3 ms·

> Here in France the same principle prevailed: "better an ex-collaborator than a communist", with the difference that they were starving for managers (and it di

> Here in France the same principle prevailed: "better an ex-collaborator than a communist", with the difference that they were starving for managers (and it didn't go well for the resistants). So they didn't try an in-depth cleaning of the country which led to great disasters during the decolonization wars (tortures, mass executions, etc.) How is that (French here)? Maurice Papon, the man you are talking about, was responsible for the brutal repression of the demonstration ordered by FLN, which lead to hundred of dead people. However, given the climate at the time, it's not obvious that a different man in the same position wouldn't have acted the same way. As for claiming that the French army tortured in Indochina and Algeria due to a lack of denazification, that's plain silly. Many of the soldiers who took an active role in these crimes were former resistants (like Massu and Aussaresses).

trhway 12y ago
>However, given the climate at the time, it's not obvious that a different man in the same position wouldn't have acted the same way. this is why there are things defined like "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" and Nuremberg trial which affirmed the principle that "just carrying out the orders" and "a different man in the same position would have acted in the same way" isn't a valid defense at least in case of such heinous crimes.
- mercurial 12y ago
  Who says I'm defending him? I'm just not convinced his collaborationist past was the deciding factor.
aeturnum 12y ago
>given the climate at the time, it's not obvious that a different man in the same position wouldn't have acted the same way. You could make the same argument about women who slept with German soldiers, but they were punished in the streets while people with administrative skills were quietly excused. I don't know if nraynaud meant to focus on Papon per-se. I think he wanted to draw the sharp contrast between how those with skills were treated v.s. how we treated those who were of lesser value to the state.
- mercurial 12y ago
  La Fontaine said it best. "Selon que vous serez puissant ou misérable, Les jugements de cour vous rendront blancs ou noirs". I agree with that sentiment. What I find dubious is the linking of crimes committed during the Occupation with crimes committed during the decolonization wars (especially since this kind of war usually involves large-scale torture).

trhway 12y ago

>However, given the climate at the time, it's not obvious that a different man in the same position wouldn't have acted the same way. this is why there are things defined like "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" and Nuremberg trial which affirmed the principle that "just carrying out the orders" and "a different man in the same position would have acted in the same way" isn't a valid defense at least in case of such heinous crimes.

mercurial 12y ago
Who says I'm defending him? I'm just not convinced his collaborationist past was the deciding factor.

aeturnum 12y ago

>given the climate at the time, it's not obvious that a different man in the same position wouldn't have acted the same way. You could make the same argument about women who slept with German soldiers, but they were punished in the streets while people with administrative skills were quietly excused. I don't know if nraynaud meant to focus on Papon per-se. I think he wanted to draw the sharp contrast between how those with skills were treated v.s. how we treated those who were of lesser value to the state.

mercurial 12y ago
La Fontaine said it best. "Selon que vous serez puissant ou misérable, Les jugements de cour vous rendront blancs ou noirs". I agree with that sentiment. What I find dubious is the linking of crimes committed during the Occupation with crimes committed during the decolonization wars (especially since this kind of war usually involves large-scale torture).