Holocaust: victim numbers could be up to 20 million.

[Tez3]

No. what I find offensive is this need to turn everything into a pro or anti gun control argument. This is an American argument and should stay between Americans, fight it out among yourselves and leave the rest of us out of it. Not everything is about guns in America.

 

[Makalakumu]

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/MURDER.HTM

Democide is not an American phenomenon. In the 20th century governments around the world have killed over 250,000,000 people. This does not include war, it's the government turning about and murdering it's own citizens. This is something that should have everyone in the world saying, "holy ****." It's also something that people around the world should keep in their minds before they vote any more power to their governments.

This is statistically your greatest chance of being murdered. Somewhere in the world right now, a government is murdering it's own citizens. It can happen at your home too.

 

[billc]

Where was America and your freedom lovers when the Jews reached out and asked for help in the 1930s?

The problem could have been that there was a democrat in office...

 

[Tez3]

However the Nazis didn't take over the governemnt of Germany, they were elected in with an overwhelming majority. They campaigned and won on the anti semitic policies they then put into practice. Basically Hitler gave the German people what they wanted. As far as they saw it they weren't murdering their own citizens as any one Jewish or of Jewish ancestry wasn't a citizen. Many who were killed as being Jewish weren't in fact, they had a Jewish ancestor but lived as good German Christians, however having Jewish 'blood' however 'thin' was enough to get you sent to a camp especially. Many were denounced by neighbours and colleagues btw. Blaming just the Nazi government doesn't cut it I'm afraid. The people were fully behind their government, few complained or opposed as any dissenters were disposed of in the early days. The Nazis guillotined more people than the French did in the Revolution. Anti semitism was a popular aspect of the Nazi party's political agenda.

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/rememberingnazism/popular_appeal

http://www.nazism.net/about/nazi_ideology/

 

[celtic_crippler]

The problem could have been that there was a democrat in office...

Who routinely used cocaine... ROFL

 

[Makalakumu]

However the Nazis didn't take over the governemnt of Germany, they were elected in with an overwhelming majority. They campaigned and won on the anti semitic policies they then put into practice. Basically Hitler gave the German people what they wanted. As far as they saw it they weren't murdering their own citizens as any one Jewish or of Jewish ancestry wasn't a citizen. Many who were killed as being Jewish weren't in fact, they had a Jewish ancestor but lived as good German Christians, however having Jewish 'blood' however 'thin' was enough to get you sent to a camp especially. Many were denounced by neighbours and colleagues btw. Blaming just the Nazi government doesn't cut it I'm afraid. The people were fully behind their government, few complained or opposed as any dissenters were disposed of in the early days. The Nazis guillotined more people than the French did in the Revolution. Anti semitism was a popular aspect of the Nazi party's political agenda.

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/rememberingnazism/popular_appeal

http://www.nazism.net/about/nazi_ideology/

Exactly my point. Society had become delusional and dangerous and people fed it, refusing to see it as it was. In this case, forget clinging on to your guns...run.

 

[Makalakumu]

The problem could have been that there was a democrat in office...

Lol. Plenty of conservatives loved the fascists, including Prescott Bush, who was prosecuted under the trading with the enemy act. The Bush family made their fortunes war profiteering. They might as well have used the gold teeth from Auschwitz to fund their political campaigns. Evil bastards.

 

[celtic_crippler]

Lol. Plenty of conservatives loved the fascists, including Prescott Bush, who was prosecuted under the trading with the enemy act. The Bush family made their fortunes war profiteering. They might as well have used the gold teeth from Auschwitz to fund their political campaigns. Evil bastards.

ALL war is about profit. Didn’t you know that?

