3 ms·

There's obviously nothing admirable about Dr. Stieve or his source of bodies. But it seems a little misleading to say that these were corpses of "political diss

There's obviously nothing admirable about Dr. Stieve or his source of bodies. But it seems a little misleading to say that these were corpses of "political dissidents". They were executed for passing information to the Soviet Union, with whom Nazi Germany was at war. Show me a country that doesn't execute spies under similar circumstances.

peterwwillis 13y ago
It's not misleading. It's fact. Political dissent refers to any expression that conveys dissatisfaction with or opposition to the policies of a governing body, and such expression may take forms from vocal disagreement to civil disobedience to the use of violence. Historically, repressive governments have sought to punish political dissent. The protection of freedoms that facilitate peaceful dissent has become a hallmark of free and open societies. [1] (edit) Oh, and I just noticed a small difference here: they used "political dissidents", which is even more broad than "political dissenters": A dissident, broadly defined, is a person who actively challenges an established doctrine, policy, or institution. When dissidents unite for a common cause they often effect a dissident movement. The word has been used since 16th century in the context of religion. The noun was first used in the political sense in 1940, with the rise of such totalitarian systems as the Soviet Union. [2] And just so we're clear: the article covers many different corpses, not just political dissidents. From the first chapter of the story: In the mid-1930s, British anatomists described with envy the “valuable sources of material” their German counterparts had. The “sources of material” included many people the Nazis sentenced to death for minor crimes, such as looting, and many convicted for political crimes that particularly incensed the regime, ranging from treason to the vague offense of “defeatism.” -- [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_dissent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_dissent [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissident http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissident
- sp332 13y ago
  It's misleading to use a broad term like "dissident" instead of the more precise word, "traitor".
  - glhaynes 13y ago
    Is it? I'm not saying "dissident" is the best word, but it certainly seems less value-laden than "traitor".
    - sp332 13y ago
      They were helping the other side in the war. They were actively participating in the downfall of their government. I don't think it needs a less value-laden word.
  - peterwwillis 13y ago
    There were also non-political corpses used. A dissident is by definition not a traitor. From its first use in the Soviet Union to describe political dissidents, the term was used to describe people who would speak out against human rights violations committed by the state. You could hardly call that traitorous. Now can we shut the fuck up about how the people who died fighting the Nazi regime might have been "traitors" ?
    - sp332 13y ago
      We're talking about people executed for passing information to the Soviet Union. Those are not dissidents by your definition.
    - aaronem 13y ago
      Virtuous as their actions may have been -- or may not have, given that the difference between the Soviet Union and the Nazi regime was one of degree and not of kind -- they provided material aid to a foreign government then in arms against their own. Such behavior, whatever else may be said of it, is the very soul of treason, and those who engage in it may quite accurately be described as traitors.
    - pessimizer 13y ago
      Not until you let go of your problem with applying the word "traitors" to traitors who you personally admire. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of people would be proud to be called a 'traitor to Nazi Germany.'
nixy 13y ago
Sweden, for example. Capital punishment was abolished for all crimes committed in peacetime in 1921, and for those committed in time of war in 1976[1]. But if you meant do say "wouldn't have executed" instead of "doesn't execute," I guess a European country that did not exercise capital punishment for treason during WWII might be hard to come by. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Sweden http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Sweden
PavlovsCat 13y ago
It's not like the Nazis had problems killing people who weren't spies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weisse_Rose http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weisse_Rose for example.
aaronem 13y ago
Surely, Citizen, you're not arguing for a return to the dark days of the past, when words like 'treason' and 'espionage' had meaning.
gustavo_duarte 13y ago
Further down the article there are other examples: The “sources of material” included many people the Nazis sentenced to death for minor crimes, such as looting, and many convicted for political crimes that particularly incensed the regime, ranging from treason to the vague offense of “defeatism.” As an example of this, Elfriede Scholz was sentenced to death for “undermining morale” in 1943 for saying she thought the war was lost.

peterwwillis 13y ago

It's not misleading. It's fact. Political dissent refers to any expression that conveys dissatisfaction with or opposition to the policies of a governing body, and such expression may take forms from vocal disagreement to civil disobedience to the use of violence. Historically, repressive governments have sought to punish political dissent. The protection of freedoms that facilitate peaceful dissent has become a hallmark of free and open societies. [1] (edit) Oh, and I just noticed a small difference here: they used "political dissidents", which is even more broad than "political dissenters": A dissident, broadly defined, is a person who actively challenges an established doctrine, policy, or institution. When dissidents unite for a common cause they often effect a dissident movement. The word has been used since 16th century in the context of religion. The noun was first used in the political sense in 1940, with the rise of such totalitarian systems as the Soviet Union. [2] And just so we're clear: the article covers many different corpses, not just political dissidents. From the first chapter of the story: In the mid-1930s, British anatomists described with envy the “valuable sources of material” their German counterparts had. The “sources of material” included many people the Nazis sentenced to death for minor crimes, such as looting, and many convicted for political crimes that particularly incensed the regime, ranging from treason to the vague offense of “defeatism.” -- [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_dissent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_dissent [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissident http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissident

sp332 13y ago
It's misleading to use a broad term like "dissident" instead of the more precise word, "traitor".
- glhaynes 13y ago
  Is it? I'm not saying "dissident" is the best word, but it certainly seems less value-laden than "traitor".
  - sp332 13y ago
    They were helping the other side in the war. They were actively participating in the downfall of their government. I don't think it needs a less value-laden word.
- peterwwillis 13y ago
  There were also non-political corpses used. A dissident is by definition not a traitor. From its first use in the Soviet Union to describe political dissidents, the term was used to describe people who would speak out against human rights violations committed by the state. You could hardly call that traitorous. Now can we shut the fuck up about how the people who died fighting the Nazi regime might have been "traitors" ?
  - sp332 13y ago
    We're talking about people executed for passing information to the Soviet Union. Those are not dissidents by your definition.
  - aaronem 13y ago
    Virtuous as their actions may have been -- or may not have, given that the difference between the Soviet Union and the Nazi regime was one of degree and not of kind -- they provided material aid to a foreign government then in arms against their own. Such behavior, whatever else may be said of it, is the very soul of treason, and those who engage in it may quite accurately be described as traitors.
  - pessimizer 13y ago
    Not until you let go of your problem with applying the word "traitors" to traitors who you personally admire. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of people would be proud to be called a 'traitor to Nazi Germany.'

nixy 13y ago

Sweden, for example. Capital punishment was abolished for all crimes committed in peacetime in 1921, and for those committed in time of war in 1976[1]. But if you meant do say "wouldn't have executed" instead of "doesn't execute," I guess a European country that did not exercise capital punishment for treason during WWII might be hard to come by. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Sweden http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Sweden

PavlovsCat 13y ago

It's not like the Nazis had problems killing people who weren't spies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weisse_Rose http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weisse_Rose for example.

aaronem 13y ago

Surely, Citizen, you're not arguing for a return to the dark days of the past, when words like 'treason' and 'espionage' had meaning.

gustavo_duarte 13y ago

Further down the article there are other examples: The “sources of material” included many people the Nazis sentenced to death for minor crimes, such as looting, and many convicted for political crimes that particularly incensed the regime, ranging from treason to the vague offense of “defeatism.” As an example of this, Elfriede Scholz was sentenced to death for “undermining morale” in 1943 for saying she thought the war was lost.