The Wehrmacht Exhibition

[Roberto]

But the Jews who were members of Soviet organs of repression signal a "collaboration by Jews in the repression of the peoples of the Soviet Union" (which include Jews, unless Michael Mills wants to tell us that they were left unscathed by Stalin's purges in the USSR as of 01.09.1939, Eastern Poland and the Baltic countries) to Mr. Mills. Why is that so?

It is quite common to speak of collaboration by Ukrainians/Latvians/Lithuanians/Croats etc with German forces in their anti-Jewish actions and other repressive measures. One does not imply thereby that every single ethnic Ukrainian etc collaborated with German forces. What the statement means is that there were significant elements of those populations that collaborated.

In like manner it is legitimate to refer to Jews who collaborated with the Soviet regime in its repressive acts. Such a reference does not imply that every single Jew was a collaborator. Only a person with a judeocentric outlook could jump to that conclusion.

Just as, say, Ukrainians collaborating with German forces could have ended up inflicting violence on fellow Ukrainians who were anti-German or supported the partisans, so could Jews working in the repressive apparatus of the Soviet state end up persecuting fellow Jews who were anti-Soviet. In the early part of the Bolshevik regime it was quite common to find Bolshevik Jewish Chekists arresting right-wing Zionists or Bundists who refused to transfer their allegiance to the Communist Party. But the historical fact is that the great majority of leftist Zionists and Bundists did end up collaborating with their fellow Jews who were already Bolsheviks.

Later, in the 30s, the purges of the Communist Party initiated by Stalin claimed many Jewish victims who were Party members. But that was because they were Party members and the Party was being purged, not because they were Jews. It is not true to say that Stalin "dejudaised" the Communist Party; basically a high percentage of old Party members, including Jews, were purged and replaced by new members, including Jews.

The basic issue is that from 1917 to 1953, the Soviet Government victimised whole population groups as groups, not as individuals, eg kulaks, Ukrainian peasants, Cossacks. Jews were never victimised as a group; indeed, as a group, they belonged to the more privileged part of the population, being over-represented in the bureaucracy, although certain individual Jews were persecuted because they belonged to political groups seen as anti-Soviet, eg bourgeois Zionists, Bundists.

At the beginning of the 1930s, over half the Jews of the Soviet Union lived in the Ukrainian SSR. Between 1932 and 1933, a huge famine raged in Ukraine, and several million people perished. How many Jews living in Ukraine died? No abnormal mortality of Jews shows up in the population statistics. The Jews of Ukraine belonged to the privileged urban groups that were fed at the expense of the peasantry.

Many of the victims of the National Socialist Government were German, eg German Communists, German Social Democrats, German opponents of Hitler. But it would absurd to say that because some of the victims of the NS Government were German, that that government was itself not German, or that the German people as a whole did not collaborate with that government, or that the german people as a whole were victims of it. In like manner it is absurd to argue that because some victims of the Soviet Government were Jewish, then Jews as a group were victims, or that there was not collaboration by significant sections of the Jewish population with the Soviet Government in its repressive actions against other population groups.

I can't help being greatly amused at the mental gymnastics by which Michael Mills is trying to wriggle himself out of a trap of his own making.

[viriato]

We should not forget that whole peoples inside the USSR were repressed by the soviet government during and after world war ii. They were the Balkars, Karatchais, Ingush, Chechens, Germans, Kalmuks, Coreans, and various peoples living in Crimea other than the germans, namely tatars, greeks, armenians and bulgarians. And one should not forget several others that were not deported but suffered at least a high grade of cultural repression: ingrian and finns, veps, ukrainians.

One should also note thet at least cultural repression on various peoples were not strange to the soviet regime prior of the war. Remember the repression on various writers of ukrainian, belorussian, tatar or other languages or the russification of the party apparatus in all republics. And those abkhasians who were only allowed to attend schools in georgian... (of course georgians were somewhat spared because of Stalin and Beria being from Georgia).

