4 ms·

I guess it strikes me as weird that we can't just say "Well, yes, 'both sides' thought they were right but in fact one (the Nazis) was wrong." To be sure, ther

I guess it strikes me as weird that we can't just say "Well, yes, 'both sides' thought they were right but in fact one (the Nazis) was wrong." To be sure, there are situations where there is some genuinely complicated moral situation. But that doesn't mean we have to pretend to be moral morons and sagely nod our heads and say "Yes, but Nazis thought they were right too, hmm, hmm."

t-3 2y ago
You're not even wrong. No sane person has said we can't judge Nazis for what they did and believed. What we shouldn't do is set ourselves up to fall into the same trap by using binary narrative framings.
- squigz 2y ago
  Falling into the other trap of treating both sides of every conflict as equally valid is probably just as dangerous, no?
  - t-3 2y ago
    We can start by not separating everything into two sides, one of which we must take. Look at each conflict as a whole rather than a sports game with a winner and a loser or a Good and an Evil or a My Team and Their Team. Maybe one side really is actually very bad and needs to be stopped. Maybe there are other ways.
    - squigz 2y ago
      There are times when this is true and admirable - "us vs them" rhetoric in political discourse is indeed harmful and only serves to help those in power - but there are times when it's more dangerous to treat both sides as equally valid that we should both listen to - like when a superpower invades another country and wages a war for years.
xandrius 2y ago
They both thought they were right but only one knee they were doing good. I cannot believe any Nazi thought they were actually "good", I would understand if they thought their action were needed but definitely killing millions of non-combatants cannot be seen as good; in the right light it can be seen as non-evil given the circumstances.
- wat10000 2y ago
  If one truly believes that it’s “us or them,” and that your enemies are inherently, genetically irredeemable, then exterminating them is good. The problem, of course, is that belief. It’s catastrophically wrong. And it’s the sort of thing that black and white good vs evil thinking can lead you towards. We can simultaneously say “the Nazis thought they were good” and “the Nazis were profoundly evil.” We can acknowledge the relativity of perspective without needing to apply a relativity of good and evil. A necessary element of true goodness is a willingness to consider new ideas, a constant reevaluation of one’s beliefs, and an acknowledgment that the world is complicated and messy. Someone who does these things can justifiably conclude that they’re good and the other guys are evil, but you have to maintain that openness and reevaluation or you can slide into Good vs Evil where you can see no wrong on your own side, and that leads to disaster.
- computerthings 2y ago
  [dead]
fulafel 2y ago
Before they started a war they were mainstream-acceptable in the USA. Henry Ford, Charles Couglin, Friends of New Germany etc. It can be argued the mainstream culture / value system doesn't reject Nazism because it's evil, but because they were "the enemy" in WW2.
- nathan_compton 2y ago
  All this tells me is that your average american is a moral midget, which is not surprising to me.
  - DennisP 2y ago
    The average Americans went to war and defeated the Nazis.
    - antihipocrat 2y ago
      The average person can be fooled into supporting anything most of the time. The list of bad wars Americans have supported (at least initially) is longer than the good ones. Normative language used as shorthand for current consensus for whether the conflict was justified given the likely alternative outcomes for not engaging.
- majormajor 2y ago
  "things changed as more and more facts came out" is learning and changing hypocrisy?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]

t-3 2y ago

You're not even wrong. No sane person has said we can't judge Nazis for what they did and believed. What we shouldn't do is set ourselves up to fall into the same trap by using binary narrative framings.

squigz 2y ago
Falling into the other trap of treating both sides of every conflict as equally valid is probably just as dangerous, no?
- t-3 2y ago
  We can start by not separating everything into two sides, one of which we must take. Look at each conflict as a whole rather than a sports game with a winner and a loser or a Good and an Evil or a My Team and Their Team. Maybe one side really is actually very bad and needs to be stopped. Maybe there are other ways.
  - squigz 2y ago
    There are times when this is true and admirable - "us vs them" rhetoric in political discourse is indeed harmful and only serves to help those in power - but there are times when it's more dangerous to treat both sides as equally valid that we should both listen to - like when a superpower invades another country and wages a war for years.

xandrius 2y ago

They both thought they were right but only one knee they were doing good. I cannot believe any Nazi thought they were actually "good", I would understand if they thought their action were needed but definitely killing millions of non-combatants cannot be seen as good; in the right light it can be seen as non-evil given the circumstances.

wat10000 2y ago
If one truly believes that it’s “us or them,” and that your enemies are inherently, genetically irredeemable, then exterminating them is good. The problem, of course, is that belief. It’s catastrophically wrong. And it’s the sort of thing that black and white good vs evil thinking can lead you towards. We can simultaneously say “the Nazis thought they were good” and “the Nazis were profoundly evil.” We can acknowledge the relativity of perspective without needing to apply a relativity of good and evil. A necessary element of true goodness is a willingness to consider new ideas, a constant reevaluation of one’s beliefs, and an acknowledgment that the world is complicated and messy. Someone who does these things can justifiably conclude that they’re good and the other guys are evil, but you have to maintain that openness and reevaluation or you can slide into Good vs Evil where you can see no wrong on your own side, and that leads to disaster.
computerthings 2y ago
[dead]

fulafel 2y ago

Before they started a war they were mainstream-acceptable in the USA. Henry Ford, Charles Couglin, Friends of New Germany etc. It can be argued the mainstream culture / value system doesn't reject Nazism because it's evil, but because they were "the enemy" in WW2.

nathan_compton 2y ago
All this tells me is that your average american is a moral midget, which is not surprising to me.
- DennisP 2y ago
  The average Americans went to war and defeated the Nazis.
  - antihipocrat 2y ago
    The average person can be fooled into supporting anything most of the time. The list of bad wars Americans have supported (at least initially) is longer than the good ones. Normative language used as shorthand for current consensus for whether the conflict was justified given the likely alternative outcomes for not engaging.
majormajor 2y ago
"things changed as more and more facts came out" is learning and changing hypocrisy?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]