Anyway… from earlier in the thread:

1. Levene finds eight features shared by the three genocides.
   1. In each case we see a government or regime in control of the state that is committed to eliminating one or more groups for political purposes. In each case, the regime had the resources and logistical capacity to carry out direct physical extermination.
   2. There was no real threat of outside interference in these cases,
   3. The government or regime believed it was in extreme danger and that crisis was looming,
   4. The killing was extended over time and did not happen in one or a few episodes of mass murder,
   5. Victims were killed regardless of gender or age,
   6. The killing was spearheaded by the military and para-military organized by the state. Other elements of the dominant population participated.
   7. The victim groups were in no position to protect themselves or fight back. They had no way to halt or impede the killing.
   8. The government or regime had a palpable sense that the targeted group was a present and future threat to the state or dominant society regardless of whether the victim group was a cohesive or even coherent unity.

The two other instances of mass killing make clear one more common feature:

1. The targeted group was identified based on the perpetrator's perception of reality, not on any sort of essential feature of the targeted group.

 

[Tez3]

Exactly my point. Society had become delusional and dangerous and people fed it, refusing to see it as it was. In this case, forget clinging on to your guns...run.

Considering what we've had in the past actually society today is better than it used to be. The past is far more dark and dangerous than the present is.

 

[CanuckMA]

No gun laws in the US. How many US citizens of Japanese descent shot it out with the authorities when they came to put them in internment camps. Frankly your knowledge f what it was like then and there is sorely lacking.

 

[celtic_crippler]

No gun laws in the US. How many US citizens of Japanese descent shot it out with the authorities when they came to put them in internment camps. Frankly your knowledge f what it was like then and there is sorely lacking.

I find your inability to reason and apply logic disturbing. :jediduel:


BACON!

 

[Tez3]