[Scott Smith]

The promoters are certainly focusing on the victims; it is Victimology and Groupthink in its essence.

The Reverend obviously neither saw the exhibition nor had a look at the 750-page catalogue. Otherwise he would know that the exhibition focuses on the point of view of the perpetrators, not that of the victims.

I'm arguing that by portraying the Germany Army as a gang of Hollywood gangsters, perpetrators, bystanders and COWARDS, the focus is indeed upon the Victims. Besides, moral propaganda is designed to make the outraged choirboys and choirgirls feel better about themselves. Hail Defeat!

And it seems to me that the postwar Alienated German generations must have an incredible identity-crisis. Their Green and gilled petit-bourgeois lives can never live-up to their ancestors shoveling rubble after a bombing raid or holding the line against another steamroller attack in subzero weather without food or clean water.

So the Eurohippies with their designer liquors, cable TV, imported manufactured goods, cheap Third World labor and stock-options must despise the Old Ones or at least whine about how the Nazis corrupted their souls and made their lives hell. Bookends: the Kaiser and Nuremberg! You would think that Germany was anus mundi prior to Nuremberg. Above all, seeing the bemedalled Old Fighters singing their marching songs and enjoying Kameradschaft infuriates them. Where does this demon come from? To borrow the line from The Keep, "I come from you."

Pathetic really. But I have faith in the German people and humanity in general. Human beings have made it through difficult crises before and the Germans are no different. Before you can love others you must learn to love yourself. And, to learn to judge people on their own terms without judgmentalism--because everybody can find a "Wehrmacht Warcrimes Exhibition" inside themselves; it's just human nature. So keep the Faith, Roberto.

If the German alienist Left wants to promote a Genocide theory-of-history

Can the Reverend only shoot hollow propaganda slogans, or can he also explain what a "Genocide theory-of-history" is supposed to be?

It may not be possible for the Skeptic to explain his reasons for doubting to the True Believer. The TB already HAS all the answers and anyone who thinks differently than his paradigm is ignorant at best--a soldier of Satan at worst.

Well, this Son of Perdition has given you his views. It is your problem if you refuse to think outside of the limitations of your own prejudice.

then they should be honest about it and not try to besmirch German veterans--the vast majority of whom were as fine as any the world has seen, and should be honored and not abused by a bunch of hippies and cowards.

Sieg Heil! Could the Reverend please explain in what way the sober collection of primary documents that the present Wehrmacht War Crimes exhibition is "besmirches" the German veterans? Why, the exhibition even contains a chapter called "Handlungsspielräume", which deals with the reactions of German officers and soldiers to the criminal orders and directives issued by their high command and contrasts those who willingly followed such instructions with those who managed to keep their soldierly honor.

Yawn. Happy Dead Hitler Day to you too, Medojurgen! Nothing but a collection of a thousand Hollywood stereotypes. Even the slowest German, whose ancestors somehow missed the euthanasia/sterilization train, will get the picture that the only way a decent human being could have served his country and his people from 1933-45 would have been to play the role of the Mythic Bomb-Plot traitor.

In every war movie the good German soldier/officer is the semi-corrupt cynical bastard, sort of the Jürgen Prochnow role over and over again, ad nauseam, maybe with a little Oskar Schindler thrown in since U-boot captains and Army officers are too romantic these days even if they are not really Nazis. Piteous. But, hey, I'm not German and it's not my country. And neither am I very jingoistic myself, nor given to mindless flag-waving. But Duty, Honor, Country, or in your lingo: Meine Ehre Heißt Treue, are not bad virtues in-and-of themselves.

What is even more lame are the motives of the alienist German Left.

What are those motives supposed to be, Reverend? Who is supposed to make up the "alienist German Left", whatever that is held to be, and what does the Reverend know about the extent to which they are connected to the present-day exhibition?

Look up alien, aliens, alienist, and alienated in a good English dictionary. Pay particular attention to the etymology and the history of the usage of the term, including the archaic psychiatric dimension.

