5 ms·

Then why was the holocaust such a shock to people? Perhaps they just didn't read the book.

Retric 10y ago
Note the scale '12,000-15,000' is ~1/1,000th of the actual death total in the Holocaust. It's the difference between 'first shoot all the lawyers' and 'just nuke their city's.' Soviet great purge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge killed ~1 million people, holocaust killed 10x that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine killed ~15 million to 43 million, but that's poor policy not gas chambers. Closest direct comparison is Pol Pot which 'only' killed ~2 million people.
- themartorana 10y ago
  It's funny that you don't hear Mao's name in many discussions of genocide. Is it that different that so many died one step removed from a direct order instead of on direct orders? Or that he had the good of the people in his heart even as tens of millions perished? Gas chambers were policy. I guess we greatly forgive incompetence, even as it's forced on people through brutality.
  - clevernickname 10y ago
    I find it strange that people proudly identify as "communists" without much stigma when the ideology was responsible for more death and suffering than national socialism. I guess it's a lot harder to remain ignorant of the Holocaust than of Stalin's purges.
    - danharaj 10y ago
      Communism isn't one ideology. That's why it's called Marxim, or Leninism, or Stalinism, or Maoism, or anarchocommunism, or autonomous marxism, etc... And furthermore, ideology itself doesn't do anything, it's purely abstract. It's entirely possible for two people to adopt the same exact ideas and do things they mutually disagree about. There are communists who like Mao and stalin. I think they're gross because of it. I follow communist lines of thought that rejected all those dictators out of hand almost immediately. This sort of genetic fallacy is kind of weak.
      - clevernickname 10y ago
        Would you extend that same generosity towards someone that identified as a facist? Or would you assume they are a jingoistic racist etc. and associate them with Nazi Germany and company? That's my point. One suffers guilt by association and its name itself has become a meaningless insult, the other does not and the mere suggestion that one could be against it draws to mind images of Cold War loonies. When in fact, both are (relatively speaking) sound families of ideologies.
        hartpuff 10y ago
        >>>I find it strange that people proudly identify as "communists" without much stigma Do you also find it strange that white people proudly identify as "Americans" without much stigma, even after centuries of racial atrocities by white Americans? > That's my point. Your point - as is the point of everyone who trots out the "Communism" is worse than Nazism old chestnut - is to minimise what the Nazis did. And there's only one reason people do that. The only surprise here, compared to every other Nazi sympathiser online making the same hackneyed "point", is you didn't claim Stalin killed 50/60/100 million people (any number higher than Hitler will do).
        clevernickname 10y ago
        >Do you also find it strange that white people proudly identify as "Americans" without much stigma, even after centuries of racial atrocities by white Americans? Evidently many do, having experienced no shortage of white guilt and self-hating anti-American sentiment in my life. >Your point - as is the point of everyone who trots out the "Communism" is worse than Nazism old chestnut - is to minimise what the Nazis did. I wish to do the opposite of minimizing what the Nazis did. I wish to knock naive Che hat-wearing millennials down a peg. >And there's only one reason people do that. If you're going to call me a Nazi, I think all I can do is stick out my tongue, call you a commie, and close the tab.
