Dresden and the Neo-Nazi march

Aric

Still thinking about your reply. I will get back to you. Oh, and my computer crashed taking with it my address book. If you still have my email address could you email me again?

Cheers
Deane

Deane

I await your reply. BTW, I sent you an email.

Regards,

Aric

delete

Hi all,
there were indeed 5000 right wing extremists in the streets in Dresden the other day (coming btw from all over Germany and Europe), but I do hope that foreign media also showed the vast majority of peaceful participants who lit up candles and shouted anti-nazi slogans.
As to whether or not Dresden was a "legitimate target" remains more than questionable and probably depends on what history books you read. I can't remember having learned this in school. The Dresden bombing was as atrocious and unnecessary as the Coventry bombing (or any others).
Regards
Uwe

Why defend the indefensible? Most argument in this thread has been along the lines of "it was nasty but the other side did nasty stuff too and we had to get nasty to stop the nastiness for good". Sounds too much like "we had to destroy the village to save it" for me to accept it as a valid argument.

It may be wishful thinking or even idealism but I'd like to see nations act with the character individual citizens show in their lives. I'm no angel - I've done shameful things in my life but who hasn't? I have faced up to my poor behaviour and tried to change and once again - who hasn't? Surely part of maturity is learning to say sorry and meaning it? So what about a bit of honest retrospection on the part of nation states? German people I have spoken with can identify a feeling of national shame for the events in WWII. The Allied Forces may not have committed the same atrocities as Germany but they are guilty of some. If they could say now that some of what happened in the war was shameful it would be more to their credit than ignoring it completely because its in the past.

There are few cliches with less truth than "time heals all wounds".

Deane

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kevin-W:

I still stand by my original criticisms of your post - real understanding of history, and especially of events as complex and important as the Second World War requires much hard work and wide reading and a dollop of healthy skepticism - not regurgitating the first book you come across that happens to fit in with one's worldview.

Kevin,Thank you for your refreshingly well informed comments. Of course I agree that the Nazi regime was avowdely aggressive and expansionist and had to be stopped. I would, however, prefer this to have been done by the German left, who were completely sold out by the German Labour party (SPD), rather than a war which claimed the lives of millions.
I have never, for one second, disrespected the motives of the millions of ordinary people who gave their lives in the belief that they were combatting fascism. My original post was in response to Adam's comment that the actions of the allies were justified in fighting fascism.
The nazi regime was, indeed, distinguished by its horrific fascist character. However, my point remains that Hitler, Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill fought the war for the ends of their respective national capitalist interests with whichever veneer of justification they chose to apply.
Incidentally (and I'm NOT comparing the British empire or USA to the nazis) I'm sure the residents of late 20th century India or Africa, or present day Iraq would have recognised Britain or the USA as aggressive and expansionist regimes who needed to be stopped.
Lastly, I never referred to Churchill as a fascist, you rightly describe him as a product of his class and time, I merely point out that he would have had no problems accomodating a regime of a fascist nature if it had suited his particular interests. Do not doubt the strain of anti-semitism which existed amongst the British ruling class. Have you visited the Holocaust exhibition at the Imperial war museum. There you will see contemporary newspaper reports (Daily Mail; Hurrah for the Blackshirts etc..) which describe Jewish refugess from the Holocaust being denied entry to Britain and being described as 'bogus asylum seekers'. Sound familiiar ?
Cheers, Malky.

Deliberate mistake, 18th Cen. Africa, not 20th, D'oh.

Deane

While maybe the Allies have not issued public apologies, I believe that they have still "learned their lesson" so to speak. In the form of the sanctity of human life, I think there is no question democratic nations place a higher value on life.

An interesting side to that, would be whether the media was responsible for fostering this quality?

In any event, I know that in the US at least, with each war/combat squirmish the "acceptable" number of losses decreases dramatically - an order of magnitude you might say. The US saw hundreds of thousands die in WWII. Now, in Iraq, you get the kind of outcry of dissent with a thousand people killed that you never would have got in WWII, Korea, or Vietnam.

The value of human life has risen.

And you also see former Allied nations that have engaged themselves in combat much less willing to go after civilian targets.