http://remember.org/imagine/limits/gabriel.htm

"The world may never know the true story behind the Holocaust, and it is left to speculate on the identity of those responsible. Much of the evidence gathered points in various directions. It is evident that the blame cannot rest fully on Nazi leaders, as it is obvious that the common German citizen was also a part of the attempted genocide enforced by those who served Hitler’s cause. If the question is why or how, you must answer based on your perception of the information obtained from those who had every opportunity to avoid their involvement in the atrocity. Your conclusion should reflect the unmistakable connection between the average German’s actions and the staggering number of executed Jews.Most people do understand the nature of the Holocaust, but fail to hold almost the entire country of Germany responsible. It is impossible to think that such a crime could have centered exclusively within one particular military movement. We can see now that "average Germans gladly, almost gleefully, participated in the torture and mass murder of Jews during World War II" (Weinstein). It appears "they were not primarily SS men or Nazi Party members, but perfectly ordinary Germans from all walks of life, men (and women) who brutalized and murdered Jews both willingly and zealously" (Goldhagen 1). These "everyday" citizens delivered just as much pain and suffering as any Nazi affiliate, and must be unmasked for the sake of all those who perished as a result of Hitler’s "final solution." It is not punishment that is sought through this exposure; it is a means of clarifying the Holocaust as an act of a single nation, where no one is left unaccountable for his or her actions.
However, some may argue that a strict and authoritative government influenced the acts of the common people. As most Germans were not directly associated with the Nazi party, it is believed they "were coerced into killing, followed orders blindly, succumbed to peer pressure, or simply were unaware of the ongoing genocide" (Weinstein). Researchers such as Christopher Browning discuss the voluntary nature of those involved in the executions to support the theory that some actually excused themselves as the acts were being committed. He also claims that the existence of "mere ‘negative stereotypes’ contributed to these men’s willingness voluntarily to hunt Jewish mothers and their infants" (Kern). This particular perception encourages the use of a sympathetic view towards those who were indirectly involved in the massacre.
The heart of Christopher Browning’s argument reflects the fear and constraint of many Germans with little or no ties to the Nazi party. "The social-psychological conditions, the objective and keenly felt pressures of the group, the fear of being held in contempt by one’s comrades: these were what turned these men into killers, in Browning’s view, and kept them at it" (Kern). His argument must be taken into consideration because you cannot assume that every citizen performed the deeds advocated by their country. The mindset and beliefs of people differ as you examine larger and larger populations, with Germany as no exception. "You cannot draw the inference from the literature, the art or the politics of those years that the ‘common sense’ of the people was that the Jews ought to be driven out or killed" (Reilly). "In a sobering conclusion, Browning suggests that these good Germans were acting less out of deference to authority or fear of punishment than from motives as insidious as they are common: careerism and peer pressure" (Browning 1). This position raises a legitimate debate as to the true motives of individuals who appear to have been left with no alternative.
Yet the testimony surrounding the willingness of the average German to participate in the brutal operation is enough to provide reasonable doubt in the mind of even the strongest nonbeliever. It is easy to see how most people can blame such horrible actions on outside influence; still there is the lingering notion that the existing pressure was a result of what each individual believed as being the only choice. If the orders were strictly optional, then why did they obey if no penalty was to be enforced? Why did they continue if they knew in their hearts that it was an unforgivable act? The answers lie in the hatred that built up among those who could not accept Jewish people as a part of their society. "Eventually, Jews were no longer even human beings in the eyes of Germans. Jews became an "anti-race" that required eradication, according to the Nazis"(Weinstein). How they chose to handle these impressions leaves no room for sympathy.
It must further be understood that those who chose to carry out the executions were fully aware of just how horrible their decisions were. Any pressure they may have felt should have washed away with the tears of the helpless victims as they held up their weapons to destroy another person’s future. As Hitler’s movement swore to exclude all non-Jewish German citizens from persecution, those who carried out the executions had no real reason to fear any type of retaliation by Nazi officers if they chose not to cooperate. "Goldhagen provides strong anecdotal evidence that Himmler’s order that no German be coerced into taking part in the extermination campaign was respected. According to testimonies later given by these men, their officers repeatedly gave them the option to abstain from killing in any given operation. Some few exercised the option and served in support roles. Some transferred out. No soldier, it seems, anywhere in the Nazi Empire, was ever punished for failing to kill Jews. Nevertheless, almost every soldier who was asked to kill civilians in this way did so" (Reilly). Many other accounts rely on the theory that there must have been an internal hatred for Jewish people in general. This seems to be the only way to explain the inhumanity of an event such as the Holocaust. No excuses are to be made and there is no need to ponder the idea of a frightened society who was forced to obey unimaginable orders. "They acted as they did because of a widespread, profound, unquestioned, and virulent antisemitism that led them to regard the Jews as a demonic enemy whose extermination was not only necessary but also just" (Goldhagen 1). It is also clear that ordinary Germans displayed the ability to conduct the mass murders despite the threat of future oppression. It is believed that "many prisoners were shot even after it became known the Himmler had ordered the killing of the Jews to cease. All of this happened when the Germans had clearly lost the war, when the guards knew they could soon be held responsible for the mistreatment of prisoners, and when no one was making them do these things" (Reilly). These horrifying accounts suggest that average Germans were motivated by hatred, rather than a suspected fear of punishment.
Much of the information available centers on the apparent fact that most Germans should be held responsible for the worst crime in recorded history. Daniel Goldhagen’s argument reemphasizes the hypothesis that the Holocaust was a unified act of terror performed by Nazi extremists and their fellow German countrymen. "It also shows that the government’s public antisemitic measures were not unpopular and that ordinary Germans did not need to be coerced to carry out the Holocaust itself" (Reilly). All that remains is the acknowledgement of such a contribution in terms of how the Holocaust is viewed by today’s society. People must become aware that the "final solution" was an equation containing Nazi officials, with the addition of many German civilians.
As we have come to view the Holocaust, we must now try to see why it is important that we reveal all who are responsible for the atrocity. Understanding the significance of identifying those involved will help explain why the number of Jewish casualties is so staggering. These individuals are charged with the greatest crime in recorded history and must be left for judgement in the highest court. Nevertheless it is our duty as a free society to view the perpetrators for everything they truly are. It must be known that Jewish victims suffered because of the hostility these Germans felt overall.
Whether it is the result of one man or one army, the purpose of including everyone is to show just how wrong Hitler’s "final solution" really was."

