Posted on 04/28/2006 11:27:17 AM PDT by Alouette
Warning! This is a high-volume ping list.
Hitler killed 12 million people. Of that number, 6 million (half) were Jewish.
Don't forget the other 6 million.
Not surprising at all.
Check the numbers again, Hitler killed (caused) a heck of a lot more than 12 million.
"Aryan philosophy dictated that the mentally disabled and deformed should be immediately exterminated, not cared for and nurtured. The weak should be crushed and the strong exalted. '
Policies of the DNC? I read that line and thought about Terri Schiavo as well as 40 million aborted children.
The Holocaust is something apart from the overall death and destruction of WW II, which would be considered 'war casualties' not victims of the Holocaust.
When it comes to Hitler and the death he caused, I think in max terms. What he did changed the world forever. The death and destruction included with the lives of the survivors also.
A difference that makes all the difference. To equate the two perspectives is to destroy the first.
Evil tyrants will exploit whatever social undercurrents happen to be available -- racial, religious, economic, and any other kind of bias -- and kill as many people of whatever description as they need to, in order to get what they want, which is always power. It's always presented as a plan for utopia, in order to garner popular support. But somehow it always involves getting rid of huge numbers of people. "We'll have a perfect society, just as soon as we get rid of all the _______ (Jews, capitalists, intellectuals, Tutsis, whites . . . )."
North Korea is an unusual situation, in that the official ideology driving it is now based almost entirely on ethnic supremacy and ethnic purity, much as the official Nazi party line was. Although it originally seized power on a combination of Marxist-Communist and Korean nationalist ideologies, by rooting out and destroying landowners, the job was thoroughly completed early on, and in the absence of any landowners or non-Koreans to slaughter, the regime has maintained power by ruthless extermination of anyone who doesn't perfectly toe the line on the official road to pure-Korean utopia. In the absence of any real group to declare as the enemy, one was invented. Actually, multiple classifications of the enemy were invented, as described in this interesting article:
http://www.brookings.edu/views/testimony/oh20030605.htm
"then-president Kim Il-sung reported to the Fifth Korean Workers' Party Congress in 1970 that the people could be classified into three political groups: a loyal "core class," a suspect "wavering class," and a politically unreliable "hostile class." Individuals are further classified into 51 subcategories, such as those in the wavering class who had been landowners before the communists came to power, or those who had resided in the southern half of Korea before 1945."
If Hitler had managed to stay in power, in due course he would have ended up slaughtering at least as many "Aryans" as he did Jews.
Interesting. I hadn't known that. Makes sense though. Totalitarian regimes are suspicious of anyone who belongs to any identifiable organization or group to which they might have loyalty. And the fact that the Freemason tradition is both secretive and tightly organized would have made them look like a serious threat to the Nazis.
But that's on a good day.
"The German Jewish Reform movement went so far as to declare "Berlin is our Jerusalem and Germany is our Zion.""
Their own words convicted them.
>>>"The Jews were arguably the most patriotic demographic in pre-Holocaust Germany. "
I take issue with this one statement. The rest of the article is pretty accurate though.
The Jews stood out in Germany and most other European countries. In Germany, I believe they were active in the government during the monetary blast off before World War Two (when it took wheelbarrows of money to buy a loaf of bread). Even though they brought so much to these countries and were essential to the economy, they were hated by many of their neighbors. There must have been a reason. So why?
First, second, and third: envy. Then, I think the lack of assimiliation to the local cutoms and being vocal about issues anti-thetical to the governments where they lived. The conflicts of d'Medici and the Catholics in Italy might be an example. Also, their relations in Poland and France. Because Jews feared governmental repression, they might have supported issues to weaken the local government. This is far less true with the Chinese, who have similar business acumen and success. What the Jews have consistently brought to the countries where they emigrated was: the arts, culture, wealth, education and a cosmopolitan (perhaps libertarian) philosophy.
Besides making a colosal mistake and commiting grossly immoral acts, Hitler, and the German people, lost one of the cornerstones for their success: the Jews. But, to think that the Jews were out there waving flags for the German government, as this article suggests, is Monday morning propaganda. Thank you for posting the interesting article.
He's going too far here. It's true that many German Jews went to great lengths to identify with Germany and express their loyalty to it, but there were significant figures who felt alientated from Germany and even hostile to it. They were a minority and perhaps they had good reason for their feelings, but it won't do to deny that such attitudes existed. And what positions did Jews occupy in Germany that they haven't held in the US?
Policy of Sandra Day O'Connor. She recently gave a speech criticizing legislative interference with judges over cases involving "life unworthy of life". Her phrase, and Nazi Germany's.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.