        hartpuff 10y ago
        > If you're going to call me a Nazi, I think all I can do is stick out my tongue, call you a commie, and close the tab. Call me a commie if you like, I'm not ashamed to admit I sympathise with Communist principles (class and race/gender equality, for example) - unlike you, quacking like a fascist but too embarrassed to openly admit it. The only people I see online making the effort to argue Nazism was not as bad as "X" are Nazi sympathisers/fascists. I mean who else would bother? If you want to 'take down' a stupid and ridiculous caricature of what a Communist is ("Che wearing millennial" or whatever) you can do it without mentioning Nazis at all. Instead you chose to take the 'at least the Nazis weren't as bad as the Communists' route. Your other posts here defending fascism don't exactly scream "Not a Nazi-sympathiser" either, so I don't know who you think you're trying to kid. What happened after the Russian, Chinese or Cuban Revolutions doesn't negate the beliefs behind and reasons for the revolutions themselves (equality and 'the people'), any more than what happened after the American Revolution - almost 100 years of slavery, aggression and "Manifest Destiny" (cf. Lebensraum), followed by another century of racial persecution and overseas aggression/imperialism - negates the ideas and beliefs behind that revolution (equality and 'the people'). What happened in Germany after 1933, however, went exactly according to the Nazi playbook. What happened in Italy and every other fascist country, likewise, went exactly according to fascist principles. Nobody becomes a Communist because they believe in purges or gulags; and nobody becomes a Nazi or a fascist because they believe in good roads, advanced rocketry or trains running on time. That's why Nazis and fascists have a stigma attached to them - because the principles behind both are reprehensible to most people.
- wcummings 10y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor killed 2.4 to 7.5 million
ikeboy 10y ago
From what I've been told (certainly not an expert), people thought he wasn't serious at first. Then he took over the country and everyone was afraid of him. They also had a large brainwashing/ propaganda campaign to convince Germans to support them.
- jacobush 10y ago
  Clearly Trump can't be serious about everything he says either.
  - ikeboy 10y ago
    The worst thing he's said is he'd kill families of terrorists, which is bad but nowhere near Mein Kampf. Also, he hasn't written them in a book, it's an off the cuff threat, which makes it less serious, in my opinion.
    - jacobush 10y ago
      Given a choice, do you think Hitler would have taken to a book or off the cuff remarks and Twitter? Also, how many terrorists are there which the US could assaninate? Multiply that with 10 to accomodate with a family and you may up with a number not far off from the 10000 Hitler proposed.
      - soundwave106 10y ago
        Hitler and the NSDAP was way more organized than Trump. The party had a well defined manifesto and their ideological bent was pretty clear. Hitler attempted to gain power through a coup before trying the legit route. Certainly there is definitely some routes of comparison between the rise of fascism in 1920s/1930s Europe and the right-wing-populist Trump phenomenon. However, in my mind the past politician that best approximates Donald Trump is Silvio Berlusconi. ("You never know", of course, but at this time I think some of the right wing political groups in Europe are better targets for 1920s-30s European fascism comparisons.)