We won't see any Crimes of Communism or even Crimes of Capitalism, I am sure.

Unless Russia and the United States have the honesty and courage to look at their history the way the Germans do, there is actually not much of a chance that such will happen, unfortunately.

Actually, we might if it fits into Feminist Victimology or some other nouveau cause. Just look at Hetman's latest Soviet Rape-Machine post. My objection is more to the politicization and moralistic axe-grinding of atrocity propaganda. Oh, but it's the Human Agenda... Yeah, right, and the Pope is Protestant.

This would not even be an issue, because the real world is populated by different points-of-view, but it is a view forced-fed with legal repression--brainsoap by any other name.

Dead wrong, Reverend. Legal repression such as exists in certain countries, wrong as it is, does not strive to impose a given point of view but to prevent disturbances of the public order and inter-ethnic violence that might result from the influence of extremist hate propaganda - right or left - on discontented segments of the population, particularly the unemployed.

The Nazis could (and did) argue the same about their repression being in the interest of Public Safety--and quite successfully to--if they had prevailed.

No point in anymore line-by-line Is-Too/Is-Not. The bottom-line here is that in Deutschland the opposing views are criminalized. Yep, the Germans have learned something from their episode of "oriental barbarism," alright. The veneer of civilization sans the Nazis being so thick and all...

You don't agree with Jack and Jill; therefore Jack and Jill have a "Hate-Speech Agenda," and your fellow-travellers seek to silence him/her. Being "liberal," you are against this, of course--but it serves your goals just the same.

Sounds like totalitarian-liberalism, not democracy (small d) to me. Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

This should not be so, in my opinion, but offensive propaganda nonsense declared illegal in some countries is still offensive propaganda nonsense.

It may be offensive-propaganda-nonsense, maybe not. What is MORE offensive, however, is the suppression of diverse-opinion by supposed democratic states. In a democracy (small d) either everybody has freedom-of-speech or no one (truly) does!

[viriato]

What is MORE offensive, however, is the suppression of diverse-opinion by supposed democratic states. In a democracy (small d) either everybody has freedom-of-speech or no one does!

Very good point indeed. Although I would rather opt by "everybody has freedom-of-speech".

[michael mills]

I can't help being greatly amused at the mental gymnastics by which Michael Mills is trying to wriggle himself out of a trap of his own making.

It is apparent that Mr Muehlenkamp's judeocentrism compels him to classify persons, statements and interpretations of history as either pro-Jewish or anti-Jewish.

He seems unable to tolerate an explanation of the complex relationship of Soviet Jewry with the Soviet Government that is neither a pro-Jewish aplogetic nor an anti-Jewish tirade. For him things are either black or white, which historical reality never is.

[Chief Whip]

The problem with the Wehrmachtausstellung is that it lacks all historical background, and is just another big horror show, sickening images showed like pornography in order to create a reaction. Nothing new with that, most of those Jewish ‘remembrance-museums’ are of the same stock. Enlarged prints of horrors placed everywhere, a gloomy atmosphere, a Zyklon-B canister and a former inmate’s blue and white dress. There is a lot of historical value attached to those elements, but when the historical background is removed it should come as no wonder that the exhibition draws criticism. Hannes Heer, the brain behind the exhibition, is a bearded obese stamp-collector. Hardly a person I’d see as a reference to explain the cruel war in the East in its many facets.

The historical context that is missing is f.ex. that the Russians used a system of Betriebskampfgruppen, which was re-established after the war in the BRD (DDR). This system calls forth upon all ‘workers’ (including women) to become soldiers in the case of nearby enemy activity of direct threat, China still uses the same doctrine. How could anyone, especially the German soldiers, know for sure they were executing civilians? The reports on dogs trained to run under German armoured vehicles after which an explosion would be triggered is well know. Suppose a photo would exist with a German soldier shooting a dog. The exhibtion would call it ‘German soldier shoots dog’. True – but the why is missing. Another The average individual will comprehend that the ‘Nazi soldiers’ were truly evil, as is already the case with most of the modern German youth.