The defense department spends billions of dollars each year here in the US trying to come up with non-lethal weapons with the hopes that one day they'll be in service and a war can be fought where our enemies are not killed.

So while you have not heard a public apology, and you may never, I think the lesson was learned and progress is being made.

Aric

Hmm...how xactly has the value of human life risen? Where in mainline media d you see a casualty count of Iraqis, either now or 14 years ago? And even though the strategic impact of bombing has proved to be nil even against industrialized states, did we not bomb Hanoi and Afghanistan, which are decidedly not industrialized?

I have sympathy for the Dresdners, but I can't help thinking that waging an unprovoked war opens a country up to rageful responses, and I can't help thinking that the fire bombing was a culmination of that rage - Germany started the war; Germany brutally occupied country after country; we could do horrific damage to Dresden, so we did. Any idiot should know that there are no excuses for unprovoked wars.

I do think the 2nd A-bomb was criminal. And I think the 1st one might have been. I can see using the bomb because overall it probably did a lot less damage than an invasion would have done. And maybe it wasn't ready in time for Dresden - but there was too much racism in the propaganda, and there are credible charges that Japan was viewed as less human than Germany was. If those charges are true, and if the bomb was ready in February or March, it should have been dropped on Germany - who knows? A bomb on Germany might have stopped the both wars at once.

The 2nd bomb was not necessary at all - the Imperial government was caving in already, and the 2nd bomd didn't prevent the invasion - the 1st one did.

Phil

quote:

Originally posted by Deane F:

Kevin

My opinions and my positions on matters important to me are the product of thought and (I hope) discussion. I hope I keep an open mind. Whether or not some of my opinions, thoughts or suggestions are similar or the same as those of skinheads is not something I labour myself about. As for playing into their hands - well, if my post is used in neo-nazi publicity it will be unfortunate indeed but other than that or some other unlikely scenario I don't see how their interests are advanced my opening a discussion on the Naim forum. The proposition that I'm playing into "their" hands is just silly.

Let me be quite clear - my God is the God of the Jews NOT the god of the christians. While I am a gentile I am sypathetic to Jewish interests. I HATE NAZISM IN ANY FORM AND I DETEST SKINHEAD SCUM AND NATIONAL FRONT ARSEHOLES. I CAN'T STAND RACISM EITHER. I hope that's clear.

I'm glad my Government refused entry to David Irving. It astounds me that so-called revisionist historians can get a soapbox in our society especially when they are "revising" events that happened in living memory.

"it was fought to preserve civilised values and baasic human decency" Can you see the inconsistency in what you are saying?

Deane

Kevin

On reflection I think the tone of my reply to your post was too strong. I ought to have couched it in less strong terms.

My apologies.

Regards
Deane

Don't worry about it Deane, no need to apologise. this is a subject about which anyone can - and perhaps should - feel strongly.

I will say this, though; if you ever visit Auschwitz-Birkenau (I did in 1998), which is quite possibly the worst place I have ever been to, you might start to think that thee Nazis had to be stopped, and almost any price would be worth paying for it. The thought that they (ie the Nazis) could have won still chills me; it wouldn't have stopped at the Jews.

I can see the contradiction in the statement "it was fought to preserve civilised values and basic human decency" but it is, in the case of the Second World War, one that i can live with.

Kevin

Irrespective of our emotional notions about the
ending of WWII, and also not wishing to start another whole new fresh load of opinions in the same mode, if you/we/I, honestly believe that the defeating of the 3rd Reich was more inspired by the death camps etc, and their 'Liberation' then I'm afraid we're all living in cloud cookoo land, anti-Semitism (anti Jewish sentiment) has been sanctioned by many 'modern' States including our own. Before anyone flies off about comparing such extremes with our beloved Democracies, I personally put the psychological and Evil Policies of Arpharteid, Removal and seperation of ethnic kids (Australia/New Zealand/Canada/Britian/USA, etc,) Ethnic cleansing in Kosova etc, naturally as well, on a same par as the Hollocaust, but that's just my opinion, and nothing else.

