auschwitz day jews. v nazis

[AZOffaly]

Everybody is in agreement with that eamonn. I don't really see any dissent there.

[ONeill]

The roots of antisemitism in Europe are so deep and tangled as to be almost indecipherable at this stage - but the primitive hatred of the "blood libel" (painting Jews as the killers of Christ) has been around ever since the Roman Empire became Christian.  the fact that the Jews had been expelled from their traditional homeland (in various different epochs) led to them being considered foreign or "other" in many different countries (which probably leads to the fear in a lot of these twisted conspiracy theories of "internationalism"). And of course, there is the prominence of Jewish people within European banking, which stemmed from usury being considered a sin by the church in the Middle Ages. However, non-Christians were allowed lend money, and since these budding empires all needed credit to expand, Jews were actively encouraged to settle and begin banking. places like the bourse in Amsterdam were a direct result of Jewish financial innovation. The hypocritical ruling classes of these countries blamed the Jews for their success, initially confining them to ghettos, and then propagating horrible myths about them, which led to muck like the Protocols of Zion being published and believed. Throw in Germany losing the war, the collapse of the Weimar Republic, amid a global financial meltdown and all the tinderbox needed was a spark.

By the way, agree with AZ, though I don't think Lawnseed is actually pyschopathic - it's just very easy to hide behind a keyboard and snigger at the reaction you're undoubtedly trying to get in pretending to be so. Don;t let the fact that tonnes of these people's hair and teeth are still kept in situ at these camps, that there are still survivors and relatives of these people to whom this is a reality, not an exercise for trolling, that the Nazi bureaucratic killing machine was perhaps the purest ever manifestation of evil upon this earth - don't let that get in the way of your own enjoyment.

People seriously need to grow up.

That's fairly interesting. Never could understand the hatred of the Jews. As a child playing games, to call someone a Jew was worse than a lot of derogatory terms.

[Mike Sheehy]

That's my point.

the thing is to keep society stable. That means controlling inequality and controlling rich people tearing the arse out of things.
The 1930s were the result of a major economic crash. It's not rocket science.

To follow up on Hardys point, why are you ruminating on inequality and "controlling rich people" on a thread about the holocaust. Surely even you can see the obvious implication ?

[omaghjoe]

That's my point.

the thing is to keep society stable. That means controlling inequality and controlling rich people tearing the arse out of things.
The 1930s were the result of a major economic crash. It's not rocket science.

To follow up on Hardys point, why are you ruminating on inequality and "controlling rich people" on a thread about the holocaust. Surely even you can see the obvious implication ?

Uh-ho here we go...

Oh well we made it quite far this time considering the subject of the thread

[omaghjoe]

OK Eamonn Hardy and all other sensible people on this board

I think we all agree that

• The holocaust was a dreadful crime probably the worst in history not just against Jews but against society, humankind, and God (if you still have the faith!)
  
  
• That we need to learn from it to ensure it never happens again (even tho it already has in Rwanda, Cambodia, Congo and a few attempts in Bosnia)
  
  
• That to use it as a justification (however slightly it is implied) for other crimes against humanity is repugnant and the worst memorial to those who died.
  

What we may disagree is the emphasis that we need to place on each. For example if someone said to me what do I think of the holocaust? My reply would be no.1 and only no.1

If someone asked Eamonn about the holocaust he might reply in a mixture of 1,2 and 3.

For me tho the danger in answering in 1,2 and 3 is that it may imply you have another agenda and that you perhaps don't think that it was that quite so bad, that implication might not be true or may not even be perceived at all, however I would never want my horror and revulsion to be mistaken or watered down on something like the Holocaust.

We just have different outlooks on it I suppose, none wrong as such.

[seafoid]

I don't think the Holocaust was the worst ever. Mao killed over 10 million in peacetime as did Stalin.
Genghis Khan would be up there too.
Even the word Holocaust is difficult. It implies a religious purpose to the slaughter, as if the Nazis  were doing god's will.

[easytiger95]

I hope some of the less empathetic posters on this thread have taken the opportunity to watch "Shoah" over the past few nights on BBC3. Tonight, they focused on the extermination of the Czech family camps within Auschwitz and the rising in the Warsaw Ghetto. Incrediby affecting still - and a rebuke to all on this thread who mess about with moral whataboutery.

[Main Street]

The lesson of the holocaust is that the veneer of civilisation is very thin. The Millman experiment corroborates that view.

Just as the Germans committed atrocities because they could get away with it, it's no surprise that the Israelis as a state oppress the Palestinians for the same reason. A scorpion stings you because he can. What we need to understand is that any nation (our own included) or group of people has it in them to perpetrate unspeakable atrocities if they figure they can get away with it.

