A challanging topic: WWII, what did we learn?

[Bluebiyou]

A preface to this thread:
This can easily become a mud slinging thread.
Please avoid 'drive by' mudslinging at another.
It's okay if you sling mud at me (I can take it :) ).
Please read an offending thread twice before retorting, to make sure you're 'getting the point' intended.
And finally, my apologies to anyone of the Jewish community. Some of my comments may seem abrasive to the Jewish community but, in my lifelong quest for morality, some of my best lessons/teachers were Jewish and I'm reflecting their feelings/struggles for morality that they communicated to me.
Ultimately, I believe Jews are no better or worse than Episcopalians, Wiccans, or Catholics.
I do remain in deep respect (albeit significant theological disagreement) for Jehovah's Witnesses because of their brethren's actions in WWII Europe.

[Bluebiyou]

What did we learn from World War II?
Did we learn that Hitler, Nazis, Germans, and Swastikas are bad, Jews and Pols are good and to be sympathized?
When Prince Harry wore a Nazi uniform to a costume party, the world frowned, and I was amazed.
It seems like no one 'gets it'.
The principles we older folks hopefully learned from WWII seem to be stylized derivatives today.
Prince Harry was born in the 1980s, nearly 40 years after WWII was over, nearly twice his lifetime (at the time of the transgress).
One might argue poor taste, but a young man about 20 years old (rebellious as any of us in reaction to very public repression), at a private costume party, wearing a 'shocking', 'bad ass', or 'bad guys' uniform from a war he only read about in history books, is hardly noteworthy.
Upon unscrupulous publication by the dogs of media, any remaining "victims' groups" should have apologized to the young man for the inconvenience to questioning his character for the 'perceived' slight.
Then of course, a gracious Harry would apologize as his attire may have been insensitive (in spite of the fact he was at a private party...) but class does ultimately show itself.
But that's not what happened.
Rather than ignore his faux pas (poor choice of a costume), Harry was and still is periodically branded as a NAZI.
WTF?
Where did we go wrong?
For one, the Jewish nation never claimed the swastika.
What would kill the swastika and/or NAZI flag faster than had it been commonly adopted by Jews?
The same can be said for the American confederate (naval) flag if blacks and gays (and Jews and Catholics for that matter) adopted, wore and displayed this symbol.
Neither symbol would have power as a symbol of hatred, it would be just a fashion symbol anymore.

I thought some of the highest tenants learned from WWII were:
1. Always combat the demonization and prejudices of society.
The Jews were proven genetically inferior by the accepted science/scientists of the day.
Jews were culturally portrayed as socially vulturous, and money grubbing.
Their removal to 'work camps' was to help them become productive parts of society rather than the pariahs they were socially accepted and scientifically proven to be.
What really happened to the Jews was:
A. They were used to unite many different people because many different people already had or developed prejudice from modern society/science. Nothing unites people like a common enemy. The Jews were different, disliked because of their exclusion/prejudice of others, and envied for their perceived wealth.
B. They were exploited financially for the NAZI party. At first, bribes to escape Germany, then their wealth was forcefully possessed through the 'work camps' process.
But the Jews were not the only casualty of WWII, work camps or death camps.
The Pols. They were enemies of the state, and thus exploitable.
The gypsies. Exterminated because of perceived parasitic existence(like Jews) on society.
Political dissidents (bleeding hearts and artists). Simply removed for the obvious.
The homosexuals. Simply because of their perceived anti social sexual agenda; to undermine society by having gay sex.
The Jehovah's Witnesses. Because they were deemed, if they refused to utter allegiance to Hitler, to much of an independent threat to the third Reich.
Jews, Pols, gypsies, dissidents, homosexuals, and Jehovah's Witnesses were all rightfully persecuted because of the current prejudice of society. Society must be preserved.
Aside: my hat comes off for the Jehovah's Witnesses who were offered a choice to live and pledge allegiance to Hitler, or go to work (mostly death) camps.