How many exhibitions are touring America with pictures of the victims of all the victims that fell during their hunts in North-Korea and Vietnam? Or how many Russian exhibitions with the same purpose for that matter? It is always and always the same ranting; guilty evil Germans – that kind of image is attempted to get spread with these exhibitions. The average person who visits this kind of exhibitions has no clue how long the war in the East was, where the villages mentioned are, or let alone, that every side could be a barbarian.

[tonyh]

Agreed. As I said earlier on another thread about this subject, it would serve the public better if an exhibition was set up to show the victims from every Countries wars or attrocities, not just the victims of German attrocities. All this will do is re-enforce some people's misconception the the German's are/were "evil".

Tony

[Davey Boy]

Agreed. As I said earlier on another thread about this subject, it would serve the public better if an exhibition was set up to show the victims from every Countries wars or attrocities, not just the victims of German attrocities. All this will do is re-enforce some people's misconception the the German's are/were "evil".

Tony

But Germans are evil.

[Roberto]

medorjurgen wrote:
Scott Smith wrote:

The promoters are certainly focusing on the victims; it is Victimology and Groupthink in its essence.

The Reverend obviously neither saw the exhibition nor had a look at the 750-page catalogue. Otherwise he would know that the exhibition focuses on the point of view of the perpetrators, not that of the victims.

I'm arguing that by portraying the Germany Army as a gang of Hollywood gangsters, perpetrators, bystanders and COWARDS, the focus is indeed upon the Victims.

If the Reverend had seen the new exhibition or read the catalogue, he would know that the exhibition’s presentation and assessment of the evidence is a far cry from “portraying the Germany Army as a gang of Hollywood gangsters, perpetrators, bystanders and COWARDS”. It also deals with the heroes who managed to keep their soldierly honor by disobeying criminal orders or preventing the execution thereof in their area of influence.

Besides, moral propaganda is designed to make the outraged choirboys and choirgirls feel better about themselves. Hail Defeat!

Historical information is not “moral propaganda”, and facing up to it is hailing historical truth, not “defeat”.

And it seems to me that the postwar Alienated German generations must have an incredible identity-crisis. Their Green and gilled petit-bourgeois lives can never live-up to their ancestors shoveling rubble after a bombing raid or holding the line against another steamroller attack in subzero weather without food or clean water.

Something that could be said about postwar generations in every country. Why it should keep those generations from looking at the true face of a regime that, among other things, caused their parents and grandparents to end up “shoveling rubble after a bombing raid or holding the line against another steamroller attack in subzero weather without food or clean water” is beyond me.

So the Eurohippies with their designer liquors, cable TV, imported manufactured goods, cheap Third World labor and stock-options must despise the Old Ones or at least whine about how the Nazis corrupted their souls and made their lives hell.

No, Mr. Whiner. They must do what their elders, for many often understandable reasons, did not do for them: discover the truth about their history.

Bookends: the Kaiser and Nuremberg! You would think that Germany was anus mundi prior to Nuremberg.

Only for 12 years, between 1933 and 1945.

Above all, seeing the bemedalled Old Fighters singing their marching songs and enjoying Kameradschaft infuriates them.

Who are “them”? Nothing against “Old Fighters”, the majority of whom were not murderers (and some of whom are/were good friends of mine).

Pathetic really. But I have faith in the German people and humanity in general.

The German people and humanity in general are fortunately a lot more reasonable than certain people who profess to have “faith” in them.

Human beings have made it through difficult crises before and the Germans are no different.

Very true. As the Führer himself once prophesized, they even survived him.

Before you can love others you must learn to love yourself.

Who tells you that Germans have any problems with that? Your Codoh/IHR gurus, perhaps?

And, to learn to judge people on their own terms without judgmentalism--because everybody can find a "Wehrmacht Warcrimes Exhibition" inside themselves; it's just human nature.

