Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Discussions on the propaganda, architecture and culture in the Third Reich.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 13487
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 23 Dec 2021 10:33

Why should we have the right to apply our own metrics to yesterday ?
Those who do this are people who think that they are better than their forefathers.Besides :it it useless and a waste of time as we can't change what happened .
Take slavery and capital punishment in the Middle Ages :why should we have the right to condemn it ?And why should we do it ?

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 1453
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by Gorque » 23 Dec 2021 15:36

The terms De Facto and De Jure are from Latin. Are you suggesting that their meanings have changed? If I use the word Tibia, does that mean something different to someone from 500 years ago as compared to today? The answer is no. It means exactly the same thing.

IMHO, the reason Latin is used in so many legal and medical papers is due its agreed-upon meanings. They do not change over time. What the Romans meant is the same as to what it meant to the Germans of the 1940s as it meant to Hans Umbreit, when he wrote in Part 1,Chapter 3 of Volume V/I regarding the various phases of the occupations.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13487
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 24 Dec 2021 20:32

The meaning of words changes with time : see
democracy, liberalism, imperialism, etc ...And Roman society was founded on principles that no one would accept today .
De jure means a thing hat is in accordance with a law .
But, there is no such thing as an universal law,whatever may claim American lawyers .
What if it is in accordance with the law of the Third Reich, but not with that of Poland ?
The Euthanasia measures of the Third Reich were de jure correct, as they were in accordance with the laws of the Third Reich, but still the responsibles were punished after the war .
What about the executions at Katyn ?
Last point : de jure and de facto originate from private law and can thus not be used in public law, international law ,because states do not act following the existing public,international laws, but adapt these to their acts .
Individuals are subject to the laws made by the states, but the states are not subject to the laws they have made .

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 9891
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by Sid Guttridge » 25 Dec 2021 08:21

Hi ljadw,

You ask, "Why should we have the right to apply our own metrics to yesterday?" Why should we not? We are, after all, living today, not yesterday!

You ask, "Those who do this are people who think that they are better than their forefathers." Your "proof" for this is what, exactly?

You ask, "Besides :it it useless and a waste of time as we can't change what happened ." Changing the past is not anybody's aim. History is a way of understanding the past, not of time travel!

You ask, "Take slavery and capital punishment in the Middle Ages :why should we have the right to condemn it ?And why should we do it ?" So you see no reason to condemn the so-called "Holocaust" on exactly the same grounds? Do you have no minor moral scruples about it? Are you entirely neutral about its justification, advisability, conduct or outcome?

Cheers,

Sid.

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 1453
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by Gorque » 25 Dec 2021 13:04

ljadw wrote:
24 Dec 2021 20:32
"The Euthanasia measures of the Third Reich were de jure correct, as they were in accordance with the laws of the Third Reich, but still the responsibles were punished after the war ."
Whoa, what?!? Aktion T4 was authorized by a single mad man, AH. It was murder, plain and simple, of innocent humans who committed no wrongs other than to have debilitating deformities and diseases. No edict, decree or enacted legislation can subsume the unwritten laws and rights of humanity. The edict was illegal from the outset and the participants knew beforehand that what they were engaged in violated the very basic law of humaniry. Their judgements and punishments were correct.

Are you implying that you see nothing wrong with the Aktion T4 edict and/or its' participants? Or are you attempting to equate a clearly illegal edict as proof of a changing meaning for de jure? Sorry ljadw, cherry-picking an obvious outlier, 3 standard deviations from the norm does not prove your point. If you are going to use examples to try to support your position, kindly do so by using those that are within accepted norms.
"What about the executions at Katyn ?"
Nebulous question, what about them?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13487
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 26 Dec 2021 05:38

There are no such things as unwritten laws and rights of humanity .
Aktion T 4 was ORDERED by the German head of state and thus correct, de jure .
That the victims were innocent humans is another thing .
Every year thousands of people in western countries are killed by doctors,without their consent .
Before Hitler arrived ,well known people in Britain demanded that people with mental /physical deformities should be killed by poison gas .
GB Shaw was one of them .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13487
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 26 Dec 2021 05:52

Sid Guttridge wrote:
25 Dec 2021 08:21
Hi ljadw,

You ask, "Why should we have the right to apply our own metrics to yesterday?" Why should we not? We are, after all, living today, not yesterday!

You ask, "Those who do this are people who think that they are better than their forefathers." Your "proof" for this is what, exactly?

You ask, "Besides :it it useless and a waste of time as we can't change what happened ." Changing the past is not anybody's aim. History is a way of understanding the past, not of time travel!

You ask, "Take slavery and capital punishment in the Middle Ages :why should we have the right to condemn it ?And why should we do it ?" So you see no reason to condemn the so-called "Holocaust" on exactly the same grounds? Do you have no minor moral scruples about it? Are you entirely neutral about its justification, advisability, conduct or outcome?

