4 ms·

- "Former Buchenwald inmate Adam Cabala stated that von Braun went to the concentration camp to pick slave laborers:" - "... also the German scientists led by

- "Former Buchenwald inmate Adam Cabala stated that von Braun went to the concentration camp to pick slave laborers:" - "... also the German scientists led by Prof. Wernher von Braun were aware of everything daily. As they went along the corridors, they saw the exhaustion of the inmates, their arduous work and their pain. Not one single time did Prof. Wernher von Braun protest against this cruelty during his frequent stays at Dora. Even the aspect of corpses did not touch him: On a small area near the ambulance shed, inmates tortured to death by slave labor and the terror of the overseers were piling up daily. But, Prof. Wernher von Braun passed them so close that he was almost touching the corpses.[63]" I agree with your comment. Let's never speak in respectful language about a Nazi SS officer. It's a loud silence when someone circles around the topic without mentioning it, as if there were some obligation of diplomacy—as if you owe tactfulness or professional courtesy to Nazis.

TheVespasian 3y ago
> It's a loud silence when someone circles around the topic without mentioning it It's a unique feature of American/Western historiography that would incline you to believe this. I find it interesting we don't have to tack on similar disclaimers when it comes to any other similarly horrible group throughout history; the brutality of the Caesars, the Chinese emperors, the Comanche -- forget about it: we can speak of them dispassionately, as non-temporal observers. But mere broaching of the subject of the Nazis requires confession that, let's repeat it in unison, they were evil.
- the_af 3y ago
  > the brutality of the Caesars, the Chinese emperors, the Comanche [...] we can speak of them dispassionately, as non-temporal observers [...] but mere broaching of the subject of the Nazis requires confession that, let's repeat it in unison, they were evil. There's the thing about temporal closeness and impact on actual politics and ideology. Nazism and Fascism's brands of ultra rightwing ideology still looms large in part of the world. And there are still people alive who lived through some of the horrors the Nazis inflicted upon the world. None lives today who saw Caesar's dictatorship. Nobody, to my mind, seriously worships Imperial China or wants a return of the Caesars. There are no Comanche atrocities apologists (of note). But Nazism and its modern day offshoots are still worshipped by enough people that every mention of people related to Nazism must be peppered with these disclaimers. It's important to note Von Braun was an unapologetic nazi and that he should not be celebrated as a person.
  - TheVespasian 3y ago
    > Nazism and Fascism's brands of ultra rightwing ideology still looms large in part of the world. Not as distinct from basic impulses we can detect in all periods. These terms we use (rightwing, fascist) are new terms for ancient political dispositions. If I describe someone as imperialist, patriarchal, sexist, antisemitic, and racist, am I more likely to be talking about the Nazis, the Romans, the Egyptians, the Abbasids or the Puritans? > Nazism and its modern day offshoots are still worshipped by enough people that every mention of people related to Nazism must be peppered with these disclaimers My understanding of human psychology does not incline me to think this is a remotely successful strategy.
    - the_af 3y ago
      > Not as distinct from basic impulses we can detect in all periods I disagree. Nazism and Fascism are largely influential today but Caesar isn't. > My understanding of human psychology does not incline me to think this is a remotely successful strategy. I cannot vouch for your understanding. I do know Nazism and Fascism must be loudly denounced whenever found. They must not be allowed to fester in the darkness.
      - ericmay 3y ago
        Add in communism and religious fundamentalism and I think you’ve just about covered it.
      - TheVespasian 3y ago
        > Nazism and Fascism are largely influential today but Caesar isn't. Sorry, but this is when I just have to tune out. It's like when people say, "America has no culture," or something similar.
        the_af 3y ago
        Feel free to tune out. I find your arguments unconvincing. > It's like when people say, "America has no culture," or something similar. I do not live in the US so I couldn't care less about what people say there.
- rrr_oh_man 3y ago
  You might enjoy this: https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-wrath-of-the-khans-series/ https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-wrath-of-...
- eloeffler 3y ago
  > we can speak of them dispassionately, as non-temporal observers Well, we can also speak of Wernher von Braun or even contemporary figures that way. It's only more likely that someone comes along and points out that we shouldn't forget about the context. When we speak of ancient history, the context is already forgotten beyond what has been documented. There are no living witnesses nor people who directly related to them. (Of course, archaeological and historical research can find more evidence.) However we do speak of them passionately anyway, even if the discussion is less emotional. You bringing up the examples that you brought up is a perfect example. People immediately understand what you mean. Anyone who agrees with you will have to feel passionately about these long past events. We all know about the cruelties that came with the Ceasars etc. because people documented them and didn't let it go. We don't need to point it out because it is common knowledge. Do go to a history conference and claim that Julius Caesar was a totally fine and nice guy and you'll see that people can get passionate very quickly. Discussions get stirred up more quickly for contemporary figures whose power to let information disappear or fade away can sometimes extend beyond their own deaths - for as long as there are people alive who may be affected by the image created.
  - TheVespasian 3y ago
    > However we do speak of them passionately anyway, even if the discussion is less emotional. You bringing up the examples that you brought up is a perfect example. People immediately understand what you mean. Anyone who agrees with you will have to feel passionately about these long past events. I would say an unemotional actor will recognize that those examples are objectively analogical. But that's not really here or there because I'm not saying one cannot have a well-founded moral reaction to the past. I'm saying it's an accident of our location in history that only Nazis receive this treatment -- well-deserved as it may be -- and admittedly one should expect any group to harbor resentment towards a vanquished enemy for some time. But this forum and particularly the context of this thread requires some stationary, objective analysis, which is impossible with the ankle-biting "by the ways."
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]