Indeed Germany is not the only nation with a gruesome past. But it is one of the few with the honesty and courage to look at it unvarnished.

So keep the Faith, Roberto.

Faith I leave to the Reverend, who as a True Believer in “Revisionist” propaganda knows a lot more about it than I do.

Roberto wrote:
Scott wrote:
If the German alienist Left wants to promote a Genocide theory-of-history

Can the Reverend only shoot hollow propaganda slogans, or can he also explain what a "Genocide theory-of-history" is supposed to be?

It may not be possible for the Skeptic to explain his reasons for doubting to the True Believer.

Especially if the “skeptic” is what he accuses his opponent of being – the exact opposite of a skeptic, a faithful follower who piously believes whatever his IHR/Codoh gurus tell him.

The TB already HAS all the answers and anyone who thinks differently than his paradigm is ignorant at best--a soldier of Satan at worst.

A very accurate self-portrait of Reverend Smith. And I still don’t know what a “Genocide theory-of-history is supposed to be.

Well, this Son of Perdition has given you his views.

Well, the faithful preacher of the IHR/Codoh sermon keeps shooting hollow slogans the meaning of which he is obviously unable to explain when challenged. Could it be that he doesn’t know himself what he’s talking about?

It is your problem if you refuse to think outside of the limitations of your own prejudice.

Very lame, Reverend. I have no limitations whatsoever in following the evidence where it leads, as you well know. Something that scares you shitless because it might interfere with your cherished dream world, ain’t that so, my friend?

Roberto wrote:
Scott wrote:
Then they should be honest about it and not try to besmirch German veterans--the vast majority of whom were as fine as any the world has seen, and should be honored and not abused by a bunch of hippies and cowards.

Sieg Heil! Could the Reverend please explain in what way the sober collection of primary documents that the present Wehrmacht War Crimes exhibition is "besmirches" the German veterans? Why, the exhibition even contains a chapter called "Handlungsspielräume", which deals with the reactions of German officers and soldiers to the criminal orders and directives issued by their high command and contrasts those who willingly followed such instructions with those who managed to keep their soldierly honor.

Yawn. Happy Dead Hitler Day to you too, Medojurgen!

Thanks for reminding me, Reverend. I was too busy these days to even think about it.

Nothing but a collection of a thousand Hollywood stereotypes.

I have a suggestion for you, my friend. Buy the catalogue, read it and then tell us what “Hollywood stereotypes” you found in there. That might be a just a little more convincing than the True Believer’s screaming ”vade retro” at whatever challenges his Faith. Here’s the Amazon link:

http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/3 ... 62-8712069

Even the slowest German, whose ancestors somehow missed the euthanasia/sterilization train, will get the picture that the only way a decent human being could have served his country and his people from 1933-45 would have been to play the role of the Mythic Bomb-Plot traitor.

No, my dear Sir, that’s not the picture the exhibition conveys, as you would know if you had had a look at it. Without ideological glasses, that is. Especially the chapter “Handlungsspielräume” features the other side of the Wehrmacht – soldiers who could have gone the easy way of participating in the crimes of the regime, but refused to do so. The German soldiers involved in war crimes were a minority anyway – no more than 5 % of those whose served on the Eastern Front, according to German historian Rolf-Dieter Müller. The new exhibition is accordingly concerned primarily with the institutional aspects and decisions that led to the Wehrmacht being involved in the crimes of the Nazi regime.

In every war movie the good German soldier/officer is the semi-corrupt cynical bastard, sort of the Jürgen Prochnow role over and over again,

A fellow like any other front-line soldier in the world, in other words. Cynicism is what it takes to save your sanity over the daily misery of front-line duty, I am told. Why should German soldiers have been different from others in this respect?

maybe with a little Oskar Schindler thrown in since U-boot captains and Army officers are too romantic these days even if they are not really Nazis.