2. Question authority at every turn.
The Nuremberg trials brought this very ugly trait of humanity to light, that many wish to bury and proclaim this trait as German/NAZI in nature.
So many of the German soldiers and even of the NAZI party felt they were pressured by both society and authority to do what was socially ordained, 'do what they were told' and were mostly simply 'acting under orders', with some variation for the desire to 'do a good job'.
This, single feature is so maligned that people disown, externalize, and project this trait on Germans and Nazis, rather than own it as a universal human trait.
We didn't learn a fucking thing, it seems.
To proof is the universally known Milgram experiments from the 1960s where a subject is told to apply electrical shocks to an acting victim who reacted according to known reactions to electrical shock.
Most people under 'authority' applied what would have been lethal electrical shocks. These shocking (no pun intended) studies were well known when I was a kid.
Just recently, the test was repeated apparently by the French.

http://cdevers.posterous.com/french-tv-documentary-updates-milgrams-nazi-t

Surprisingly, (or perhaps not so Surprisingly) the results were repeated with greater than 80% of the test subjects applying (had the equipment been accurate and situation been real) lethal electrical shocks. Although, this test apparently included both authority (someone telling the subject to administer the shocks) and social pressure (an audience).
The beyond surprising and onto shocking was a Jewish woman whose grandparents were tortured by NAZIS who complied with the authority/compliance demands of administering electrical shocks.


3. Take personal responsibility for our actions. Stop fully. Whenever possible (unless someone has a gun to your head... there might be some exceptions there).

Finally, who among us would stop? Who is so dedicated that they would not harm another person? If you knew this person was going to die anyway? If you knew you were going to a work camp if you didn't follow orders? If you only felt the social scorn of disobeying an authority figure or acting anti-socially by opposing the will of several people?

Okay, I'm sucking ass again, but I hope if I'm ever strapped in a chair, Fran is the one at the control panel, not Rissa, or Twyla, or Pasa, or Mikey3000, or...
Because I don't think there's a lot of question about these other good folks, and many others, being among the 80% compliant...

4. Be ware of verbal engineering. Call a spade a spade.
Don't forget that the 'holocaust', the greatest act of genocide and theft since the white man of the American Indian, was dissuadingly labeled as: 'the final solution' to the Jewish question.

[Pasadenacpl2]

Wow...all that to take a swipe at folks you don't like, and to kiss Fran's ass again. You, sir, have my respect. It takes a LOT of dedication to put that much work into your persistent attacks on others.

Pasa

*I read it twice. I scratched my head the whole time as you didn't have a very good thesis, no consistent message, and it was obvious that the entire post was a set up for the finale. But, I did read it twice, as you requested.

[tenni]

"Finally, who among us would stop? Who is so dedicated that they would not harm another person? If you knew this person was going to die anyway? If you knew you were going to a work camp if you didn't follow orders? If you only felt the social scorn of disobeying an authority figure or acting anti-socially by opposing the will of several people?"

If we examine your attempt to connect Nazism with the psychological studies, what is your point?

First, the psychological studies happened years after the Nazis committed their crimes. Even knowing as we (some) do know now that there is a tendency in Western societies for people to press the button that is suppose to cause physical pain to an unseen person, it is not the same as what happened during the Nazi era. Even more recent genocides such as Darfur, Rwanda, Ukraine(by Stalin), Cambodia(Pol Pot) and a few more perhaps may not be linked too closely with these studies. As I recall, these studies victims were not visible to the person who pressed the button. There were people who did see and participated in the gassing by the Nazis. This is a major difference between the studies and what happened under Nazism. Certainly, there was a rationalization by the Nazis that "these" people were not like "us" etc. though. I believe that the subject who pushed the button rationalized their actions by stating that the victim must deserve it though.

If you knew that if you did not do "the deed" that you may also be sent to a camp to be killed, it is possible that the majority may co operate. It would be survival mode kicking in. That would not excuse the person though. If there was no direct consequence from a society and all effort to rationalize your actions were done, you may still have a "guilty conscience" and suffer. If you were amoral such as a sociopath, you may be able to kill without guilt.