Cheers, Fritz Von Lest we forget

P.S. Living where I do this subject arises almost daily:

Evil is evil. Murder is murder. Genocide is genocide. One life isn't worth any more or less than another.

It was the combination of genocide with the German genius for efficiency and death camps that were specifically built for the purpose (leaving the Nazi intention beyond doubt) that made the Holocaust particularly chilling.

However, I would like to raise another point. We'll never know for sure but perhaps it was the humanity of the Germans who led their country's efforts to develop the nuclear bomb who prevented that bomb from being developed.

The Nazi regime was one of the clearest examples of true evil in human history but even amongst the darkness some light was seen.

Regards
Steve M

quote:

However, I would like to raise another point. We'll never know for sure but perhaps it was the humanity of the Germans who led their country's efforts to develop the nuclear bomb who prevented that bomb from being developed.

I remain sceptical about Germanys’ ability to construct a functioning nuclear weapon during WWII. Just look at the resources the US had to throw at the Manhattan project. Could Germany, whilst being bombed, have done the same?

I sometimes wonder with so-called n-weapon developement (Post WWII) with USSR, USA, UK, France, etc ? testing fall out etc on their own troops (mainly National Service) where the moral high ground really does lie ?


Fritz Von Braun

This thread talks of '6 million' Jews being murdered in the Nazi death camps, and I have difficulty with that.

I believe the number of human beings who perished in the camps was more like 12 million.

Jews were specifically targeted, and perhaps in response, the Jews who were outside of Germany's reach decided to confront the specific horror of genocide - so we all know of the 'final solution'.

But other groups were also targeted: Socialists, Communists, Gypsies, homosexuals. They just didn't speak up as much as Jews did, and they didn't have claims for their own country.

With eye-witnesses to the murders dying, and with holocaust deniers growing wealthier and more active (it's probable that some of the obscene profits of 'The Passion of the Christ' went to the deniers), we need to remind ourselves that it was 12 million, not 6 who were murdered - and it wasn't just Jews.

And it would be useful for Jew-haters to keep in mind that the nazi attempt to rid the world of Jews resulted in re-establishment of the state of Israel - while the Chinese treatment of Jews as simple foreigners who were welcome to live in China resulted in total assimilation and disappearance of Judaism in China.

Love thy enemy.

Regards.

Phil

Phil

The figures for deaths in the Second World War are constantly being revised upwards (especially as the old Soviet archives are opened up).

Until recently, 55 million dead was usually accepted as the best figure but in the last few years this has been revised upwards to 60 million. Thee real death toll may be aas high as 75 million, but I doubt if we wiill ever know, particularly since the slaughter in the Soviet nion and China was vast.

The big problem is of course that most of those killed in the war were civiilians, not combatants. The Nazi camps were "only" a formalised aspect (the bureaucratic face, if you like) of civilian slaughter, most of which was carried out in the field with few records kept, particularly of Slavs in the East and by the Japanese in China.

The Nazis were very nearly successful in wiping the Jews out from Europe coompletely (particularly in Poland, which was, before the war, the big centre of European Jewry). I haven't got the figures to hand but the poulation was decimated. Also, it is probable that the State of Issrael would have been established anyway, having been agreed in principle during the First World War.

Kevin

Their human destruction did not end in 1945 by the way.


Fritz Von 'Humanity' grows daily as does subsequently it's larger inherent risk to itself, & being the the unchangeable nature of 'our' beast.

There is a certain arrogance in being able to kill people with impunity. It must be a bit like serial killers. Once you get started its hard to stop. All the dictators have had a go. And of course the good guys can then justify doing the same thing. Not in so personal a fashion I suspect. After all the pilot of a plane dropping bombs doesn't equate to a soldier walking along and putting a bullet through the back of the neck.
I see the Americans are developing battlefield robots. Well we all watched Star Wars and we know what to expect. However this in turn will lead to a propensity to go to war knowing that human losses{ on your side} will not sway public opinion. Pie in the sky. No, just a logical next step in the game of staying one step ahead of your enemy and the realisation that there are many more wars to be fought.

Gunpowder's been around for a long time mate, and dynamite developed into a peace prize ?