What about the folks in Vilsmaier’s Stalingrad, Reverend? Quite a realistic portrayal of contemporary characters, but I bet the Reverend disagrees because fanatical warriors fighting to the end with an unflinching belief in the Führer’s cause are what he would like to believe in. Am I right?

Piteous.

Is how I’ve been seeing the Reverend for quite a long time.

But, hey, I'm not German and it's not my country.

Then how about shutting up instead of mouthing off about things you have no idea of?

And neither am I very jingoistic myself, nor given to mindless flag-waving.

Some might even say that your attitude towards your own country is the one you accuse Germans of having towards theirs.

But Duty, Honor, Country, or in your lingo: Meine Ehre Heißt Treue, are not bad virtues in-and-of themselves.

Who said they were? The bad things are those that some did in the name of such virtues.

Roberto wrote:
Scott wrote:
What is even more lame are the motives of the alienist German Left.

What are those motives supposed to be, Reverend? Who is supposed to make up the "alienist German Left", whatever that is held to be, and what does the Reverend know about the extent to which they are connected to the present-day exhibition?

Look up alien, aliens, alienist, and alienated in a good English dictionary. Pay particular attention to the etymology and the history of the usage of the term, including the archaic psychiatric dimension.

Again a little bullshit instead of an answer you can’t provide, old pal?

Roberto wrote:
Scott wrote:
We won't see any Crimes of Communism or even Crimes of Capitalism, I am sure.

Unless Russia and the United States have the honesty and courage to look at their history the way the Germans do, there is actually not much of a chance that such will happen, unfortunately.
Actually, we might if it fits into Feminist Victimology or some other nouveau cause.

Or if historians consider it an issue that needs to be addressed and that the public should be made aware of – as happens in Germany.

Just look at Hetman's latest Soviet Rape-Machine post.

Something about Beevor’s new book, which I intend to read. Anything wrong with it?

My objection is more to the politicization and moralistic axe-grinding of atrocity propaganda. Oh, but it's the Human Agenda...

First and foremost, it’s history – the history of a great nation that has the honesty and courage to look at its past as it was and doesn’t need ideological blindfolds to safeguard its identity. As admirable as the Reverend’s mouthing off about it is contemptible.

Yeah, right, and the Pope is Protestant.

Thanks for bringing up the Pope. Smith’s decrying as “atrocity propaganda” whatever doesn’t fit into his ideological bubble is strongly reminiscent of the Pope’s expectable reaction to the contention that Jesus Christ was born of natural intercourse among human parents rather than Mary’s fooling around with the Holy Spirit, as a matter of fact.

Roberto wrote:
Scott wrote:
This would not even be an issue, because the real world is populated by different points-of-view, but it is a view forced-fed with legal repression--brainsoap by any other name.

Dead wrong, Reverend. Legal repression such as exists in certain countries, wrong as it is, does not strive to impose a given point of view but to prevent disturbances of the public order and inter-ethnic violence that might result from the influence of extremist hate propaganda – right or left - on discontented segments of the population, particularly the unemployed.

The Nazis could (and did) argue the same about their repression being in the interest of Public Safety--and quite successfully to--if they had prevailed.

Apart from the fact that the Nazis persecuted reasonable folks and great literature rather than extremist howlers and their nonsense, that they didn’t treat those they persecuted according to their own laws but threw them into concentration camps without a legal procedure and that the penalties they imposed were far more severe than a stiff fine or a few months in a fairly decent prison and affected a lot more people, there are in fact certain similarities, in Germany as well as in other countries where hate-speech laws are enforced. But then, I didn’t say such laws are a proper approach, did I? I’m just saying that they don’t make the offensive nonsense they target look any less offensive and nonsensical.

No point in anymore line-by-line Is-Too/Is-Not.

Out of arguments again, Reverend?

The bottom-line here is that in Deutschland the opposing views are criminalized.

Not “opposing views”, Reverend. Extremist hate propaganda. Big difference.

Yep, the Germans have learned something from their episode of "oriental barbarism," alright. The veneer of civilization sans the Nazis being so thick and all...