We do not know really how many people who inflicted such horrors to the people in these camps suffered great stress. I am unaware of any study of this examination. I think that there were factors why we/you refer to the Nazi horrors as the worst genocide of the 20th century. I'm not sure that it was. The Armenians suffered great loss and still do not get the same respect as the Nazi horrors. Of course, I don't think that the Armenians had their skin turned into lamp shades either. The shock value of such deeds made it horrendous. On top of that, the winners wanted to demonize the losers (Nazis).

I believe that the Nazi symbols will remain a taboo for several more generations. Remember that it once was a religious symbol sacred to some North American
Indigenous peoples.

What did we learn? Well, I wonder if the study of prison guards did not partially come out of the need to understand the human behaviour exhibited by the Nazis.

[MarieDelta]

Couple points here:

Firstly usage of a Nazi uniform by Prince Harry was in extremely poor taste. It isn't the swastika but the whole uniform that is still revered by some both in the UK and elsewhere. They still believe in the principles espoused by the Third Reich.

Secondly Prince Harry had an uncle(?) (King Edward)who espoused these same beliefs prior to WWII. Which makes it doubly in bad taste.

Thirdly, the Royal houses of Europe, which Prince Harry is part of, have carried out pogroms against Jewish folks in the past.

Lastly, HRH cant take a wee without cameras being trained on the royal dick, do you really think this would escape the paparazzi? Like it or not , he is a celebrity of international proportions.

All that pushes the idea that to wear a Nazi uniform anywhere is a bad idea of epic proportions.

of course that is just my opinion...

[tenni]

True Marie

I may be wrong but Prince Harry was also just at the end where the press had agreed not to cover any shots of him. He may not have been accustomed to having his privacy invaded. I don't hold him overly responsible but I can see how his foolishness crossed the line for many. Young people who paint swastikas on walls probably do not understand the full impact of their actions even if they are doing it out of rebellion or being a neo Nazi. They just don't get what they have not personally experienced at that young an age.

There was a case in Canada within the past year where two children were taken from their parents due to the teaching of neo Nazism and placing swaztikas on the young girls arm. The girl espoused neo Nazi beliefs when she was examined by the Children's aid. Even now though, I think that the two kids were returned to their mother once the "boyfriend" leftl.

[TwylaTwobits]

When I first saw the title of the thread, I was thinking okay...maybe a decent thread for a change. A chance to discuss things without mudslinging...then I get to the bottom of the thread and realize the entire diatribe was packing dirt into one big mudball to cover whoever dares disagree with the arrogance exhibited on these boards. Blue, Fran has point blank asked you not to toss her in the middle of a dog fight like a bone to won. You disregarded that and you reap what you sow with her.

Now as for your entire theory, well that's your opinion. Personally, I believe that Hitler was one of the most charismatic men of the past 200 years. He was a leader that had strong beliefs and convinced a nation to follow him. The irony... he was short and dark haired, his idea of perfection was tall and blond.

The lessons we can learn from World War II are the same lessons we can learn from every major event in history. No one can be made to conform to a set of criteria. That's the unique thing about free will. There have been many documented cases of cruelties inflicted on people in the concentration camps, but the most heinous were found to have been done by people not just following orders but indulging in their own twisted fantasies. Josef Mengele and his twin experiments come to mind.

As for your testing......please. Again Free Will. You can think of me what you want but I take personal responsiblity for the things I post on this board and the things I say in real life, do you?

[paukenplayer]

I kinda' scratched my head trying to figure out bluebiyou's 'real' point.....

But, for what it's worth; here is my take on what we learned - or should have learned - from WW II:

1. Appeasement never works (Neville Chamberlain).

2. Tyranny anywhere is tyranny against everyone.

3. Political extremism - left OR right - is extremely dangerous.

4. True freedom of the press - a politically neutral press, that is - freedom of the people to bear arms and a strong, volunteer military form a nation's best defense against tyranny and extremism, whether internal or external.

5. History must be taught - fully and completely - to subsequent generations or (as the old saying goes) we will be doomed to repeat it.

[paukenplayer]

By the way......

