Standing accused of accessory to the murder of 300,000 people

Lucien wrote:My (not so serious) line on vegetarianism was only dropped in because I foresaw people ignoring this man's history and the social conditions of the time. Essentially that line was a "People will judge us too, in the future" -- that's not to say of course the man should get off. It was more of a call to consider these important things.

I'm pretty sure genocide was a crime back then, too. Eating animals is not a crime now. It's an important distinction to be made.

It's unfortunate that the Germans were swayed by the politics of extremism, and it might be interesting to chat about why that happened and whether we can make any moral judgements about them over it; but (although I'm not an expert) for me it's important to bear in mind that I don't think anyone at the time really believed they would be voting for the systematic slaughter of six million Jewish men, women and children.

Lucien wrote:

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:

Lucien wrote:My (not so serious) line on vegetarianism was only dropped in because I foresaw people ignoring this man's history and the social conditions of the time. Essentially that line was a "People will judge us too, in the future" -- that's not to say of course the man should get off. It was more of a call to consider these important things.

I'm pretty sure genocide was a crime back then, too. Eating animals is not a crime now. It's an important distinction to be made.

There are countries where homosexuality is a crime punishable by death, but I'm sure you wouldn't condone that because of its legal status.

I'm not entirely certain of the point you're trying to make here. Are you saying genocide should be legal?

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:

Lucien wrote:My (not so serious) line on vegetarianism was only dropped in because I foresaw people ignoring this man's history and the social conditions of the time. Essentially that line was a "People will judge us too, in the future" -- that's not to say of course the man should get off. It was more of a call to consider these important things.

I'm pretty sure genocide was a crime back then, too. Eating animals is not a crime now. It's an important distinction to be made.

Technically it wasn't as genocide had not been defined nor the term been coined.

Lucien wrote:

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:I'm not entirely certain of the point you're trying to make here. Are you saying genocide should be legal?

Nope. You said genocide was/is a crime, and eating animals is not; I'm saying something's legal status doesn't really matter - people can make anything legal or illegal. That's all.

So people shouldn't be tried for crimes because something's legal status doesn't matter?

Go away and let the sane people talk, please.

Falsey wrote:He could, you know, not come in to work.

Job's a job.

Shadow wrote:ITT Qikz defends a confessed Nazi who aided in the attempted ethnic cleansing of the Jews at Auschwitz.

GG, Qikz. GG.

When StayDead starts talking about WWII, amazing things happen. See: his recent banning from NeoGaf.

Dig Dug wrote:Studying propaganda can be interesting. Watching Triumph of the Will was an interesting experience for me as a media student because you could see how many films have been influenced by it's imagery.

It's a fascinating film - not just as a talisman for what propaganda can achieve, but also from a technical point-of-view.

Triumph of the Will was released in 1935 and became a prominent example of propaganda in film history. Riefenstahl's techniques—such as moving cameras, aerial photography, the use of long focus lenses to create a distorted perspective, and the revolutionary approach to the use of music and cinematography—have earned Triumph of the Will recognition as one of the greatest films in history. Riefenstahl helped to stage the scenes, directing and rehearsing some of them at least fifty times. Riefenstahl won several awards, not only in Germany but also in the United States, France, Sweden, and other countries. The film was popular in the Third Reich, and has continued to influence movies, documentaries, and commercials to this day.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_of_the_Will

It's a mesmeric film; it's easy to see how entire populations could be captured by the film's scale and effect. It remains as an historical record (forever banned in Germany); a moment in time (1935), captured forever and which now serves as a very dark warning from history. Anyone who wonders just how that unremarkable little corporal from Austria somehow beguiled an entire nation to follow him to their doom should watch it. Grand Guignol, on an epic, cast-of-thousands scale.

chalkitdown wrote:

Shadow wrote:ITT Qikz defends a confessed Nazi who aided in the attempted ethnic cleansing of the Jews at Auschwitz.

GG, Qikz. GG.

When StayDead starts talking about WWII, amazing things happen. See: his recent banning from NeoGaf.

Link?

Karl wrote:It's unfortunate that the Germans were swayed by the politics of extremism, and it might be interesting to chat about why that happened and whether we can make any moral judgements about them over it; but (although I'm not an expert) for me it's important to bear in mind that I don't think anyone at the time really believed they would be voting for the systematic slaughter of six million Jewish men, women and children.

