building nuclear weapons for 30 years. The Jews understand what passive and powerless acceptance of doom has meant for them in the past, and they have ensured against it. Masada was not an example to follow—it hurt the Romans not a whit, but Samson in Gaza? What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens? For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away—unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans—have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?
Never underestimate us again.
haha this is cute
"we can survive anything", but on the off chance we get "taken down", we'll nuke the "ENTIRE" world because we CAN and because FUCK YOU we're Israel and RAWR look how awesome it is to make these epic claims and we won't tolerate another Holocaust and if it looks like it'll happen again we'll kill EVERYONE in the world because well BECAUSE
|
On November 13 2012 17:57 Elegy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 16:47 Lecideur wrote: Let's just make a simple test and most of you will understand why there is anti-semitism in this world....
Just imagine the Nazis were right. The Jews really are the root of all problems, killed Jesus. Imagine they control the media and Hollywood, all the money, the banking system and by it the World.
Really try to imagine that this is reality, if you are able to, you understand a simple truth. And the truth is, there are a lot of things in this world YOU believe...
Reality is what we believe... and we believe Israel is the Holy Land, that's why we take it, we expand it and we die for it. These desert monkeys shoot with firecracker rockets at our bunkers, we have bunkers every 100 meters, we have rocket sirenes, who alert us. We have Drones 24/7 flying over Gaza and the West Bank. We are in total control. We will never tolerate another Holocaust. We have the technology and the power to survive everything. When we go down, we will take the world with us. We also got i think a couple of hundred atomic warheads on Jericho 3 rockets, who have a radius of over 5000 kilometers. We have free (yes free) german submarines armed with atomic warheads. If Israel falls, the Samson option will be initiated, trust me.
There is no Israel without the world and there is no world without Israel.
I like to quote David Perlmutter: "Israel has been building nuclear weapons for 30 years. The Jews understand what passive and powerless acceptance of doom has meant for them in the past, and they have ensured against it. Masada was not an example to follow—it hurt the Romans not a whit, but Samson in Gaza? What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens? For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away—unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans—have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?
Never underestimate us again.
haha this is cute "we can survive anything", but on the off chance we get "taken down", we'll nuke the "ENTIRE" world because we CAN and because FUCK YOU we're Israel and RAWR look how awesome it is to make these epic claims and we won't tolerate another Holocaust and if it looks like it'll happen again we'll kill EVERYONE in the world because well BECAUSE
I got a similar impression.
|
On November 13 2012 17:07 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 15:56 zalz wrote:On November 13 2012 15:53 Mallard86 wrote: Jews have been a scapegoat for centuries. The only reason anti-antisemitism has died down in the west over the last few decades is because of the growth of PC as well as a collective guilt/pity over the Holocaust.
The question is why are Jews so hated over the centuries? The answer is relatively simple. In the west, most communities have been homogenous. You live in a catholic town or you live in a protestant town. Jews are kind of separate from the communities due to different religion and thus different assemblies and traditions. Being separate or different has historically been a liability. The "You-killed-Christ" narrative that ran through the church is probably more too blame than their funny hats. Don't forget the money-lending business. That garnered a lot of people's misappropriated hate. Back then, good Catholics couldn't loan money, so if you wanted to take out a loan, you're likely going to visit a Jewish establishment, and gawk at whatever interest rate they charged (I can only imagine with so little competition what those rates looked like back in that era). In the eyes of one PhD political scientist, this was the reason just behind natural distrust of a non-assimilating culture & people group that Jews garnered such hate.
That is why I spoke about the circular nature of the hatred.
Jews were banned from doing most work, so they were forced to the fringes of trade and banking.
In turn, they became the supposed Jewish banking cabal that runs the world, and for that they must be made to pay according to the neo-nazis.
The hatred is perpetual. An injustice is inflicted upon the Jews, and in turn that injustice becomes justification for the next injustice.
|
how anyone can take that grimmy troll seriously is beyond me...
|
Far right in Europe = leftist in Japan.Those guys take it to another level.
|
On November 13 2012 00:26 oneofthem wrote: far right sentiments is a proper public concern. much like terrorism, racism and other kinds of 'bad' ideology. it needs to be controlled and eradicated if possible.
LMFAO...........oh the irony..
|
On November 13 2012 00:26 oneofthem wrote: far right sentiments is a proper public concern. much like terrorism, racism and other kinds of 'bad' ideology. it needs to be controlled and eradicated if possible. Janet Napolitano, is that you?
|
On November 13 2012 15:53 Mallard86 wrote: Jews have been a scapegoat for centuries. The only reason anti-antisemitism has died down in the west over the last few decades is because of the growth of PC as well as a collective guilt/pity over the Holocaust.
The question is why are Jews so hated over the centuries? The answer is relatively simple. In the west, most communities have been homogenous. You live in a catholic town or you live in a protestant town. Jews are kind of separate from the communities due to different religion and thus different assemblies and traditions. Being separate or different has historically been a liability.
