5 ms·

>It also seems to suggest that the German people couldn’t know what atrocities were being committed, which it was well known what was going on. On this point,

>It also seems to suggest that the German people couldn’t know what atrocities were being committed, which it was well known what was going on. On this point, as someone whose grandparents lived through the German side of WW2, I am convinced it's allied propaganda used to justify the collective guilt of the German people. I don't doubt it was well known to the Jewish population in America at the time, but any news of that nature would have been easy to dismiss as the other side's slander to the German on the ground. People today barely know what happened in Abu Graib, and that's with modern communications technology.

goto11 6y ago
Why would anyone dismiss it as slander? Eradication of Jews had been the stated goal of the Nazi party from the beginning. Progroms like kristallnacht was used as propaganda for the Nazi party. The Nuremberg laws was a matter of public record.
- SuoDuanDao 6y ago
  Again, that does not ring true given the conversations I've had with people alive at the time. Jewish people were scapegoated for the destruction of the German economy. Not everyone who accepted that narrative would have believed death was a just response. Any competent propagandist would have left the question of what a proper response was open so people would have imagined that what they thought was proper would happen. The closest modern equivalent I can think of would be Occupy Wall Street. If the leaders of OWS had formed their own political party in the wake of the 2008 bailouts and ridden a wave of public anger into office, they would have probably had the political capital to seize all bankers' assets as stolen goods and hold them to await trial. It would have taken an order of magnitude more political capital to simply start executing them without trial.
  - goto11 6y ago
    > Again, that does not ring true given the conversations I've had with people alive at the time. Have you considered that these people might have an interest in downplaying how much they knew? > The closest modern equivalent I can think of would be Occupy Wall Street. You should be ashamed of yourself for making that comparison.
    - SuoDuanDao 6y ago
      >Have you considered that these people might have an interest in downplaying how much they knew? Certainly, and I've also considered that an army which killed civilians during the war would be interested in playing up how much the civilians knew. I've listened to both sides and made my decision which story sounds more plausible. >You should be ashamed of yourself for making that comparison. If I wasn't clear, I was talking about the conditions that gave rise to the ideology, not the ideologies themselves. We are very lucky that racial and economic resentments have stayed mostly decoupled since the second world war. I am not remotely ashamed for describing how similar a modern example is to half of that wicked formula. To me, taking responsibility for my ancestors has nothing to do with paying blood money and everything to do with remaining vigilant to familiar precursors. I'd be ashamed for staying silent if I see a modern parallel.
      - ihm 6y ago
        You are comparing the blaming bankers who were actually responsible for the financial crisis to the scapegooating of Jews in Nazi Germany, and this was the closest modern example you could think of in a world where e.g., there are concentration camps on the American-Mexican border.
- fsloth 6y ago
  "Why would anyone dismiss it as slander?" Because in WW1 the English and French governments manufactured propaganda that claimed all sorts of preposterously horrible things were perpetrated by the germans. After the war (WW1) it became obvious they were mostly extremely exaggerated lies. That's why in WW2 it was initiallly very hard to start discussion about this. "You know, in last war we claimed the germans were commiting inhuman acts of horror? And we were kind of ... lying? Well, this time its totally true! Please believe us" It's the case of boy crying wolf... and then wolf comes.
  - goto11 6y ago
    Yes but the comment was about people inside Germany. I can understand if people outside Germany who hadn't been exposed to Nazi propaganda could believe it was run-of-the-mill wartime slander of the enemy.
    - fsloth 6y ago
      I think you are approaching this from a position of afterwisdom. Case in point: Think how hard it was for the general american to realize the police in their country actually has pathological violent tendencies and blacks actually are in a weak position. If modern state is able to treat their minorities in that way in our enlightened age for a long time, think about what the chances the public had in WW2 Germany to have a clue. Generally, Germans trusted their government. The Nazi propaganda was astoundingly enticing (there were excellent books on WW1 propaganda that the Nazi:s studied from in earnest so they learned from existing knowledge). How good was the Nazi propaganda? People are still today falling in love with the concept, even though the Nazi idealism was proven evil and non-functional, and fascism itself inserted to modern day would be extremely anachronistic. Think about it. People are falling in love with a brand and ideology created by people who died 70+ years ago. Now imagine these same people are running a country. Portraying themselves as glorious leaders, and saying to all germans - hell yes, we will triumph, love us. And love they did. They have total pulse on the public sentiment. They control the mass media (they have mass media! Which is itself a novelty!). They control the public image of the state and they control the public mindset. They control the public news and what people are concerned off. I presume the public sentiment was along the lines of "So, they are moving those jews somewhere? Oh, better in some 'jewtown' rather than here in that ghetto, I'm glad I don't have to see them again". But I doubt they had in mind the slaughterhouse. It was horror what happened. But it is very hard to convince me the average german would have had any clue.
- redwood 6y ago
  I think it's a question of whether your family lived in a town with Jews. Jews tended to be city people so I would expect rural folks to have been fairly ignorant of what was going on. However German city people could not miss the persecution of a large portion of their cities.
  - goto11 6y ago
    Progroms like Kristallnacht were widely publicized by Nazi media (the word "Kristallnacht" itself was coined by Nazi propaganda). So it is not like you only knew about the persecutions if you had Jewish neighbors. The party itself made sure everybody knew about the persecutions.

goto11 6y ago

Why would anyone dismiss it as slander? Eradication of Jews had been the stated goal of the Nazi party from the beginning. Progroms like kristallnacht was used as propaganda for the Nazi party. The Nuremberg laws was a matter of public record.