Note the scale '12,000-15,000' is ~1/1,000th of the actual death total in the Holocaust. It's the difference between 'first shoot all the lawyers' and 'just nuke their city's.' Soviet great purge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge killed ~1 million people, holocaust killed 10x that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine killed ~15 million to 43 million, but that's poor policy not gas chambers. Closest direct comparison is Pol Pot which 'only' killed ~2 million people.

themartorana 10y ago
It's funny that you don't hear Mao's name in many discussions of genocide. Is it that different that so many died one step removed from a direct order instead of on direct orders? Or that he had the good of the people in his heart even as tens of millions perished? Gas chambers were policy. I guess we greatly forgive incompetence, even as it's forced on people through brutality.
- clevernickname 10y ago
  I find it strange that people proudly identify as "communists" without much stigma when the ideology was responsible for more death and suffering than national socialism. I guess it's a lot harder to remain ignorant of the Holocaust than of Stalin's purges.
  - danharaj 10y ago
    Communism isn't one ideology. That's why it's called Marxim, or Leninism, or Stalinism, or Maoism, or anarchocommunism, or autonomous marxism, etc... And furthermore, ideology itself doesn't do anything, it's purely abstract. It's entirely possible for two people to adopt the same exact ideas and do things they mutually disagree about. There are communists who like Mao and stalin. I think they're gross because of it. I follow communist lines of thought that rejected all those dictators out of hand almost immediately. This sort of genetic fallacy is kind of weak.
    - clevernickname 10y ago
      Would you extend that same generosity towards someone that identified as a facist? Or would you assume they are a jingoistic racist etc. and associate them with Nazi Germany and company? That's my point. One suffers guilt by association and its name itself has become a meaningless insult, the other does not and the mere suggestion that one could be against it draws to mind images of Cold War loonies. When in fact, both are (relatively speaking) sound families of ideologies.
      - hartpuff 10y ago
        >>>I find it strange that people proudly identify as "communists" without much stigma Do you also find it strange that white people proudly identify as "Americans" without much stigma, even after centuries of racial atrocities by white Americans? > That's my point. Your point - as is the point of everyone who trots out the "Communism" is worse than Nazism old chestnut - is to minimise what the Nazis did. And there's only one reason people do that. The only surprise here, compared to every other Nazi sympathiser online making the same hackneyed "point", is you didn't claim Stalin killed 50/60/100 million people (any number higher than Hitler will do).
        clevernickname 10y ago
        >Do you also find it strange that white people proudly identify as "Americans" without much stigma, even after centuries of racial atrocities by white Americans? Evidently many do, having experienced no shortage of white guilt and self-hating anti-American sentiment in my life. >Your point - as is the point of everyone who trots out the "Communism" is worse than Nazism old chestnut - is to minimise what the Nazis did. I wish to do the opposite of minimizing what the Nazis did. I wish to knock naive Che hat-wearing millennials down a peg. >And there's only one reason people do that. If you're going to call me a Nazi, I think all I can do is stick out my tongue, call you a commie, and close the tab.
        hartpuff 10y ago
        > If you're going to call me a Nazi, I think all I can do is stick out my tongue, call you a commie, and close the tab. Call me a commie if you like, I'm not ashamed to admit I sympathise with Communist principles (class and race/gender equality, for example) - unlike you, quacking like a fascist but too embarrassed to openly admit it. The only people I see online making the effort to argue Nazism was not as bad as "X" are Nazi sympathisers/fascists. I mean who else would bother? If you want to 'take down' a stupid and ridiculous caricature of what a Communist is ("Che wearing millennial" or whatever) you can do it without mentioning Nazis at all. Instead you chose to take the 'at least the Nazis weren't as bad as the Communists' route. Your other posts here defending fascism don't exactly scream "Not a Nazi-sympathiser" either, so I don't know who you think you're trying to kid. What happened after the Russian, Chinese or Cuban Revolutions doesn't negate the beliefs behind and reasons for the revolutions themselves (equality and 'the people'), any more than what happened after the American Revolution - almost 100 years of slavery, aggression and "Manifest Destiny" (cf. Lebensraum), followed by another century of racial persecution and overseas aggression/imperialism - negates the ideas and beliefs behind that revolution (equality and 'the people'). What happened in Germany after 1933, however, went exactly according to the Nazi playbook. What happened in Italy and every other fascist country, likewise, went exactly according to fascist principles. Nobody becomes a Communist because they believe in purges or gulags; and nobody becomes a Nazi or a fascist because they believe in good roads, advanced rocketry or trains running on time. That's why Nazis and fascists have a stigma attached to them - because the principles behind both are reprehensible to most people.
wcummings 10y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor killed 2.4 to 7.5 million

ikeboy 10y ago

From what I've been told (certainly not an expert), people thought he wasn't serious at first. Then he took over the country and everyone was afraid of him. They also had a large brainwashing/ propaganda campaign to convince Germans to support them.

jacobush 10y ago
Clearly Trump can't be serious about everything he says either.
- ikeboy 10y ago
  The worst thing he's said is he'd kill families of terrorists, which is bad but nowhere near Mein Kampf. Also, he hasn't written them in a book, it's an off the cuff threat, which makes it less serious, in my opinion.
  - jacobush 10y ago
    Given a choice, do you think Hitler would have taken to a book or off the cuff remarks and Twitter? Also, how many terrorists are there which the US could assaninate? Multiply that with 10 to accomodate with a family and you may up with a number not far off from the 10000 Hitler proposed.
    - soundwave106 10y ago
      Hitler and the NSDAP was way more organized than Trump. The party had a well defined manifesto and their ideological bent was pretty clear. Hitler attempted to gain power through a coup before trying the legit route. Certainly there is definitely some routes of comparison between the rise of fascism in 1920s/1930s Europe and the right-wing-populist Trump phenomenon. However, in my mind the past politician that best approximates Donald Trump is Silvio Berlusconi. ("You never know", of course, but at this time I think some of the right wing political groups in Europe are better targets for 1920s-30s European fascism comparisons.)