There may be some carry-over of historical Judeophobia into modern anti-semitism, but anyone with a basic understanding of the intellectual history of modern Germany will find the Goldhagen thesis untenable. There is a world of difference between traditional anti-Jewish feeling of the villages, the synthecist debates during the Jewish enlightenment from a C.W. von Dohm, and national-folkish anti-semitism of a Wilhelm Marr.
Categorising people like the Nazis as exploiting traditional Catholic prejudices about Jews is as unhistorical as you can get.
Anyone claiming to have read Mein Kampf will easily recognise the distinction Hitler makes when recounting the crystallisation of his own anti-semitism:
To-day it is hard and almost impossible for me to say when the word 'Jew' first began to raise any particular thought in my mind. I do not remember even having heard the word at home during my father's lifetime. If this name were mentioned in a derogatory sense I think the old gentleman would just have considered those who used it in this way as being uneducated reactionaries. In the course of his career he had come to be more or less a cosmopolitan, with strong views on nationalism, which had its effect on me as well. In school, too, I found no reason to alter the picture of things I had formed at home.
At the REALSCHULE I knew one Jewish boy. We were all on our guard in our relations with him, but only because his reticence and certain actions of his warned us to be discreet. Beyond that my companions and myself formed no particular opinions in regard to him.
It was not until I was fourteen or fifteen years old that I frequently ran up against the word 'Jew', partly in connection with political controversies. These references aroused a slight aversion in me, and I could not avoid an uncomfortable feeling which always came over me when I had to listen to religious disputes. But at that time I had no other feelings about the Jewish question.
There were very few Jews in Linz. In the course of centuries the Jews who lived there had become Europeanized in external appearance and were so much like other human beings that I even looked upon them as Germans. The reason why I did not then perceive the absurdity of such an illusion was that the only external mark which I recognized as distinguishing them from us was the practice of their strange religion. As I thought that they were persecuted on account of their Faith my aversion to hearing remarks against them grew almost into a feeling of abhorrence. I did not in the least suspect that there could be such a thing as a systematic anti-Semitism.
Then I came to Vienna.
Confused by the mass of impressions I received from the architectural surroundings and depressed by my own troubles, I did not at first distinguish between the different social strata of which the population of that mammoth city was composed. Although Vienna then had about two hundred thousand Jews among its population of two millions, I did not notice them. During the first weeks of my sojourn my eyes and my mind were unable to cope with the onrush of new ideas and values. Not until I gradually settled down to my surroundings, and the confused picture began to grow clearer, did I acquire a more discriminating view of my new world. And with that I came up against the Jewish problem.
I will not say that the manner in which I first became acquainted with it was particularly unpleasant for me. In the Jew I still saw only a man who was of a different religion, and therefore, on grounds of human tolerance, I was against the idea that he should be attacked because he had a different faith. And so I considered that the tone adopted by the anti-Semitic Press in Vienna was unworthy of the cultural traditions of a great people. The memory of certain events which happened in the middle ages came into my mind, and I felt that I should not like to see them repeated. Generally speaking, these anti-Semitic newspapers did not belong to the first rank--but I did not then understand the reason of this--and so I regarded them more as the products of jealousy and envy rather than the expression of a sincere, though wrong-headed, feeling.
Not any of the top Nazis fit the old-fashioned profile of the anti-semite, and many did not even fit the profile of the biological determinist. Hitler said it himself: the Jews are a race of the spirit, not of the flesh.
That is one of the elemental problems addressed by my previous intrusion into the argument. That people, due to the Nazi past, are united and determined to resist the proliferation of anti-semitism, it is clear. Unfortunately, they don't really understand what they are trying to resist. Hence not only the historical, but also the moral feebleness of their efforts.
|
On November 13 2012 06:09 Grimmyman123 wrote: For referrence, if you didn't know, Germany's military budget is EQUAL to Austria, Switzerland, Czech, Belguin, Poland, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands military budgets COMBINED. Take a look at that list of countries and their proximity to Germany. Scary isn't it?
No it isn't. The German military defence budget is 1.3% of gdp, among the lowest, if not the lowest of any devolved large nation in the world.
- They have no independent heavy lifting logistical aircraft, no nuclear weapons, no nuclear attack submarines, no aircraft carriers, no blue-water navy, no independent military satellite network and are reliant on foreign military company's for much of there hardware.
Germany literally has little way of projecting its power beyond its borders outside of NATO. The entire German military was basically built for a single purpose, to provide the Russian's with one hell of a roadblock to breaching western Europe, even with the collapse of the Soviet Union, a resurgent Russia is still the primary threat to European security.
To be honest the only EU military's worth a damn these days are France and the United Kingdom and even they can only perform limited operations independently and are suffering cutbacks. Frankly, despite the political problems the EU would be a whole lot better off with a single unified military. It's better to have 1 effective military than 27 self defence forces, which is what many of them are or becoming.
|
I think its normal that some people would take on a more vocal anti immigration stance during economic crisis. I don't see this as Nazism, but it doesn't surprise me that some media are trying to sell it to the masses in such a way, it also doesn't surprise me to see people get emotional about sensitive subjects like this without really thinking it through.
|
Btw, guess what nation had the most wars in the last 200 years
It's got to be us, Britain.