What is absolutely clear is that the human race (to a man) has the ability to de-humanise other members of the human race. Much of this is inbuilt into the male psyche. Look at the natural attaction of weapons and fighting amongst male youth. Now highly visible in computer games, but just as prevalent in my own youth and that of our ancestors going right back to the apes.

There seems to be an inbuilt "You are not me and therefore a competitor". Whether it's calling out a complete stranger for a fight outside the pub or dancehall. Or reserving a mating partner amongst the assembled females nomatter how flimsy one's tenuous ability to hold onto the chosen female.

The closed village concept exists long after fear of plague or robber bands. We surround ourselves in security according to our ability to pay. The larger our wealth, the greater the space around our "castle" and the more defensive our car is likely to be. Wealth buys space to exist with fewer visible reminders of others who are "lesser beings". Or those who remind us of our own advantages. Power often means greater privacy. The Nazis took it to extremes. They simply removed millions of "others" to make room for the greater "We". To simply extinguish those who offended them and reminded them of their own limitations.

The clan, gang and tribe mentality exists where no physical need exists. The defense of territory is always a very high priority. Expansion of territory is the highest goal man sets for himself. The price is often war and destruction of other's rights to exist. We look on the universe as our own. Even now we are planning to expand to other worlds. A cause supposedly so worthwhile we will risk vast resources and take any chance with others' lives to gain a foothold in other places.

Our veneer of civilisation is indeed microscopically thin. We set up walls against outsiders and hate "different" with a burning passion. We use any excuse to exterminate others: Nation, political party, class, team, religion, house, company, colour, race, clan, school, 'hood. The list is endless. We are world-class experts!

A driving force for this war against "them" is the use of poverty, denial of education and lack of opportunity to fulfill a useful role in society.

It is said that "Greed Works". Capitalism takes no prisoners. But nor does communism or dicatorship. All set one above another whatever their political persuasion.

The youth of Cambodia were prone to turning their own parents in for death and torture. No doubt the Nazi youth, N.Koreans, Chinese and those in any similar situations will produce much the same scenario. We are completely ruthless and totally immoral in our quest for power.

"We" are deeply flawed. Our "life systems" are deeply flawed. Heirarchy, wealth & power are all sold as ideal attributes. Our entire lives are spent pointlessly competing with others for personal advantage and reward. We even vote for those who would see us die with the snap of a manicured finger.

Isn't it enough that we each exist? And each have a useful function? Without one having dominion over another. Isn't one person taking the life's breath and strength from another for monetary gain (and all its advantages) actually an obscenity? Even if we dress it up as employment and give them a rest now and then?

Yet we set rules for "them" that we consider unworthy of the slightest consideration in our own selfish lives. Master and slave. Employee and worker. Shopkeeper and customer. General and private. Husband and wife. Parents and children. Big brother and smaller brother. Bully and victim. Bigger car and smaller car. Power corrupts absolutely.

We need to find an alternative that rewards personal effort within the capacity of each. According to his or her skills, intelligence and ability. To organise using the skills and ability of all. Not just those who are lucky enough to have the beneficial advantages we hold dear at any particular time in history. Instead we still reward aggression above all else.

My point? How many of the Nazi youth enjoy a reasonable standard of living and all of life's little luxuries we hold so dear? House, car, hifi, stable relationship, etc.

No, it's not a good excuse for worshipping the vilest evil in recent history. But who gave them anything else they could call their own? Where their youthful & blind aggression was actually respected? (and no doubt carefully channelled) Where their limitations were largely ignored for the good of the group? It's no wonder the Nazis came to power and nearly ruled the world. They used the natural aggressive instincts of youth and those normally placed outside of polite society to their own despicable ends. The rest followed like lambs because it was that, or death. Or worse.

Without positive feedback youth (and human society) will go on making exactly the same mistakes for all time. All "we" ever offer "them" is negative feedback.

Nime

Call me arrogant, but I dismiss almost all of your points as being totally 'Cliche' and unoriginal, I personally define mankind's character (male & female) when put to the extreme test as equal, and the common denominator our 'Ego'. Without getting into endless psychological theories and discussions, or philosphical one's for that matter either (wether a person has 'studied' something or not is also 'TOTALLY' irrellevant.