Exactly, Reverend. For all its defects and for all your howling, the “Bundesestablishment” is one hell of a lot better than your cherished Nazi regime. Among other advantages, it doesn’t make wars and commit mass murders.

You don't agree with Jack and Jill; therefore Jack and Jill have a "Hate-Speech Agenda,"

Dead wrong, Reverend. Your friends try to sell lies in support of a hate-speech agenda, for which reason I cannot even disagree with them. Disagreement requires respect for my opponents arguments, and I can have no respect for lies.

and your fellow-travellers seek to silence him/her.

No “fellow-travellers”, Reverend. No friends of mine.

Being "liberal," you are against this, of course--but it serves your goals just the same.

Dead wrong, Reverend. My goal being to expose the ridicule of “Revisionist” propaganda, it is everything other than helped by the stupid policies of certain governments that give morons a pretext for claiming “persecution”.

Sounds like totalitarian-liberalism, not democracy (small d) to me.

What’s “totalitarian-liberalism”, once again? Something like the “Genocide theory-of-history”, perhaps? Another of those empty slogans the meaning of which seems to be unclear even to the Reverend, who keeps throwing it around?

Roberto wrote:
This should not be so, in my opinion, but offensive propaganda nonsense declared illegal in some countries is still offensive propaganda nonsense.

It may be offensive-propaganda-nonsense, maybe not.

Judging by what it's defenders have so far produced on this forum, the latter possibility is highly unlikely, to say the least.

What is MORE offensive, however, is the suppression of diverse-opinion by supposed democratic states.

Well, those governments at least have the good intentions of safeguarding the public order and protecting minorities from the violence of extremists, whereas the hate propagandists advocate and/or give ideological support to exactly that violence.

In a democracy (small d) either everybody has freedom-of-speech or no one (truly) does!

The message seemingly not being that a democracy that is not flawless should be replaced by something else, I agree.

[Roberto]

Quote:
I can't help being greatly amused at the mental gymnastics by which Michael Mills is trying to wriggle himself out of a trap of his own making.

It is apparent that Mr Muehlenkamp's judeocentrism compels him to classify persons, statements and interpretations of history as either pro-Jewish or anti-Jewish.

Michael Mills keeps sinking into the muck of ridicule. Could it be that he is really too unintelligent, or too blind, to see that my issue on this forum is a criminal government and its victims and that I don’t give a damn about the ethnicity of the latter?

He seems unable to tolerate an explanation of the complex relationship of Soviet Jewry with the Soviet Government that is neither a pro-Jewish aplogetic nor an anti-Jewish tirade.

One thing is discussing “the complex relationship of Soviet Jewry with the Soviet Government”. Another is an uncalled-for statement, implicit or explicit, that what the Nazis did to Soviet Jews wasn’t all that bad because i) it did not differ from the crimes of the Soviet government against other ethnicities and ii) Jews had been bystanders to or perpetrators of such crimes. Why this tendency of lumping together Jewish individuals, whatever their attitude towards Jewish beliefs and values, into a collective body called “the Jews”, by the way?

For him things are either black or white, which historical reality never is.

The frustration of having nothing better to say transpires from this beaten slogan, especially considering how far removed it is from reality.

[Scott Smith]

For him things are either black or white, which historical reality never is.

The frustration of having nothing better to say transpires from this beaten slogan, especially considering how far removed it is from reality.

What's the matter, Roberto? He has your number.

[Roberto]

The problem with the Wehrmachtausstellung is that it lacks all historical background, and is just another big horror show, sickening images showed like pornography in order to create a reaction.

What Wehrmachtsausstellung are you talking about? The old one that was closed down in 1999, which was correctly criticized of trying to influence the viewer by means of horrible photographs, or the new one which explains the historical background in detail on the basis of mostly documentary evidence and contains relatively few photographs?

