Teh Nazis!

[Rosencrantz]

How could we think the nazism was/is/should be German's problem only?
Let's take couple examples:

1. Who supported eugenic research programs in Germany before the WWII? The very right answer is: Among the others, THE Rockefeller Foundation. Why? Because in the States there was people who thought it was time to get rid of disabled (physically or mentally) people, or people with low economics but fast reproduction. In the nutshell the idea was to search and identify principal eugenic factors which make a man being a potential looser - i.e. social ballast. And for example in Sweden these kind of programs continued even long after the war, including for example forced castration of women with unwanted social background. Here in Finland eugenic studies were also conducted but they never lead to anything.

2. I wouldn't say "the Germans killed 6'000'000 jews" but rather "the World killed millions of jews, gypsies and other people in concentration camps placed in the Germany". Why? Because even if no one could imagine Auswitch-like mass destruction factory in 1930's, propably no one who read The London Times or other main stream news paper could be unaware about what was going in the Germany. Just read the old magazines and you'll see. Everything is there, starting from the very first anti-jewish pogrom on 1st of April 1933. Quote from the Finish paper Ajan Suunta 1.4.1933: "...Boycott will be carried on on Saturday, with full strength and iron discipline. It will begin, as planned, at 10 am, but will be interrupted at the evening... If the international agitation will be called to absolutely halt by the evening, the National Socialist Party will be ready to return the normal conditions in the Germany..." (My translation)
"International agitation" means foreign press releases handling the anti-jewish violences happened already in the Germany.

So, there was news, nothing much was done behind the curtains, and what happened? Nothing. No one raised a finger before it was too late. And again, why? Of course, no one didn't know how far Germany would go with jews, plus that basicly it was German's own busines to rule their country. But I think also, no one really didn't want those people, jews and the others. That became clear a bit later, as years passed. No one didn't want those people, and so actually the world killed them - not the Germans alone.

But the world needs it's heroes and so we often seems to forget that when the white troops saved the world from the black nazism, they were actually washing their own laundry as well. And what concerns me even more is that something like the Holocaust could happen again, against our eyes, and without we would be able to do anything but being late. And it doesn't have to be mass murders or ethnic wars like in the Balkans 1990's, but maybe also something else. However, no matter what we think about it today, eugenic was a science then. And besides the genes, what are we studying today?

To the end I want to say just one more thing. I think it's a shame - but understandable - that the Nazi era hasn't been discussed properly between the old and new German generations. I think maybe the most important lesson will be lost, because the era is quiet to death. I say so bacause I can't believe all that could happen and no one knew - as it is often excused. "I didn't know", or "Grandpa didn't know". I think the best what still living old people in Germany could do would be telling: "Yes, I was a German and I hailed to the Führer." And then explain what he or she felt and thought during those years and why.

Greetings,
-RC-

[Task Force]

If I am correct the japanease had something similar to what the nazis did, if I remember it correctly the killed over 10 million civilians right.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Task Force

If I am correct the japanease had something similar to what the nazis did, if I remember it correctly the killed over 10 million civilians right.

And Stalin over 20 million.

[Task Force]

Wow, stalin did the same thing too. hmm... so the germans wernt the only ones... There just the ones noted more...

[Raptor1]

The Russians and Germans at the time beat the Japanese in murdering their own people, but the Japanese take the lead at murdering other people I believe...

[Task Force]

I think your right... gonna go look it up...
China - 1,300,000 military and around 10,000,000 civilians.
as you can see china had around 10,000,000

[Max2147]

Arguing about how many people this or that dictator killed is so imprecise that it's pointless.

For example, Mao didn't order that many deaths directly. However, millions died as a direct result of his policies. The goal of those policies wasn't killing people (which makes them different from the Holocaust), but they were directly responsible for causing famines and other strife that killed people. So if you're counting the number of people that Mao killed, do you count those people?

I think what separates the Holocaust from those other brutal incidents in our mind isn't the number killed, it's the way they were killed and who killed them.

Most massacres have an almost animal-like brutality about them. The Rwandan genocide is a classic example - bands of people going around, finding people they don't like, and hacking them to death. The Japanese atrocities in China were similarly animalistic - soldiers roving through the city, raping the women and murdering the men.

For the most part, the Holocaust was different. It was conducted with scientific efficiency. It was controlled, cold, and calculated - none of the uncontrolled frenzied animal passion that characterizes most massacres. It was almost industrial in nature - like the victims were a commodity like cattle that were brought to a central point for slaughter. It was very well thought out over several years and planned from the top. It's probably the only time that permanent buildings and huge sprawling camps have been built for the specific purpose of killing people on a massive scale.

Another issue with the Holocaust was that the perpetrators were Western Europeans living in an advanced, well-educated, and industrial society. They weren't some barbarians from a foreign land - they were one of us. That really scared and continues to scare a lot of people.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by CaptHawkeye

By all means Stalin and his regime were equally cruel and sadistic. The difference is no one covered for him after death. The Post-Stalin Soviet Union actually went out the way to discredit Stalin and his public image for good reason. The man was a tyrant, and the Soviet and modern people of Russia never liked him. If the Nazis hadn't been so brutal to the western Slavs, they would have actually risen against him and joined the axis.

Actually, Stalin is "in" in the present Russia. Stage shows featuring him. TV and films. He is socially acceptable again. Many people confess to like him. He has become an idol. It is said that the government also polishes his image, to make people more accepting strong leader figures at the top of the state. His nasty sides get minimised and glossed over, I get the impression. I think for historical reasons Russian mentality is quite prone to leader cult and one-man-shows - see Putin's surprising and very substantial popularity. Maybe they had Czars for too long - and the guys coming after the Czars were not less autocratic.

[Skybird]

And school, well, my Gymnasium times were from 1978 (I think) to 1985 (I'm sure). And from sixth class on Nationalsocialism and Holocaust was shoved down our throats on three different schools in three different federal states: in history classes, in religion classes (when I was allowed there ), in Political classes, in German classes anyway , and even a bit in English classes, time and again, over and over again, year for year. That's why I am so very fed up with being told about the holocaust anymore and usually reject any discussion of the very topic itself. It BORES me to death. Learning the lesson from it, is okay, I support that, and I refer to it myself occasionally, to get an argument delivered. But discussing it for the sake of discussing the holocaust and "die deutsche Geschichte bewältigen" turns out a less patient and more unfriendly side in me. Exceptions to the rule are possible, but the rule is I am through and through sick and tired of hearing about the holocaust, from toe to head.

If that was the educational goal, they have been highly successful.

Strangely, the sequence of military events that form up WWII were almost ignored. The history of the military part of the war I learned for private interest, after school. But the military in general was very much a banned issue in Germany in the 80s.

[Task Force]

they dont talk about the military stuff here realy ither... Just that nazis were bad people... they killed people... ect...

In elementary school or 'upper secondary school' we didn't have anything about the military side of WW 2, all that stuff one had to learn on one's own time. Especially if one had a female history teacher, they didn't like the WW2 at all, it was just about 1848 and French revolution etc. Interesting times on their own but WW 2 is the truly 'manly' part of history.

Maybe they had Czars for too long - and the guys coming after the Czars were not less autocratic.

Good point Skybird. Although Russia was established as a western country in the east they have often been shunned from the 'European table' for being 'barbaric', 'slavic', 'eastern', etc. And were the targets of two most recent world wars, and Napoleon. They too have a reason to be sceptical of the west, and pretty much all their neighbours.