SuoDuanDao 6y ago
Again, that does not ring true given the conversations I've had with people alive at the time. Jewish people were scapegoated for the destruction of the German economy. Not everyone who accepted that narrative would have believed death was a just response. Any competent propagandist would have left the question of what a proper response was open so people would have imagined that what they thought was proper would happen. The closest modern equivalent I can think of would be Occupy Wall Street. If the leaders of OWS had formed their own political party in the wake of the 2008 bailouts and ridden a wave of public anger into office, they would have probably had the political capital to seize all bankers' assets as stolen goods and hold them to await trial. It would have taken an order of magnitude more political capital to simply start executing them without trial.
- goto11 6y ago
  > Again, that does not ring true given the conversations I've had with people alive at the time. Have you considered that these people might have an interest in downplaying how much they knew? > The closest modern equivalent I can think of would be Occupy Wall Street. You should be ashamed of yourself for making that comparison.
  - SuoDuanDao 6y ago
    >Have you considered that these people might have an interest in downplaying how much they knew? Certainly, and I've also considered that an army which killed civilians during the war would be interested in playing up how much the civilians knew. I've listened to both sides and made my decision which story sounds more plausible. >You should be ashamed of yourself for making that comparison. If I wasn't clear, I was talking about the conditions that gave rise to the ideology, not the ideologies themselves. We are very lucky that racial and economic resentments have stayed mostly decoupled since the second world war. I am not remotely ashamed for describing how similar a modern example is to half of that wicked formula. To me, taking responsibility for my ancestors has nothing to do with paying blood money and everything to do with remaining vigilant to familiar precursors. I'd be ashamed for staying silent if I see a modern parallel.
    - ihm 6y ago
      You are comparing the blaming bankers who were actually responsible for the financial crisis to the scapegooating of Jews in Nazi Germany, and this was the closest modern example you could think of in a world where e.g., there are concentration camps on the American-Mexican border.
fsloth 6y ago
"Why would anyone dismiss it as slander?" Because in WW1 the English and French governments manufactured propaganda that claimed all sorts of preposterously horrible things were perpetrated by the germans. After the war (WW1) it became obvious they were mostly extremely exaggerated lies. That's why in WW2 it was initiallly very hard to start discussion about this. "You know, in last war we claimed the germans were commiting inhuman acts of horror? And we were kind of ... lying? Well, this time its totally true! Please believe us" It's the case of boy crying wolf... and then wolf comes.
- goto11 6y ago
  Yes but the comment was about people inside Germany. I can understand if people outside Germany who hadn't been exposed to Nazi propaganda could believe it was run-of-the-mill wartime slander of the enemy.
  - fsloth 6y ago
    I think you are approaching this from a position of afterwisdom. Case in point: Think how hard it was for the general american to realize the police in their country actually has pathological violent tendencies and blacks actually are in a weak position. If modern state is able to treat their minorities in that way in our enlightened age for a long time, think about what the chances the public had in WW2 Germany to have a clue. Generally, Germans trusted their government. The Nazi propaganda was astoundingly enticing (there were excellent books on WW1 propaganda that the Nazi:s studied from in earnest so they learned from existing knowledge). How good was the Nazi propaganda? People are still today falling in love with the concept, even though the Nazi idealism was proven evil and non-functional, and fascism itself inserted to modern day would be extremely anachronistic. Think about it. People are falling in love with a brand and ideology created by people who died 70+ years ago. Now imagine these same people are running a country. Portraying themselves as glorious leaders, and saying to all germans - hell yes, we will triumph, love us. And love they did. They have total pulse on the public sentiment. They control the mass media (they have mass media! Which is itself a novelty!). They control the public image of the state and they control the public mindset. They control the public news and what people are concerned off. I presume the public sentiment was along the lines of "So, they are moving those jews somewhere? Oh, better in some 'jewtown' rather than here in that ghetto, I'm glad I don't have to see them again". But I doubt they had in mind the slaughterhouse. It was horror what happened. But it is very hard to convince me the average german would have had any clue.
redwood 6y ago
I think it's a question of whether your family lived in a town with Jews. Jews tended to be city people so I would expect rural folks to have been fairly ignorant of what was going on. However German city people could not miss the persecution of a large portion of their cities.
- goto11 6y ago
  Progroms like Kristallnacht were widely publicized by Nazi media (the word "Kristallnacht" itself was coined by Nazi propaganda). So it is not like you only knew about the persecutions if you had Jewish neighbors. The party itself made sure everybody knew about the persecutions.