I don't t to dogpile here, so pls don't take it as that.
Now you state what YOU think was a good think,
Makinggermany string, so in so forth
What I trying to show is that good thing, really wasn't today all. Certainly not for us Deaf, and OT for gypsies (I have gypsie blood on my mans side) or othe rminorities,Jess,or undiseribles, so on.
So forth
The strength he created was good for the rich for a whirlwind good for a certain class for a while but they too ended up feeling the brunt of total war.
It's almost like discussing addiction with a addict.
It's a good thing that scrub makes you feel good,even though the actual comesfar out does any good feeling it may cause....
Evening he good days of the third reich it was never good to be Deaf, or someone w it's contrary polo cal views to national socialism or the state..
What imtryigto state is
The good, the stronger militarized Germany united under a racial ideology of expansion and recharge may have been.
For people like us and the nations around her it wS a BAD thing.
It prob would of been better if Germany wasn't united under his regime or his ideas.it may havebeenfar better to be a broken up nation of small states,
Rayne rthenth emitter it soon became.
That's what im trying To argue...
For what it's worth
As it is know the holocaust was not just death camps, he also had a large number of experiments done. Since animal testing was out (banned under hitler) they conducted their "science" on humans.
Biology was affected through deeper understanding of genetics, advancements in medical care, and how the body worked. The cost of which was at all of the poor souls that were not even seen as himans. They are the ones that developed the best cure of hypothermia and various other medical aspects. They are the ones that figured out how much damage a body could take and how to fix it. ... I do not need to state the horrors these findings we done in or that I do not support them... but to say that they did not benefit the medical field would lessen the unwilling sacrifices of the brutally slain.
Through seeking genicics purity and weaponry advances were also made in physics and chemistry... sadly even here the condemned did not escape "testing" to see what affects these things had on the human body.
You cannot kill to the degree he did and not find out more about the human body and nature, nor the environment in which they are found....earth.
What exactly was advanced by testing on living human eings?
What exact advancement in medical care came from that that couldn't of come other ways?
I want specifics.
Not generalizations
What new knowledge was taken from this in regards to how the body works that really was new knowledge?
I want specifics
You offer a cure for hypothermia
Fine..I grant..though I don't have time to look into. It..
Right now
Really I often have seen the above remark and no place have I found real data...
I grant they certainly learned allot about the Use Of poison gas on humans,and how to torture or pour hot lead downside. Poor kids throat etc etc..
But I'm asking how is that exactly advanced our useful knowledge
I'd rather us live without what ever advances that may have lead to the the extreme. Depravation the actual practises were and untold suffering caused by them.
Science isn't worth that
Frankly
I'd rather us be living in caves as brutes then have that....
I'm sure plenty of drills were used on Darfie heads too....
I wouldn't put it past them...
I see nothing "normal" about Hitler or anything "good" about his works. Anything he did was simply a means to an end--a wicked end.
As the eye witnesses and victims of World War II and the Holocaust die off, I'm afraid there's going to continue to be more revision of history.
It's not too many steps from a "normal" Hitler, to this:
http://thegreateststorynevertold.tv/10-reasons-why-hitler-was-one-of-the-good-guys/
The book mentioned in the OP may be of use to scholars who want to understand how a person like Hitler develops, and how he was able to wield so much influence over so many people.
Instead of trying to "normalize" Hitler we should be concerned with how so many "normal" people in the Third Reich not only supported Hitler but thrived in his twisted universe. Hitler was their guiding light but he couldn't have done all the damage he did without the cooperation of his many followers.
Again I already have... for the immediate good and the long lasting "positive" affects he had... reread my post...
Oh my goodness, I did not realize this was the article you were speaking of... I was looking for your post to show you this article. .. I cannot believe this bull feces exisits...
Much or the rewriting of history, where nazi Germany is concerned, is correcting lies and misinformation like this. I do not know if you know this, but Germany tried to deny the Holocaust. ... the Nazis (actually a rather small group realiviky speaking... think the tally is somewhere in the 200,000 range) to escape justice for war crimes and the horroric actions comited to humanity... the rest of Germany because they could not believe such horrors could be committed by their nation. I am sure there are other reasons, but those two are the strongest that come to mind.
There have been great movements to bring these travesties into light in the hopes that they never happen again.
I cannot believe this article exisits, or any like it. It is really a sad state of affairs that this was written....
History is an agreed upon fable. Period
People will chime "the re writing of history"so on, but who is writing what for whom?
History is written by the victors as such the victor will dictate the history.
If the nazi would of won
You and I and Reba here and others would be having. A very different conversation about the narrative
They lost
So we have this discussion about the narrative
Who controls the past controls the future
That's why history is so important.
That's why narratives are so important.
The closer one is to an event the least likely one will have a picture even hinting at the "truth" what ever that maybe.
In regards to war very little of it told to us in schools or on TV or through news papers could really be ever classed as close to the "truth"
We like to think our narrative is.
But in the end
It's a fable like any other, constructed for a political purpose like any other.
We like to pat ourselves on the back for always being toehold guys
I sure do...
But the truth of it is far more ugly
World War Two gives us a good glimpse at how propaganda of all sides can shape the narrative for generations after it.