That's why the criminalisation of holocaust denial is justifiable, even at the expense of the right to free speech. We must never forget, never mind deny. Eternal vigilance is not just the price of freedom. It is a necessity for civilisation.

Well said - the more recent conflicts in Palestine and indeed the Balkans bear this out, sadly.

Rwanda...

Please explain the relevance of  ........    any sense of this statement   
"the Germans committed atrocities because they could get away with it, it's no surprise that the Israelis as a state oppress the Palestinians for the same reason"

Would that be similar to,
'the Germans committed atrocities because they could get away with it, it's no surprise that the ( insert a name)   suppress the (insert a name) for the same reason'?

Considering that Stalin, Soviet communism, Pol Pot, Mao tse Tung, along with fascism in general, but Nazi fascism in particular, all are candidates for 'scum of the earth' (thank you arthur koestler), just how does the function of the Israeli state equate to the antics and atrocities of the scum of the earth?

[Eamonnca1]

Considering that Stalin, Soviet communism, Pol Pot, Mao tse Tung, along with fascism in general, but Nazi fascism in particular, all are candidates for 'scum of the earth' (thank you arthur koestler), just how does the function of the Israeli state equate to the antics and atrocities of the scum of the earth?

Their body count may not be as high, but you have to admit wiping an entire nation off the map and now trying to completely erase it from history is a pretty impressive piece of scum-of-the-earthery.

[Hardy]

The lesson of the holocaust is that the veneer of civilisation is very thin. The Millman experiment corroborates that view.

Just as the Germans committed atrocities because they could get away with it, it's no surprise that the Israelis as a state oppress the Palestinians for the same reason. A scorpion stings you because he can. What we need to understand is that any nation (our own included) or group of people has it in them to perpetrate unspeakable atrocities if they figure they can get away with it.

That's why the criminalisation of holocaust denial is justifiable, even at the expense of the right to free speech. We must never forget, never mind deny. Eternal vigilance is not just the price of freedom. It is a necessity for civilisation.

Well said - the more recent conflicts in Palestine and indeed the Balkans bear this out, sadly.

Rwanda...

Please explain the relevance of  ........    any sense of this statement   
"the Germans committed atrocities because they could get away with it, it's no surprise that the Israelis as a state oppress the Palestinians for the same reason"

Would that be similar to,
'the Germans committed atrocities because they could get away with it, it's no surprise that the ( insert a name)   suppress the (insert a name) for the same reason'?

Considering that Stalin, Soviet communism, Pol Pot, Mao tse Tung, along with fascism in general, but Nazi fascism in particular, all are candidates for 'scum of the earth' (thank you arthur koestler), just how does the function of the Israeli state equate to the antics and atrocities of the scum of the earth?

I  think you've managed to find the wrong end of the stick. I was taking lawnseed to task for suggesting that the modern day crimes of the Israeli state were somehow a retrospective justification for the Nazi massacre of Jews. That is the only reason I mentioned the Israelis as the example to quote to illustrate that the intrinsic propensity to commit evil is a human, not a national trait – a fact that should be the first lesson of the holocaust.

As for your request to explain how the "function" of the Israeli state, "equates" to the antics and atrocities of any group, I'm afraid I can't help, as I have no idea where you found such a suggestion.

The point is that the holocaust should teach us that victimisation of groups and categories of people comes easily to the human race - all of us as an intrinsic trait in our nature, as proven by psychological research - and can even extend to justifying their organised extermination, as long as we think we can get away with it.

[seafoid]

The lesson of the holocaust is that the veneer of civilisation is very thin. The Millman experiment corroborates that view.

Just as the Germans committed atrocities because they could get away with it, it's no surprise that the Israelis as a state oppress the Palestinians for the same reason. A scorpion stings you because he can. What we need to understand is that any nation (our own included) or group of people has it in them to perpetrate unspeakable atrocities if they figure they can get away with it.

That's why the criminalisation of holocaust denial is justifiable, even at the expense of the right to free speech. We must never forget, never mind deny. Eternal vigilance is not just the price of freedom. It is a necessity for civilisation.

Well said - the more recent conflicts in Palestine and indeed the Balkans bear this out, sadly.

Rwanda...

Please explain the relevance of  ........    any sense of this statement   
"the Germans committed atrocities because they could get away with it, it's no surprise that the Israelis as a state oppress the Palestinians for the same reason"

Would that be similar to,
'the Germans committed atrocities because they could get away with it, it's no surprise that the ( insert a name)   suppress the (insert a name) for the same reason'?