I'm not sure if we've actually ever technically been at peace in the last 200 years. There's pretty much always been British soldiers fighting in some far flung part of the world, still the case now.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 13 2012 22:25 MoltkeWarding wrote: Unfortunately, they don't really understand what they are trying to resist. Hence not only the historical, but also the moral feebleness of their efforts. they are not limited or restricted to resist only the exact contour of the antisemitism animating naziism. a general resistance against dehumanizing thinking is enough.
|
On November 13 2012 23:17 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 22:25 MoltkeWarding wrote: Unfortunately, they don't really understand what they are trying to resist. Hence not only the historical, but also the moral feebleness of their efforts. they are not limited or restricted to resist only the exact contour of the antisemitism animating naziism. a general resistance against dehumanizing thinking is enough.
When you say that you're resisting a categorical kind of thought attributed to a certain group, whether it be Nazis, Jews, bourgeois-reactionaries, hipsters, punks, or astrologists, regardless of whether their conscious and expressed opinions fit your caricaturisation, you are the one committing the dehumanisation of people, first and foremost. Thinking of the past, which is filled by human beings in terms of stylised ethical oppositions alone is the dehumanisation of history. Saying that you are capable of direct access to moral truth without looking at its worldly manifestations is not only dehumanising, it is sacrilege. It is a sort of self-deification which makes you more low-brow than the most vulgar of Nazi theologians.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the point is that we are not limited to resisting nazis specifically as in, arguing against the nazis. it's just to prevent a problem that was manifest in the nazis as a prominent incident.
if i cared enough i'd actually try to figure out what you are thinking but the general silliness of it is enough for the present purpose.
|
When you say that you're resisting a categorical kind of thought attributed to a certain group, whether it be Nazis, Jews, bourgeois-reactionaries, hipsters, punks, or astrologists, regardless of whether their conscious and expressed opinions fit your caricaturisation, you are the one committing the dehumanisation of people, first and foremost. Thinking of the past, which is filled by human beings in terms of stylised ethical oppositions alone is the dehumanisation of history. Saying that you are capable of direct access to moral truth without looking at its worldly manifestations is not only dehumanising, it is sacrilege. It is a sort of self-deification which makes you more low-brow than the most vulgar of Nazi theologians.
No, not in the slighest.
A political movement exhibits certain traits. Using names like communism or fascism, we classify ideas into groups.
A Nazi will always adhere to a majority of Nazi thought, otherwise we wouldn't classify him/her as a Nazi.
You can't be pro-freemarket, pro-individual rights, and pro-democracy, and be a Nazi, at some point you follow too few ideas of a certain political strand, and you are given a different label.
To suggest that speaking out against any group is wrong, is not accurate. It would leave anyone crippled, unable to speak out against anyone, regardless of the horrors that their views represent.
Stalinist-communists represent the same ideology, by and large, the same goes for many other political beliefs.
If those beliefs clash with my own, I can denounce the entire group.
Now, the problem is when one begins to attribute positions to a person's race, or other inborn elements.
Lashing out at ideas, or groups that adhere to those ideals, is not wrong. Leaving yourself crippled out of fear of insulting, is far worse when it means tolerating the political thoughts that would have us destroy ourselves.
|
On November 13 2012 23:30 oneofthem wrote: the point is not to resist nazis specifically as in, arguing against the nazis. it's just to prevent a problem that was manifest in the nazis as a prominent incident.
if i cared enough i'd actually try to figure out what you are thinking but the general silliness of it is enough for the present purpose.
I would like to know what the problem manifest in the Nazis was, according to an ahistorical expert of the human soul such as yourself. If you cannot give it articulation, your moral opposition is worthless. You are either resisting nothing, or a figment of your own imagination. It is then your own imagination which is being projected outward to label and condemn other people whom you don't understand. If that's not dehumanizing, I don't know what is.
Contrary to previous contentions, the general educated populace does not know much about the essence of Nazi Germany, even as much as we are hazy in our factual history. What we do is take a difficult ethical problem, convert it to something we can easily brush under the rug, and pretend that we are sanitary people.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
i would have thought the problem obvious, even to you.
but anyway, using your idea that operating on a level of representation that is larger in size than an individual and her thoughts is necessarily dehumanizing, (not true btw, + Show Spoiler +given closure of physical world any characteristic observed on the group level is valid if not necessarily specifically realized on the individual level. is there the possibility of a good nazi, or good nazi ideas? maybeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, but the general group level judgments are still okay. for a guy like heidegger under most charitable interpretation of the facts there is still the problem of his ability to find nothing appalling in a deathly idea. that suggests a fatal hole in whatever sophisticated system he might have held ) nazis engaged in a lot of group level prejudices and thus dehumanizing thinking. such as when they thought jews should all be killed for being jews.
your act is like an anti death penalty post during nuremberg. not even, it's more like a "don't be mean to nazis" protest during nuremberg.
|
|
|
|