TheVespasian 3y ago

> It's a loud silence when someone circles around the topic without mentioning it It's a unique feature of American/Western historiography that would incline you to believe this. I find it interesting we don't have to tack on similar disclaimers when it comes to any other similarly horrible group throughout history; the brutality of the Caesars, the Chinese emperors, the Comanche -- forget about it: we can speak of them dispassionately, as non-temporal observers. But mere broaching of the subject of the Nazis requires confession that, let's repeat it in unison, they were evil.

the_af 3y ago
> the brutality of the Caesars, the Chinese emperors, the Comanche [...] we can speak of them dispassionately, as non-temporal observers [...] but mere broaching of the subject of the Nazis requires confession that, let's repeat it in unison, they were evil. There's the thing about temporal closeness and impact on actual politics and ideology. Nazism and Fascism's brands of ultra rightwing ideology still looms large in part of the world. And there are still people alive who lived through some of the horrors the Nazis inflicted upon the world. None lives today who saw Caesar's dictatorship. Nobody, to my mind, seriously worships Imperial China or wants a return of the Caesars. There are no Comanche atrocities apologists (of note). But Nazism and its modern day offshoots are still worshipped by enough people that every mention of people related to Nazism must be peppered with these disclaimers. It's important to note Von Braun was an unapologetic nazi and that he should not be celebrated as a person.
- TheVespasian 3y ago
  > Nazism and Fascism's brands of ultra rightwing ideology still looms large in part of the world. Not as distinct from basic impulses we can detect in all periods. These terms we use (rightwing, fascist) are new terms for ancient political dispositions. If I describe someone as imperialist, patriarchal, sexist, antisemitic, and racist, am I more likely to be talking about the Nazis, the Romans, the Egyptians, the Abbasids or the Puritans? > Nazism and its modern day offshoots are still worshipped by enough people that every mention of people related to Nazism must be peppered with these disclaimers My understanding of human psychology does not incline me to think this is a remotely successful strategy.
  - the_af 3y ago
    > Not as distinct from basic impulses we can detect in all periods I disagree. Nazism and Fascism are largely influential today but Caesar isn't. > My understanding of human psychology does not incline me to think this is a remotely successful strategy. I cannot vouch for your understanding. I do know Nazism and Fascism must be loudly denounced whenever found. They must not be allowed to fester in the darkness.
    - ericmay 3y ago
      Add in communism and religious fundamentalism and I think you’ve just about covered it.
    - TheVespasian 3y ago
      > Nazism and Fascism are largely influential today but Caesar isn't. Sorry, but this is when I just have to tune out. It's like when people say, "America has no culture," or something similar.
      - the_af 3y ago
        Feel free to tune out. I find your arguments unconvincing. > It's like when people say, "America has no culture," or something similar. I do not live in the US so I couldn't care less about what people say there.
rrr_oh_man 3y ago
You might enjoy this: https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-wrath-of-the-khans-series/ https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-wrath-of-...
eloeffler 3y ago
> we can speak of them dispassionately, as non-temporal observers Well, we can also speak of Wernher von Braun or even contemporary figures that way. It's only more likely that someone comes along and points out that we shouldn't forget about the context. When we speak of ancient history, the context is already forgotten beyond what has been documented. There are no living witnesses nor people who directly related to them. (Of course, archaeological and historical research can find more evidence.) However we do speak of them passionately anyway, even if the discussion is less emotional. You bringing up the examples that you brought up is a perfect example. People immediately understand what you mean. Anyone who agrees with you will have to feel passionately about these long past events. We all know about the cruelties that came with the Ceasars etc. because people documented them and didn't let it go. We don't need to point it out because it is common knowledge. Do go to a history conference and claim that Julius Caesar was a totally fine and nice guy and you'll see that people can get passionate very quickly. Discussions get stirred up more quickly for contemporary figures whose power to let information disappear or fade away can sometimes extend beyond their own deaths - for as long as there are people alive who may be affected by the image created.
- TheVespasian 3y ago
  > However we do speak of them passionately anyway, even if the discussion is less emotional. You bringing up the examples that you brought up is a perfect example. People immediately understand what you mean. Anyone who agrees with you will have to feel passionately about these long past events. I would say an unemotional actor will recognize that those examples are objectively analogical. But that's not really here or there because I'm not saying one cannot have a well-founded moral reaction to the past. I'm saying it's an accident of our location in history that only Nazis receive this treatment -- well-deserved as it may be -- and admittedly one should expect any group to harbor resentment towards a vanquished enemy for some time. But this forum and particularly the context of this thread requires some stationary, objective analysis, which is impossible with the ankle-biting "by the ways."
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]