Considering that Stalin, Soviet communism, Pol Pot, Mao tse Tung, along with fascism in general, but Nazi fascism in particular, all are candidates for 'scum of the earth' (thank you arthur koestler), just how does the function of the Israeli state equate to the antics and atrocities of the scum of the earth?

I  think you've managed to find the wrong end of the stick. I was taking lawnseed to task for suggesting that the modern day crimes of the Israeli state were somehow a retrospective justification for the Nazi massacre of Jews. That is the only reason I mentioned the Israelis as the example to quote to illustrate that the intrinsic propensity to commit evil is a human, not a national trait – a fact that should be the first lesson of the holocaust.

As for your request to explain how the "function" of the Israeli state, "equates" to the antics and atrocities of any group, I'm afraid I can't help, as I have no idea where you found such a suggestion.

The point is that the holocaust should teach us that victimisation of groups and categories of people comes easily to the human race - all of us as an intrinsic trait in our nature, as proven by psychological research - and can even extend to justifying their organised extermination, as long as we think we can get away with it.

"The point is that the holocaust should teach us that victimisation of groups and categories of people comes easily to the human race - all of us as an intrinsic trait in our nature, as proven by psychological research - "

It is more or less guaranteed by war.
See the Yazidis in Iraq for example.


"Members of the Yazidi community, an ancient monotheistic religion rooted in Zoroastrianism, say they can never forgive those who helped Isis.
"They killed our men. If we could, we would kill theirs in return," says Ali Khalaf Qassem, a 70-year-old man with cracked feet and drooping eyebrows. He walked for days with his family to flee their village in Sinjar province.
They have joined 48 families that have taken over an unfinished building in the Kurdish city of Dohuk, hanging sheets along its concrete skeleton to create the illusion of separate rooms.
"We aren't safe anywhere. Iraq is like a fire. Now after the peshmerga fled, how do we know Kurdistan will protect us?," Mr Qassem asked. "We have to get to Europe."
For older Yazidis such as Mr Qassem, this was not their first expulsion. In the 1970s, under former ruler Saddam Hussein's "Arabisation" policy, minorities such as the Yazidis were moved across the country or rounded up into contained communities.
"I want to cry again for leaving behind our villages and holy places on the mountain," says Suleiman Kutti, a squat man with bushy white hair. "Without an international force here to protect us, we will keep facing this."
Iraq's Christians feel the same. "Iraq will be divided and our areas will become part of Kurdistan, which is fine. But if the world cannot protect us, it must help us leave," says Amira, a woman living with eight other families in a tiny classroom at the Mar Youkhana Church."

We need to teach kids about how awful war is.
Focusing on the Holocaust misses the point. WW2 was just an example of the system.

But it would be too hard to explain to them how our need for petrol outweighs other considerations. 

[easytiger95]

I think you're missing the point Seafoid. Hitler's campaign against Jews was pointless - they weren't blocking lebensraum economically it cost the Reich huge amounts of treasure and foreign currency to actually organise the extermination (the Nazis weren't sitting on hoards of Jewish gold - on the contrary, the property and valuables of the Jews were meant to pay for the expense of theirr own deaths), they weren't in political control of any countries, economically their influence was far overstated by the Nazis. So unlike presentday Israel/Palestine which is essentially a struggle for territory and the control of it's inhabitants, or Rwanda which was a Civil war fought on ethnic lines, or Cambodia, which was spurred on by American aggression in the region and a twisted communist ideology in the jungles, or Mao and Stalins horrible modernisation and collectivisation programmes, the holocaust is probably the purest example of focused evil projected against a people, and probably the catastrophe that comes closest to fitting the definition of genocide - in that the destruction of the entirety of a people is the purpose, rather than a consequence of other actions.

Ask a Palestinian in Gaza today why what is happening to them, is happening and they would have a ready answer for you. The same with the Kulaks in 30s Soviet Russia, the same with the middle class in Year One Cambodia, the same with the Tutsi governing class in Rwanda.

The shocking thing about the Holocaust, besides the incredible planning and technological advances that it spurred, was the lack of reason, and the consequences that had for Jewish populations. They could not believe themselves that such terror would be levelled agaisnt them for no reason, which undoubtedly led to Jewish populations being easier to transport. The scale of the horror was such that in the Czech Family camp in Auschwitz, despite being told by other inmates who had seen the orders for their death be gassing within 48 hours, they could not believe the SS would kill the children that they had built a school for, and missed their chance to revolt. that was within Auschwitz itself - even in the centre of the vortex they could not understand the scale.