Its never a simple as
"We are the good guys"
"They are the bad guys"
Too bad it isn't
But it's never that simple
There is something about the use of the word "fable" that mornings truth and yet feels wrong. Yes, history is written by the victors... I do like the description of history being an agreed upon fable... studying history one can learn a lot from.
If the Natzis won I would not be here for this conversation nor would such conversations be allowed so yes it would be a very different one
It is interesting to me that the victors always claim to be "the good guys" and while everyone wants that position...the truth is there really is no such thing.
It may feel wrong to you,but it shouldn't. You should ask yourself why it brings up any feelings at all.
It's just a word
But an accurate one
To use an example here
The native version of the events and conquest of the new world is frankly very different then the white Anglo saxon Protestant version of the event.
Or the Spanish catholic version of the event
Or the French catholic version of the event
The Aztecs had a very different idea and take on the event then the conquistadors...
If the Aztecs would of won the narrative would be very different
If the Iroquois would of managed to push the French and British back to the sea the narrative Be very different
But they didn't
And we're conquered
And we all know the ramifications of that.
Ramifications the nazi actually spoke well of
The idea of a reserve or a Jewish ghettoes are not very far apart.
Apartied In South Africa or the reservation system in Canada were not very far apart
The difference is here natives are a minority whereas in southafrica the blacks are the majority. but the affects of conquest and the soul crushing ramifications of the idea are the same...
But ask a white guy to tell you the tale you will get a really different answer then someone raised in third world conditions in northern Ontario..
Unless that white guy has educated himself enough to see through the propaganda.
The difference is
The white conquest in the new world succeeded.
The nazi conquest of Europe didn't
Each have their fables from the victors, each have their fables from the losers
All of this I agree with, the word "fable" does strike meaning to me due to the implications that the story is fictional. ... this gives rise to we'll how much of it is fiction? Many authors in the field will say the best way to write good fiction is to tell only one lie... and people will believe the rest. In this fiction to me seems like a better qualifier... yet a fable is a story told to teach a lesson or learn from.... to me that is what history is.... yet mesh them and you need up with what you are saying, and I agree with. So while it is only a word, and it should not... it does create a "feeling or emotion".
To your examples, yes I agree with them... in short victory worth history... yet we must not forget that the conjured also write their stories and pass them down. This is not as well studied as "history" and it does take some dedication for weed through them. The conjured will liable the victory as wrong and evil while the victors wrote why they were "justified".
Conquered wrote their stories,if they write or survive to write them at all
Sure.
But they tell their stories sure
No one has denied this though
The statement isn't only the victors tell a story.
The sta,ENT is
In the real world
Only the victors telling in the end actually matters.
Their always will be resistance. Sure
But if that's now a days just built into the conquest..
Natives tell their stories,they have their powwows, they do whT they do.
But it's all built into the system now. It's allowed and even now accepted and even promoted.
Because the conquest was so thorough
There is no danger
So they get to dance now.
That would be rather different if the powers that be sensed or saw a danger.
But the conquest is but complete.
This by all means tell your stories. The hob will even pay for it
After all
It's the least they can do
I'm sure..
If the nazi would of won, and the conquest was so through. They wouldn't have much cared for a smattering of Jews on some Jew Rez or ghetto telling a story...
If they were permitted to live..
Once their was no danger
Why not
The natives, while "allowed to dance" are still percicuted in the US... lands are still taken from them and they are still actively supressed.... any time someone finds a way to rise, even a little, the government will take it or crush it... while a "minor threat" it is still often seen as one evidently...
Thus with the philosophy the Natzi had about the Jewish people even a small grotto would not have been much allowed ... this was not a society that believed in equality or diversity... rather complete and total analiation of any thing and person not of the Aryan race and German. ...
I am missing where we are saying something different in regards to where history comes from.
The Jewish people have a huge advantage that many other groups who faced attempted genocide... the truth came out in all its horrors. Now there a multiple organizations and nations that seek to ensure this travesty is never forgotten. But even this did not come without motivations....
As they are in Canada.
My point is
Not to suggest the nazi would use the exact same policy as the whites did on those they conquered.
I was trying to illustrate the similarities in the actions of those who got away with a conquest and genocide and those who didn't.
Yes their would be differences
No doubt
It is doubtful the nazis could of or even would of tried to annihilate any non aryan rayan..race, they were allies with n I aryanid should be remembered ie Japan.
After all it should be noted
You need people. To do the shit work
They would of kept lesser races in their eyes for that shit work, work that would be comnsidered under the arya (nobles) ie the aryan.
Think it through
Some races of course would be exterminated.
But most prob would be living in some aryan type of cast thing India knows so well
Sure the Jews have a good advantage.
And truth be told
If their holy books are to be believed
They too conquered and genocided peoples.
History
Mmmmmm
If the Nazis had won, there would be no Jews left to tell their story. Any sympathizers would also be shut up, one way or another.Conquered wrote their stories,if they write or survive to write them at all
Sure.
But they tell their stories sure
No one has denied this though. . .
I'm sure..
If the nazi would of won, and the conquest was so through. They wouldn't have much cared for a smattering of Jews on some Jew Rez or ghetto telling a story...
If they were permitted to live..
Once their was no danger
Why not
No one is saying he was a good person nor has anyone forgotten the fallen and the cost. But by only concentrating on the horrors that were done... people tend to forget that this horrible person was in fact just a man.