Chhers.

Fritz Von I personally am not a materialist,ie people's priorities vary; however rich they are, and whatever ethical or political direction they choose/decide/or are forced to follow blindly or voluntarily informed.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nime:
____________________________________________-
There seems to be an inbuilt "You are not me and therefore a competitor".
_____________________________________________
_________________________________________
Without positive feedback youth (and human society) will go on making exactly the same mistakes for all time. All "we" ever offer "them" is negative feedback.
_____________________________________________-

Sometimes the situation does indeed seem desperate. However, consider the response of humanity worldwide to the recent Tsunami disaster. A genuine outpouring of concern for fellow humans in desperate need, in which the generosity of ordinary people far outstripped their governments who preferred to spend money making wars.
There exist many other instances of the humanity of ordinary human beings. It is easy to be cynical, charity is a drop in the ocean compared to the difference that could be made by cancelling crippling foriegn debts or diverting the cost of weapons to genuine aid. The point is, people are motivated to do something out of a genuine desire to make a difference. Of course people can be selfish and aggressive but they can also act out of humanity and concern.

Good points Sussex: The British contributions to the 'Big Wave' I believe were put because it is 'mainly' sexy to do so, the British cash has hardly been touched yet, and mega arguments re: it's distribution have yet to occur (They will believe me), and you refer to people in 'Our' World's and not the Asian one.
I often think of a good example of man's 'Possibilities' being in the scene in 'Cuckoo's Nest' where Jack organises stuttering Billy a female friend/whore, he's miraculously healed through sexual & human healing, quickly to be shot down by the fear of his mother learning of the episode, told by the nasty nurse,a and he subsequently 'successfully' killing himself by cutting his wrists.
This point is relevant, it show's in our language how bloody stupid we all are.


Fritz Von Doner Fatigue therfore I'm BAD

Isn't it the case that such humanity and charity are so rare that they make headlines? (For a few days)

My generalisations still hold true. We dismiss others at every level of our daily routine. We may not actually kill them but we place them beneath contempt for the most trivial of reasons. I believe it is how we have adapted to coping with being "haves" in the presence of "have-nots" in an overpopulated world. Simple survival is no longer the problem.

Our only reason for existence now is to obtain goods, property and power until we die. But this inevitably produces an internal emotional conflict in many people.

Those who choose to remain outside the aquisitive norm are considered blasphemers and wierdos. They are mocked for their strange behaviour. Labels are common.

Cyclists are a clear and simple case. Their behaviour is actually perfectly logical. Their progress is often quicker than a car and they enjoy healthy exercise out in the "fresh" air. But they are often treated with utter contempt by car owners and most elected governments. Only fear of prosecution and potential damage to paintwork prevents the car driver from regularly committing road murder. Many car owners must wish they had the nerve to "get out there" and cycle themselves. But they are terrified by their own emotional response to cyclists. "If I hate them so much, then so must everybody else!" "So I dare not cycle for fear of being carved up myself!"

Take the case of "chavs". The owners of expensive cars have invested heavily in the image such ownership signals loud and clear. To have a teenage idiot (with his cap on backwards) pass them at will in a tarted-up peoples' car is an affront to everything the posh-car-owner holds dear. How dare they usurp the power-image of luxury-car-ownership so easily? They must have the use of black-magic powers to improve the performance of their cheapo vehicles. The luxury car owner can rarely open the bonnet without the help of a skilled mechanic. For which he also pays dearly. His insurance bills, maintenance, parking and overnight secure storage costs also sky high.

The image of freedom and power bought-into by the car-owner is a complete and expensive charade. The luxury car owner sits in the same traffic jams and travels just as slowly and frustratingly along the same overcrowded roads. So now the "chav" must be de-humanised for having the nerve to so easily destroy the myth promoted by the car manufacturers' advertising bullshit.

Just another day in the fantasy social landscape of our very strange world. Where we wish whole segments of the population should be exterminated. Wiped from the face of the earth. Simply for behaviour at odds with our own.

Nime