Externally, it also made it very difficult to convince the Allied powers that anything was going on - the stories were too outlandish. Even today, if you heard that Israel were shipping Palestinians by train to specially constructed factories, deliberately designed to slaughter them, after stripping them of any valuables and any bodily features construed as having value, despite everything we know of human nature, we would find it very difficult to believe. It is very difficult to conceive of any regime as blatantly as the Nazis legitimising mass murder ever again. there are of course different weapons, such as famine, deliberate neglect etc, yet i would argue that the world has not yet plumbed the moral depths that Nazi Germany did, despite the other genocides that have occurred since.

[seafoid]

I think you're missing the point Seafoid. Hitler's campaign against Jews was pointless - they weren't blocking lebensraum economically it cost the Reich huge amounts of treasure and foreign currency to actually organise the extermination (the Nazis weren't sitting on hoards of Jewish gold - on the contrary, the property and valuables of the Jews were meant to pay for the expense of theirr own deaths), they weren't in political control of any countries, economically their influence was far overstated by the Nazis. So unlike presentday Israel/Palestine which is essentially a struggle for territory and the control of it's inhabitants, or Rwanda which was a Civil war fought on ethnic lines, or Cambodia, which was spurred on by American aggression in the region and a twisted communist ideology in the jungles, or Mao and Stalins horrible modernisation and collectivisation programmes, the holocaust is probably the purest example of focused evil projected against a people, and probably the catastrophe that comes closest to fitting the definition of genocide - in that the destruction of the entirety of a people is the purpose, rather than a consequence of other actions.

Ask a Palestinian in Gaza today why what is happening to them, is happening and they would have a ready answer for you. The same with the Kulaks in 30s Soviet Russia, the same with the middle class in Year One Cambodia, the same with the Tutsi governing class in Rwanda.

The shocking thing about the Holocaust, besides the incredible planning and technological advances that it spurred, was the lack of reason, and the consequences that had for Jewish populations. They could not believe themselves that such terror would be levelled agaisnt them for no reason, which undoubtedly led to Jewish populations being easier to transport. The scale of the horror was such that in the Czech Family camp in Auschwitz, despite being told by other inmates who had seen the orders for their death be gassing within 48 hours, they could not believe the SS would kill the children that they had built a school for, and missed their chance to revolt. that was within Auschwitz itself - even in the centre of the vortex they could not understand the scale.

Externally, it also made it very difficult to convince the Allied powers that anything was going on - the stories were too outlandish. Even today, if you heard that Israel were shipping Palestinians by train to specially constructed factories, deliberately designed to slaughter them, after stripping them of any valuables and any bodily features construed as having value, despite everything we know of human nature, we would find it very difficult to believe. It is very difficult to conceive of any regime as blatantly as the Nazis legitimising mass murder ever again. there are of course different weapons, such as famine, deliberate neglect etc, yet i would argue that the world has not yet plumbed the moral depths that Nazi Germany did, despite the other genocides that have occurred since.

It wasn't pointless or lacking reason. The Nazis identified Jews in Wall St and in the Soviet Union government as their enemies.
They were a reaction to the austerity imposed on Germany in the 1930s.  Fascism was all about trauma and death and existential dread.
It was run by sociopaths who could channel the fear of their people.

The Nazis wanted to impose a different economic model that wasn't run out of Wall St. 
http://www.amazon.com/Wages-Destruction-Making-Breaking-Economy/dp/0143113208

Most of the German industrialists were with the Nazis.
Every war is the same. There was nothing unique about the Nazis.
What eventually defeated them was the lack of oil.

It is very difficult to conceive of any regime as blatantly as the Nazis legitimising mass murder ever again
Climate change means it's pretty inevitable

the logic of war is fairly grotesque. This is from the FT 

http://ftalphaville.ft.com//2012/07/10/1078071/the-negative-fear-bubble/

"Capital must be destroyed in order for liquidity to be usefully deployed once again — especially if it is to deliver investment returns.Hence, why wars are so hugely useful for dealing with economic depressions. They permanently and effectively destroy capacity. Not just the surplus capacity that plagues the system, but core capacity, which serves a genuine economic need. Indeed, it's the need for the capacity to be reinstalled that in many ways justifies a return on investment again.
The foundation of Friedman's corrupting principle is that the investor (money to be more precise) has no duty, obligation or covenant to anyone or anything."

And when the war is over reconstruction is great for business.