Hannes Heer, the brain behind the exhibition, is a bearded obese stamp-collector. Hardly a person I’d see as a reference to explain the cruel war in the East in its many facets.

I don’t see why being an “obese stamp-collector” would be a hindrance to being a good historian. Whether Heer is a good historian is another matter. In regard to some of his photos he obviously failed to show the care that is required of an historian.

How could anyone, especially the German soldiers, know for sure they were executing civilians?

When you’re shooting or hanging unarmed women and children or locking them into barns and setting those on fire, you have a fairly good idea of what you are doing, don’t you think so? The striking disproportion between the number of “partisans” killed on the one hand and the number of apprehended firearms and German casualties on the other, according to contemporary reports about “anti-partisan” operations, speaks a very clear language. Have a look at the thread

Major Anti-Partisan Operations in Belorussia
http://thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/viewt ... b15412eee2

on this forum.

How many exhibitions are touring America with pictures of the victims of all the victims that fell during their hunts in North-Korea and Vietnam?

None. It would be good if Americans faced up to their past with the honesty and courage displayed by the Germans. After all, American forces slaughtered between 4,000 and 10,000 unarmed civilians in Vietnam between 1964 and 1973, not to mention another 65,000 who fell victim to the bombing of North Vietnam let alone those killed in the bombing of Cambodia in the early 1970’s, the most intensive in history, which may have taken as many as 400,000 lives.

Or how many Russian exhibitions with the same purpose for that matter?

None, unfortunately. And yet they have a past at least as sinister as the Germans.

It is always and always the same ranting; guilty evil Germans – that kind of image is attempted to get spread with these exhibitions.

That remark would be justified if the exhibition were not one made by Germans for Germans about facts of German history. I wouldn’t consider it appropriate if such an exhibition were organized by Australians in Australia, for instance. If the Aussies decided to make an exhibition about the extermination of their aborigines, on the other hand, I wouldn’t consider myself entitled to mouth off about an Australian “complex of guilt” or similar.

The average person who visits this kind of exhibitions has no clue how long the war in the East was, where the villages mentioned are, or let alone, that every side could be a barbarian.

The average person is given a fair insight into things in the new exhibition, which contrary to the old one is a collection of primary documents and not a photo show with little didactical information. Have a look at it or read the catalogue, and then we can talk about it. Heer’s deservedly criticized exhibition is the snow of yesterday. When he’s not carelessly captioning photographs, the obese stamp collector isn’t all that bad, by the way. At least his 1999 book Tote Zonen suggests that he learned something from his mistakes. Here’s the Amazon link for ordering the book, in case you are interested:

http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/3 ... 28-8732559

[michael mills]

Another is an uncalled-for statement, implicit or explicit, that what the Nazis did to Soviet Jews wasn’t all that bad

Yet another distortion from someone trying to expunge his own past flirtation with National Socialism by projecting his former beliefs onto others.

I of course did not make anything like the above statement. I made no moral judgement on the mass-killings and other violent acts committed either by the Soviet Government or by the German Government.

Mr Muehlenkamp well knows that my point was that the "crimes of the Wehrmacht" were committed in an area well terrorism of the population by the government was the established order, and that the German authorities were copying methods of domination and repression. that had been used by their predecessors.

Why this tendency of lumping together Jewish individuals, whatever their attitude towards Jewish beliefs and values, into a collective body called “the Jews”, by the way?

It is quite common for historians writing about the attitudes of the various East European peoples to the mass-killing of Jews that was going on in their midst to say that those people were primarily bystanders, and that a significant number were perpetrators. It is normal for historians to lump individuals together into collective bodies called "Poles" or "Ukrainians", regardless of the personal beliefs of those individuals, whether they are believers, non-believers, strongly nationalistic or not particularly interested in ethnic identity.

[Roberto]

The reason for my not making any comments to the previous post by Michael Mills is stated in my post of Sat May 04, 2002 5:05 pm on the thread

Why the Jews and the gas chambers?
http://thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/viewt ... c4151f0cc8