Works Cited​

Browning, Christopher R. Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1992.
Goldhagen, Daniel J. Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1996.
Kern, Paul. "Goldhagen, Browning and Expertise." 16 Apr. 1996. <http://h-net2.msu.edu/~german/discuss/goldhagen/gold9.html> (2 Mar. 1999).
Reilly, John J. "Convicted of the Wrong Crime." 1997. <http://pages.prodigy.net/aesir/
hwe.htm> (2 Mar. 1999).
Weinstein, Natalie. "Prof. Defends His Theory of ‘Willing Killers.’" 19 Apr. 1996. <http://JewishSF.Com/bk960419/sfaprof.htm> (2 Mar. 1999).

---

 

[billc]

The Japanese in the United States were lucky...they were in the United States.

One thing we now know is how things can go if they go really badly. Too many people think that the mass murder committed by the socialists in Germany and Russia, and China, and Vietnam can't ever happen again. Why they believe that is beyond me, but some people do...that is why they aren't worried about giving up their weapons.

Considering what we've had in the past actually society today is better than it used to be. The past is far more dark and dangerous than the present is.

This is true...for now...but the state of the future is never guaranteed and the only guide we have to know what could happen is the past...so it is better to be prepared, and watch for the warning signs...and keep our weapons...than to trust that the past won't happen again...

"Goldhagen provides strong anecdotal evidence that Himmler&#8217;s order that no German be coerced into taking part in the extermination campaign was respected. According to testimonies later given by these men, their officers repeatedly gave them the option to abstain from killing in any given operation. Some few exercised the option and served in support roles. Some transferred out. No soldier, it seems, anywhere in the Nazi Empire, was ever punished for failing to kill Jews.

The only problem here is that you, if you were a German citizen or soldier, had to trust the word of men who were carrying out the mass murder of innocent people...and that their word was good...considering what they were already doing to the most innocent of people.

 

[celtic_crippler]

It has been leaked, more then once, that US soldiers have been tested on their ability to follow the order to fire on civilians. I believe I posted a thread on that somewhere...

And now, civilian law enforcement, are using drones...stockpiling ammunition by the billions of rounds... and buying tanks. The FEMA bill has been reintroduced which, if it passes, will make it perfectly legal to set up “camps” where civilians can be held against their will in the event of a “national emergency;” all under the direction of the Secretary of the DHS, a civilian law enforcement agency. Why? They've cited no reason and nobody is asking... except for fruit-cakes like me.

"The past is far more dark and dangerous than the present"????

Really?

You're right to a degree... it shouldn't be. We have more access to information than ever before. But what are we doing with it? Nothing. And there's the real danger as history shows what happens to those that do "nothing."

“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” ~ Edmund Burke

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” ~John Stuart Mill

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” ~ John F. Kennedy (attributed to Burke)

This philosophy of “doing nothing” leading to the triumph of evil is not a new one, and history bears out in grisly detail the usual outcome.

With today’s technology and our governments having state-of-the art weaponry (some on par with what was once considered science fiction) far more advanced than any civilian has, you honestly think the potential for something far more “dark and dangerous” than we’ve ever imagined before in our history isn’t right around the corner?

Oh, but I forget… people actually think that things are different now. Sure, there have been tyrannical, murdering nut-jobs in the past but our current leadership is morally superior and righteous. Right? They’d never do anything so hideous. Right?

You think you’re the first person who made that assumption?

The message to schoolchildren is thus: never again through never forgetting. Great store is put in the ability of memories and representations of the Holocaust to have a transformative effect on the young and to create active and engaged citizens. The danger is clear and so is the moral: the Holocaust not only can happen again, it has happened again - in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Darfur - and it will keep on happening unless we remain eternally vigilant in our duty of remembrance.

http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/8000/

 

[Tez3]

It has been leaked, more then once, that US soldiers have been tested on their ability to follow the order to fire on civilians. I believe I posted a thread on that somewhere...