[easytiger95]

Disagree strongly Seafoid. Wall Street/ International finance angle does not cover the atrocities meted out to poverty stricken Jewish communities - although Hitler's anti semitism was well rooted and exposed from Mein Kampf onward, there is little to suggest that he actually believed the conflation of Jew with Communism (as witnessed by the pragmatism of the pre war pact with Stalin, no fan of the Jewish people themselves). It was a visceral hatred, based in the prejudices and myths of Mittel Europe.  As the Jewish combat leaders in Warsaw expressed in messages to prominent Jews in America - you will have no one left to lead. The extermination of the Jewish population of Europe was an end in itself - the weakening of any international finance/ communist plot a happy byproduct for the Nazis.

The climate change comment, i find to be a bit glib, especially from someone who claims that Israel is currently engaged in a genocide against Palestinians. To attribute actions such as the Holocaust and other genocides to what seems to be a Marxist reading of history, completely ignores Man's capacity to pervert ideologies of whatever bent to satisfy more primal urges.

Lack of oil did not do for the Nazis - what did for them was an inability to resupply their own lines at Stalingrad, caused by Hitler's increasing need to micro manage the front from Germany. They had taken a lot of the oil fields in southern Russia by the time they turned to stalingrad - ironically this fuel allowed them travel far ahead of their own supply lines across the steppes ( a lot of the provisioning had to be done by pack animals because roads were so bad). if Hitler had not been so fixated in taking a city bearing Stalin's name the advance across the steppes would have been slower and more successful.

Lack of oil is putting a post modern read on a conflict that does not bear the supposition. Unlike Iraq, WW2 was not fought for oil, though it's acquisition became a strategic imperative. But it was not a cause of the war.

The Nazis were unique, because of the way they were able to incriminate an entire nation - the German industrialists Krups and Siemens actually opened factories in Auschwitz in 1942. Never before or since has a nation committed such awful crimes with the acquiescence or tacit support of the vast majority of its citizens, very different from any other genocidal examples given in this thread.

[seafoid]

Disagree strongly Seafoid. Wall Street/ International finance angle does not cover the atrocities meted out to poverty stricken Jewish communities - although Hitler's anti semitism was well rooted and exposed from Mein Kampf onward, there is little to suggest that he actually believed the conflation of Jew with Communism (as witnessed by the pragmatism of the pre war pact with Stalin, no fan of the Jewish people themselves). It was a visceral hatred, based in the prejudices and myths of Mittel Europe.  As the Jewish combat leaders in Warsaw expressed in messages to prominent Jews in America - you will have no one left to lead. The extermination of the Jewish population of Europe was an end in itself - the weakening of any international finance/ communist plot a happy byproduct for the Nazis.

The climate change comment, i find to be a bit glib, especially from someone who claims that Israel is currently engaged in a genocide against Palestinians. To attribute actions such as the Holocaust and other genocides to what seems to be a Marxist reading of history, completely ignores Man's capacity to pervert ideologies of whatever bent to satisfy more primal urges.

Lack of oil did not do for the Nazis - what did for them was an inability to resupply their own lines at Stalingrad, caused by Hitler's increasing need to micro manage the front from Germany. They had taken a lot of the oil fields in southern Russia by the time they turned to stalingrad - ironically this fuel allowed them travel far ahead of their own supply lines across the steppes ( a lot of the provisioning had to be done by pack animals because roads were so bad). if Hitler had not been so fixated in taking a city bearing Stalin's name the advance across the steppes would have been slower and more successful.

Lack of oil is putting a post modern read on a conflict that does not bear the supposition. Unlike Iraq, WW2 was not fought for oil, though it's acquisition became a strategic imperative. But it was not a cause of the war.

The Nazis were unique, because of the way they were able to incriminate an entire nation - the German industrialists Krups and Siemens actually opened factories in Auschwitz in 1942. Never before or since has a nation committed such awful crimes with the acquiescence or tacit support of the vast majority of its citizens, very different from any other genocidal examples given in this thread.

The cause of the war was the economic breakdown post 1929 that came out of ww1.
The Germans thought they could dominate with a different economic model that enslaved the slavs. They were insane.

Climate change isn't glib, either. How do you think India is going to feed 2 billion people ?
And China ? With desertification and seasons unreliable from one year to the next .
The Nazis were not and will not be seen as sui generis.

I think oil was one of the main reasons they lost but feel free to differ.
They didn't get any and once they lost Stalingrad the Soviets turned the tide. They didn't have the resources to
beat the Soviets. They had the best military machine but it wasn't enough. By 1944 they were doing stuff with coal but the war was lost.

We are very lucky to live in a very stable period of economic history but others will not be so lucky.
The mechanisms to kill large numbers of people industrially exist and they will be used again.

http://www.poetryinternationalweb.net/pi/site/poem/item/9297/auto/A-DISUSED-SHED-IN-CO-WEXFORD