> [Original Message] > From: Judith Evans <judithevans001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: 12/28/2005 3:20:26 PM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Hitler Meets A Christmas Story > > > --- Andy Amago <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > at the time. Maybe you can tell me about an uproar > > against this sentiment in Germany. > > Germans of my generation (and, I believe, successing > ones) were taught all about Nazism. They know that it > wasn't "the German people" who voted Hitler into power > (i.e., it was not a majority vote) but they take the > hit -- as it were -- anyway. Germany has strong > anti-hate-speech laws and Nazi symbols are banned > there. I believe Holocaust revisionism is banned > there too (as it is in Austria). > > Now why would they need to do this? > Hitler actually > > despised his own people once it was clear that the > > war was lost. They were weak; they deserved to die. > > These are his words. > > Non sequitur > > Tell it to Hitler. These are his own words. > > AA. I guess if you get your butt kicked it could > > have a way of toning things down. But not for gas > > station owners. > > Sorry a gas station owner was nasty to you. Some > Russians were nasty to me when I was in Leningrad, but > I didn't infer anything about Russians in general from > that; I suggest you try not to infer anything from > such instances. > Actually, he wasn't nasty to me. He was quite nice to me. So nice, in fact, I had to stop going there. Perhaps he was just a rogue German. He just happened to not like Russians. > > M.G. I have no idea how wide-spread the acceptance > > of Nazi racial superiority was among the German > > people during the 20's, 30's and 40's. > >(etc.) > > > > AA. Well, there was enough to fuel WWII. > > > *Why don't you read some history*, Irene? > > *Why don't you say something instead of doing personal attacks,* Judy? > The rest > > of it sounds like we're in agreement. People simply > > hate people. Nearly all people, nearly all the > > time. Irish need not apply, etc. > > Then you haven't read Mike's post. (I find most > people don't hate most people, and I live in a very > "multicultural" city and neighbourhood.) > > I'm talking historically. > > > AA. Yup. > > I'd say there was a lot of Social Darwinism in British > Imperialism; but to apply it further, without proof, > is wrong. > > So the British had it all sewed up with Social Darwinism, did they? > > > M.G. I'd say the need to have a place where you > > could be a Jew and not be hated for that was at the > > heart of the Zionism. > > > > > > AA. No doubt. But Israel was conceived before > > WWII. Before WWI in fact. > > > Yes indeed -- but then Jews were hated and persecuted > long before then. > > The scapegoat/victim thing. It all starts with beating of children of all nationalities and religions. Let's stop creating defective humans who are filled with rage that need to dump it somewhere. > It was essentially a > > 19th century idea, take somebody's land for > > yourself. Think it would work today? > > I suggest you look at the arguments of Zionists in > those decades. > > Answer the question. Think it would work today? > > > AA. And/or politics. I don't know that people who > > order the dropping of atomic bombs are overrun with > > remorse or guilt. > > I agree but think you've misunderstood Mike's point > > Which is? > > AA. Complicated, of course, because people are > > generally heartless. > > > *No*, Irene,*all too easy*, for you, because you > ascribe everything to human viciousness and lack of > empathy, which you appear to think universal. Matters > get complicated when explanations take into account a > variety of factors And you are an apologist for vicious behavior. > (I add that you confuse, here, complex explanations > and complex situations, so fail to reply to Mike) > While you tell me nothing except that I'm wrong. > > > M.G. Nevertheless, justice should be striven for, > > Palestinians should be compensated for their losses. > > > > > > AA. Sure got me on how to do that. > > Payment for lost homes? > Where would the homes be located? > > > > AA. Napoleon is considered a > > great general. Ever think he might be a mass > > murderer? Probably, like everybody, Napoleon is > > synonymous with greatness for you. > > > I don't know anyone for whom Napoleon is synonymous > with greatness. Are you kidding? He's synonymous with victory. Everybody wants victory. For some here, Churchill is/was > synonymous with greatness, but there are also many who > loathe/d him and what he stood for. (Indeed, as you > may know, the soldiers came home from war and, with > others, voted him out of office and voted in a > government that -- I should qualify this slightly, > still... -- founded a welfare state.) > > That's probably true. Churchill is too recent. He's also doesn't have enough, what's the word, egomaniacal qualities to ensure "greatness". > Every once in a > > great while, yes, great while, there's some empathy, > > but even in A Christmas Story one kid beats another > > bloody, and people, meaning the audience (this movie > > is wildly popular) as well as the kids in the story, > > think it's a hoot. Yes, empathy. > > > Do you believe you have empathy, Irene? > I don't make apologies for vicious behavior, let's put it that way. Andy > Judy Evans, Cardiff > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html