And now, civilian law enforcement, are using drones...stockpiling ammunition by the billions of rounds... and buying tanks. The FEMA bill has been reintroduced which, if it passes, will make it perfectly legal to set up &#8220;camps&#8221; where civilians can be held against their will in the event of a &#8220;national emergency;&#8221; all under the direction of the Secretary of the DHS, a civilian law enforcement agency. Why? They've cited no reason and nobody is asking... except for fruit-cakes like me.

"The past is far more dark and dangerous than the present"????

Really?

You're right to a degree... it shouldn't be. We have more access to information than ever before. But what are we doing with it? Nothing. And there's the real danger as history shows what happens to those that do "nothing."

&#8220;When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.&#8221; ~ Edmund Burke

&#8220;Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.&#8221; ~John Stuart Mill

&#8220;The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.&#8221; ~ John F. Kennedy (attributed to Burke)

This philosophy of &#8220;doing nothing&#8221; leading to the triumph of evil is not a new one, and history bears out in grisly detail the usual outcome.

With today&#8217;s technology and our governments having state-of-the art weaponry (some on par with what was once considered science fiction) far more advanced than any civilian has, you honestly think the potential for something far more &#8220;dark and dangerous&#8221; than we&#8217;ve ever imagined before in our history isn&#8217;t right around the corner?

Oh, but I forget&#8230; people actually think that things are different now. Sure, there have been tyrannical, murdering nut-jobs in the past but our current leadership is morally superior and righteous. Right? They&#8217;d never do anything so hideous. Right?

You think you&#8217;re the first person who made that assumption?


http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/8000/

I've made no assumptions what so ever. I honestly don't think you read other peoples posts, you have that idea in your head of what you want to lecture people on and you do so even though it has nothing to do with anything anyone has said.
If you have problems with your government why don't you go do something about it, ie stand for office or something instead of pontificating on here and derailing threads, this one btw is about the research that lead to finding of more concentration camps than previous thought.

 

[Big Don]

http://remember.org/imagine/limits/gabriel.htm

"The world may never know the true story behind the Holocaust, and it is left to speculate on the identity of those responsible.

---

The NAZIS, the NATIONAL SOCIALISTS, who, we are routinely lectured were not socialists, even though it was part of their name...

 

[Big Don]

An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity

 

[granfire]

The NAZIS, the NATIONAL SOCIALISTS, who, we are routinely lectured were not socialists, even though it was part of their name...

because they are not

You can take my word for it.

 

[Big Don]

because they are not

You can take my word for it.

OK, I'll take your word for it, you are wrong.
Hitler:

The National Socialist Party will prevent in the future, by force if necessary, all meetings and lectures which are likely to exercise a depressing influence on the German state.

We are Socialists, we are enemies of the capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.

National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd and artificial ties with the democratic order.

Goebbels:
As socialists, we are opponents of the Jews, because we see, in the Hebrews, the incarnation of capitalism, of the misuse of the nation&#8217;s goods.
​

Next you will tell us Islamic terrorist groups like al qaeda aren't Islamic
​

 

[Big Don]

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

The German Labour Front (German: Deutsche Arbeitsfront, DAF) was the National Socialist trade union organization which replaced the various trade unions of the Weimar Republic after Adolf Hitler's rise to power.

Its leader was Robert Ley, who stated its aim as 'to create a true social and productive community' (Smelster, 1988). Theoretically, the DAF existed to act as a medium through which workers and owners could mutually represent their interests. Wages were set by the 12 DAF trustees. The employees were given relatively high set wages, security of work, dismissal was increasingly made difficult, social security programmes were started by the Arbeitsfront, leisure programmes were started, canteens, pauses and regular working times were established, and therefore generally the German workers were satisfied by what the DAF gave them in repaying for their absolute loyalty.
Employment contracts created under the Weimar Republic were abolished and renewed under new circumstances in the DAF. Employers could demand more of their workers, while at the same time workers were given increased security of work and increasingly enrolled into social security programmes for workers. The organisation, by its own definition, combated capitalism, liberalism, but also revolution against the factory owners and the national socialist state.

Consolidating all unions into one super sized union is hardly eliminating unions.

No, no relation to the Nazis at all