Cheers,

Sid.
Slavery and capital punishment in the Middle Ages were generally accepted, thus we should not wast our time with useless condemnations .
The Holocaust, OTOH,was universally condemned by those who lived during the Holocaust .
Thus there is a big difference between both .
No one would have protested against the Holocaust if he happened in the 13 th Century .If the contemporaries did not protest, why should we protest ?
We should stop with dividing the past in good and bad guys, in good and bad societies .
The executions ordered by Julius Caesar were very cruel,following our norms, but not following the norms of the contemporaries .Our armies can not take hostages . Every one took hostages 2000 years ago ,including Caesar . Caesar used slaves . Must we now publicly condemn Caesar ,2000 years after the facts ?
We should stop with imposing our norms on the past .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13487
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 26 Dec 2021 11:23

Gorque wrote:
25 Dec 2021 13:04
ljadw wrote:
24 Dec 2021 20:32
"The Euthanasia measures of the Third Reich were de jure correct, as they were in accordance with the laws of the Third Reich, but still the responsibles were punished after the war ."
Whoa, what?!? Aktion T4 was authorized by a single mad man, AH. It was murder, plain and simple, of innocent humans who committed no wrongs other than to have debilitating deformities and diseases. No edict, decree or enacted legislation can subsume the unwritten laws and rights of humanity. The edict was illegal from the outset and the participants knew beforehand that what they were engaged in violated the very basic law of humaniry. Their judgements and punishments were correct.

Are you implying that you see nothing wrong with the Aktion T4 edict and/or its' participants? Or are you attempting to equate a clearly illegal edict as proof of a changing meaning for de jure? Sorry ljadw, cherry-picking an obvious outlier, 3 standard deviations from the norm does not prove your point. If you are going to use examples to try to support your position, kindly do so by using those that are within accepted norms.
"What about the executions at Katyn ?"
Nebulous question, what about them?
Hitler was not a madman, but an intelligent criminal.
The Katyn executions were ordered by Stalin,T4 Aktion by Hitler . The only difference was that Stalin won and Hitler lost.
It is not on me ,80 years after the facts, to label the T4 Aktion orders as wrong,the same for the Katyn orders .Only the temporaries can label them as crimes .

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 1453
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by Gorque » 26 Dec 2021 13:55

Hi ljadw:

You say "The only difference was that Stalin won and Hitler lost."

While that may have saved Stalin from escaping any legal repercussions on account of he being the victor, considering that Aktion T4 euthasia program, the Katyn Forest executions, the murders of Jews and Roma were all done in secrecy. If these actions were so "legal", then why did the State try to hide and lie about what they had done? The answer is quite simple: The State knew that their actions were illegal and any laws that they had passed legalizing these murders were null and void from the get-go. When an inmate on death row is executed, it is done in public, with the entire world knowing about it, not in the shadows.

Once again, you need to find instances of laws that are not aberrations if you want to demonstrate that the meaning of the Latin terms de jure and de facto.

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 1453
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by Gorque » 26 Dec 2021 14:09

ljadw wrote:
26 Dec 2021 05:38
There are no such things as unwritten laws and rights of humanity .
There sure are and I'd gladly show them to you except I can't find the paper upon which they were written.

I guess we need to have in writing the right to eat, sleep, defecate, procreate, hug, smile, the expectation not being murdered on account of a physical or mental deformity, etc., etc., else we don't have basic human rights. :roll:
Every year thousands of people in western countries are killed by doctors,without their consent .
Proof of this allegation is urgently required or else I'm going have to label you a conspiracy theorist.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13487
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 26 Dec 2021 16:21

Never heard of euthanasia and eugenics ?
Basic human rights are an invention of 19th and 20 th Anglo-Saxon politicians,journalists,writers : before the 19th century there were no such rights and most people were indifferent to them .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13487
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by ljadw » 26 Dec 2021 17:06

To attack the Aktion T 4 ,but deny that such things happen also in Britain and the US ,is saying : we are not like the Germans .
Before 2003 18000 people were yearly euthanized in Britain . And everyone knows that their consent/demand,opposition did not count in the decision to kill them .In the Netherlands and Belgium mentally ill people are euthanized without/against their consent .
Helen Keller said that a doctor had the right and the duty to decide whether a life was worth living . Hitler said the same .
Churchill proposed the compulsory sterilization of 120000 persons ( Did you not talk about basic human rights ?),GB Shaw proposed to gaz all those who were,following him, not worth to live ( Basic human rights ? )

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 1048
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by George L Gregory » 26 Dec 2021 17:32

Gorque wrote:
25 Dec 2021 13:04
Whoa, what?!? Aktion T4 was authorized by a single mad man, AH.
Hitler wasn’t a madman. That’s what a lot of people say or write to try to explain the awful things he did. It really wasn’t the case at all. On the contrary, he was a very intelligent man who was extremely charismatic and those two things combined together enabled him to come to power legally and start a war that ultimately became a world war and resulted in the deaths of millions of soldiers, innocent civilians, etc, as well as being the man behind the genocide of millions of innocent Jews and other people of all ages including children and old people, men and women, etc.

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 1048
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by George L Gregory » 26 Dec 2021 17:34

ljadw wrote:
26 Dec 2021 05:38
That the victims were innocent humans is another thing .
Every year thousands of people in western countries are killed by doctors,without their consent .
Before Hitler arrived ,well known people in Britain demanded that people with mental /physical deformities should be killed by poison gas .
GB Shaw was one of them .
Are you for real? The false equivalence fallacy is something you keep on using in this thread.

Also, provide a source for your claim that “every year thousands of people in Western countries are killed by doctors without their consent”.

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 1048
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

Post by George L Gregory » 26 Dec 2021 17:35

Gorque wrote:
26 Dec 2021 14:09
Proof of this allegation is urgently required or else I'm going have to label you a conspiracy theorist.
Are you not familiar with him? He’s well known as a conspiracy theorist (aka a nutjob) on this forum. Check his posts history.

Return to “Propaganda, Culture & Architecture”