Collective guilt?

[tonyh]

[Split from "Agreement on the Holocaust"]

The fact they made the moral choice to be indifferent to this anti-semitissim suggests some sort of collective guilt of the people as a whole, not on the individual basis.

Absolute utter nonsense. You're displaying your real argument here. You are of the view that the Germans as a whole agreed with the holocaust and had full knowledge about it. And frankly thats just an extremely uneducated and uninformed "opinion".

You think it was that way because you simply wish it to be that way.

I simply cannot agree with that sort of idea.

Tony

[Apocalypse_Now]

Absolute utter nonsense. You're displaying your real argument here. You are of the view that the Germans as a whole agreed with the holocaust and had full knowledge about it. And frankly thats just an extremely uneducated and uninformed "opinion".

You think it was that way because you simply wish it to be that way.

I simply cannot agree with that sort of idea.

Tony

Show me were I said the Germans agreed with the Holocaust, do not put words in my mouth!

The guilt is in the indifference of the people to elect a leader that supported racist ideology.

[Marcus]

The guilt is in the indifference of the people to elect a leader that supported racist ideology.

Let's not forget that the NSDAP came to power with "only" 33,09% of the vote.

/Marcus

[Apocalypse_Now]

Let's not forget that the NSDAP came to power with "only" 33,09% of the vote.

/Marcus

That is still a large amount of support.

[Marcus]

Let's not forget that the NSDAP came to power with "only" 33,09% of the vote.

That is still a large amount of support.

Of course, but it is far from a majority.

/Marcus

[Apocalypse_Now]

Of course, but it is far from a majority.

/Marcus

Well Hitler assumed his position legally, and remained in power despite this. No action was taken by the masses. They accepted his policies. Therefore they must take collective guilt.

[David Thompson]

Heinz -- You said:

Well Hitler assumed his position legally, and remained in power despite this. No action was taken by the masses. They accepted his policies. Therefore they must take collective guilt.

This line of thinking has something about it that reminds me of Al-Qaeda proclamations.

Collective guilt is a primitive and unjust concept which has no place in the modern world. For several centuries the mainstream of thought in civilized countries is that it is the individual criminal who deserves the punishment -- not his family, or acquaintances, or someone who lives down the street from him. In addition, it is generally accepted among educated people that the individual guilt of a wrongdoer must be demonstrated, and not merely assumed, prior to the infliction of punishment.

[Caldric]

The guilt is in the indifference of the people to elect a leader that supported racist ideology.

Let's not forget that the NSDAP came to power with "only" 33,09% of the vote.

/Marcus

Yes but everyone knows they had the vast majority of support by 1939. Still does not make them all guilty of the holocaust but as I have stated on many occasions I think the entire German nation must carry some of the burden. You would have to be blind and stupid if you lived in Germany and did not understand the injustice being carried out against people. Not only Jews but many others, Jews were the main oppressed though. Constant speeches on wiping the Jews from Europe and cheering it on and allowing the government encouragement to fulfill their criminal plans.

[Apocalypse_Now]

Heinz -- Collective guilt is a primitive and unjust concept which has no place in the modern world. For several centuries the mainstream of thought in civilized countries is that it is the individual criminal who deserves the punishment -- not his family, or acquaintances, or someone who lives down the street from him. In addition, it is generally accepted among educated people that the individual guilt of a wrongdoer must be demonstrated, and not merely assumed, prior to the infliction of punishment.

I'm simply stating that the Germans at that time have a collective guilt for bringing Hitler to power and supporting his racist program. How is that an un-educated view? I also said nothing about punishing them, it was a moral burden of the people at that time to bear.

[Marcus]

Yes but everyone knows they had the vast majority of support by 1939.

Did they? Based on what and support of which policies? Support based on the fact that the economy was much better (how much of this was thanks to the policies of the regime is another discussion) or support for their racist plans?

I think the entire German nation must carry some of the burden

I don't believe in any such form of collective responsibility, I am responsible for only my own actions, just like you or a citizien of Berlin or Moscow during WW2.

Constant speeches on wiping the Jews from Europe and cheering it on and allowing the government encouragement to fulfill their criminal plans.

This isn't my area of interest, but were there really constant speeces on "wiping out" the Jews? Removing their "power", yes. But whiping them out?

/Marcus

[Nina van M.]

Heinz VanNoon,

Hitler was appointed for chancellor after a long row of political intrigues with conservative elite and NSDAP's rise to power wasn't that "clear" at all, so his naming was not a real reflection of people's will.

33% people voted for NSDAP... Where are the other 67% of votes? I think that's not the fact you can just simply look over and generalize things this way.

Regards,

Nina

[Apocalypse_Now]

Heinz VanNoon,

Hitler was appointed for chancellor after a long row of political intrigues with conservative elite and NSDAP's rise to power wasn't that "clear" at all, so his naming was not a real reflection of people's will.

33% people voted for NSDAP... Where are the other 67% of votes? I think that's not the fact you can just simply look over and generalize things this way.

Regards,

Nina

Yes but nothing was done by the masses to oppose this ascension of power, his support increased after 1933. My point is people traded moral scruples and became indifferent as a whole for the sake of societal changes. There burden is that.

[Nina van M.]

Of course it has increased after 1933, isn't that logical if you take into consideration the methods Hitler used for "getting rid" of political opponents?

But before Hitler's rise to power, NSDAP had many problems within the party - fractions, finacial problems,... and they have never achieved more than 33%. After the elections in 1932 until Hitler's appointment for chancellor, NSDAP's support was still falling.

[Caldric]

Yes but everyone knows they had the vast majority of support by 1939.

Did they? Based on what and support of which policies? Support based on the fact that the economy was much better (how much of this was thanks to the policies of the regime is another discussion) or support for their racist plans?

I think the entire German nation must carry some of the burden

I don't believe in any such form of collective responsibility, I am responsible for only my own actions, just like you or a citizien of Berlin or Moscow during WW2.

Constant speeches on wiping the Jews from Europe and cheering it on and allowing the government encouragement to fulfill their criminal plans.

This isn't my area of interest, but were there really constant speeces on "wiping out" the Jews? Removing their "power", yes. But whiping them out?

/Marcus

I will have to wait until I get my book back from a "friend" to answer the first questions.

As for speech and other material. I am not sure how the educated German population could not know what was going on even during the Holocaust. Of course they could do nothing about it. However they supported a government and system that allowed such actions. Collective Guilt I do not believe in. Collective Burden I do. During the segregation in the United States there was a Collective Burden. And through the bravery of a few and the voice of the people it was changed. The entire nation had to carry the shame and burden of treating fellow humans as sub-human. To say there was not a national burden and that you are only responsible for your own actions I think is a way out without looking the shame in the face. But then I have a totally different view of Nationhood then you do. I think the individual has a duty to the nation and with such a civic duty it is for the individual to speak out and try to change policy that is morally wrong. To claim that I am only responsible for “my actions” I think it is a cop-out and a way of hiding from the truth.


http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ ... htm#Speech

[Apocalypse_Now]

Caldric,

I like the view of "Collective Burden" as opposed to my "Collective Guilt". I will adopt that as my stance, as this seems like a more rational view.

Of course it has increased after 1933, isn't that logical if you take into consideration the methods Hitler used for "getting rid" of political opponents?

But before Hitler's rise to power, NSDAP had many problems within the party - fractions, finacial problems,... and they have never achieved more than 33%. After the elections in 1932 until Hitler's appointment for chancellor, NSDAP's support was still falling.

That does not answer the question of the peoples indifference to the plight and fanatical policies toward certain segments of society.