They knew they were voting for a political party with a very long - and active - history of violent anti-semitism. Hitler was a brawling street-fighter as early as the 1920s, his anti-semitic hatred was plainly on view right from the very start and in 1925-6 he put it into print (Mein Kampf slowly became a bestseller and made him a millionaire in his own right long before he became Chancellor and started systematically ransacking the State). Somebody was buying his book.

The vast majority of the German public knew something bad was happening to the Jews as early as 1933, as the Nazis became truly ascendant and gained total power over Germany. By 1941-2 everyone knew the Jews were being rounded up and shipped out 'for resettlement' to the newly-occupied Eastern Territories; it was an open secret that was hard to avoid. In truth - and many knew this - the Jews were being sent to their death as more and more 'concentration camps' began to spring up in newly-occupied lands.

I honestly don't think we can absolve the general population in Germany from tacit, if not active, complicity. Jewish intelligence had from the very start of the war (before it, even) been fed back to both British and US governments as to what was tragically unfolding across Nazi Germany and it's occupied territories.

Memento Mori wrote:

chalkitdown wrote:

Shadow wrote:ITT Qikz defends a confessed Nazi who aided in the attempted ethnic cleansing of the Jews at Auschwitz.

GG, Qikz. GG.

When StayDead starts talking about WWII, amazing things happen. See: his recent banning from NeoGaf.

Link?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.ph ... tcount=212

Oh my God.

Moggy wrote:

Photek wrote:You have to look at how he was brought up, Nationalist father who hated the treaty of Versaille who then loses his business in 1929, its literally perfect timing for him to be a Nazi and millions like him, not saying he's innocent but its clear that cirumstances dictated his choice in dictator.

No we don't have to look at how he was brought up. A nationalist father and the loss of a business should not lead people to become the money counters for death camps. He made the choice to join the SS and he worked at the death camp knowing exactly what was going on.

While he was counting out the money that he knew was just stolen from a murdered Jew, I couldn't give a gooseberry fool what his thought were on the fairness of the Treaty of Versailles.

I was just explaining why he ended up in the Nazi party, why people presume I was Exonerating him of any guilt is beyond me.

Photek wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Photek wrote:You have to look at how he was brought up, Nationalist father who hated the treaty of Versaille who then loses his business in 1929, its literally perfect timing for him to be a Nazi and millions like him, not saying he's innocent but its clear that cirumstances dictated his choice in dictator.

No we don't have to look at how he was brought up. A nationalist father and the loss of a business should not lead people to become the money counters for death camps. He made the choice to join the SS and he worked at the death camp knowing exactly what was going on.

While he was counting out the money that he knew was just stolen from a murdered Jew, I couldn't give a gooseberry fool what his thought were on the fairness of the Treaty of Versailles.

I was just explaining why he ended up in the Nazi party, why people presume I was Exonerating him of any guilt is beyond me.

Photek, your point is a fair one. Millions of young German boys and girls were swept up in the general enthusiasm for National Socialism; they would have had great difficulty avoiding it, to be honest, as the Nazi regime quickly infiltrated all educational establishments (schools and universities) as well as churches and regular youth clubs, etc, and children and teenagers were enrolled in huge numbers into the Hitler Youth movement as a consequence.

It would be fair to say that this man was - to a degree - a victim of circumstance. That's a fair point. It then has to be set against his clear willingness to continue climbing the Nazi ladder, by opting into service with the SS, for instance (he could have joined the regular German army). The SS ran their own training establishments - even SS universities. Joining the SS was a clear statement of intent; it said that one had embraced the Nazi ideology in full and wished to serve it. The SS stood apart from the regular German army (often the source of much friction between Hitler and his generals). Himmler saw 'his' SS as a new elite - the vanguard of his new model army; shining examples of pure National Socialism, groomed and indoctrinated to serve the aims of the Party and the '1000 year Reich'.

TLDR: Joining the SS was a clear statement of intent to kill Jews (amongst many others, but especially the Jews).

Photek wrote:I was just explaining why he ended up in the Nazi party, why people presume I was Exonerating him of any guilt is beyond me.

Nobody said you were exonerating him of any guilt.