TwylaTwobits - I LOVE the "butthurt" form linked at the bottom of your post! :bigrin:

[tenni]

Twyla
The concept about free will is a lovely warm fuzzy. Unfortunately, far too many people have been proven to ignore free will and are too willing to "join the crowd" where ever it is going. I think that the reality is that we too willing ly do not really think through a lot of things but conform instead to whatever we are told by our leaders. Theoretically, we have free will but for much of our lives we are encouraged to conform to societal norms. When we are presented with rules and laws, few of us use our free will to thoroughly examine the consequences. Our lives become filled with our survival needs and desire for comfort away from stress. We can not examine in sufficient detail all aspects to use our free will. Unless we consider that it is our free will to ignore as much as possible that does not specifically impact us personally.

[FalconAngel]

A preface to this thread:Please read an offending thread twice before retorting, to make sure you're 'getting the point' intended.

Good advice Blue.

[MarieDelta]

Oh and wasnt there a "true story" book about a teacher who tried a social experiment to show how the whole Nazi thing worked?



The Wave (http://www.amazon.com/Wave-Morton-Rhue/dp/0141322608)

http://hillelstoler.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/thegooglewave.jpg


There was also a Teleplay....

Fact is, unless we are very wary we are all subject to the pressures of society.

In addition there is a tendency in primates to turn folks who are 'different' into others specifically "others-who-are-less-than."

RE: Monkeysphere - The limited capacity of primates to conceptualize others as distinct and relevant individuals (from an article on Cracked.com). Studies suggest that for humans this limit is about 150 people, and those outside the monkeysphere are not really considered people at all, but one-dimensional bit characters.

[Long Duck Dong]

what did we learn ???? we learnt nothing....... we can learn about ww2, but we repeat the same mistakes time and time again.....

we can not create the * perfect * race.... as there is none, only the option to accept the differences in others and that we should not to seek to force others to change, but give them the option of change...... for its by them that we define ourselves.....
we still attack race and religion and beliefs as inferior and wrong..... yet we are part of the same race....the human race, we believe our ways are right, and our religion is the * me, me, me * religion

we know the pain of bloodshed and senseless killing, yet every day, its repeated time and time again, and justified or vilified according to our opinions.... be it the war on terror, or the death penalty for a criminal or even medical decisions and misdecisions.....

we know the stupid mistake of judgment on the grounds of percieved differences.... such as the internment of american japanese..... yet we continue to act in the same manner to people we percieve as not LGBT supportive....and I am referring to people that are not anti lgbt, nor pro lgbt, but lgbt neutral....... and we give them a reason to become anti lgbt.....

we have learnt nothing at all from ww2..... but thats not a surprise, as history is filled with us not learning anything but repeating the same goddammed mistakes over and over again.......

and how do I know we have not learnt ????
malaysia, nam, the falklands, kuwait, iran, iraq......and let us not forget society and the fight for rights.....

lest we forget the lessons of the past, and maybe, just maybe, we will finally learn for the future generations to come, so they can live in a world that is not totally fucked up

[FalconAngel]

If we examine your attempt to connect Nazism with the psychological studies, what is your point?

Tenni, I don't believe that he is trying to do that. His question is "what did we learn?".

It looks more like he is using known studies and current data to assess their behavior to put it in context of the time, not as an excuse, but more as something to give us a common social standard to base our reaction to.


First, the psychological studies happened years after the Nazis committed their crimes. Even knowing as we (some) do know now that there is a tendency in Western societies for people to press the button that is suppose to cause physical pain to an unseen person, it is not the same as what happened during the Nazi era.

Pretty sure that was used to compare what we think we know about it all to what the reality is. Sometimes these studies come about as a way to answer the question of why a society or group does what they do in a similar such situation.


Even more recent genocides such as Darfur, Rwanda, Ukraine(by Stalin), Cambodia(Pol Pot) and a few more perhaps may not be linked too closely with these studies. As I recall, these studies victims were not visible to the person who pressed the button.

You could be right, but those events are a case of a superior military force against a (mostly or completely) unarmed populace, which also demonstrates one constant of society and individuals: Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.



There were people who did see and participated in the gassing by the Nazis. This is a major difference between the studies and what happened under Nazism.

I was under the impression that they did two different studies using both conditions. Does anyone know for sure if it was or was not done both ways? If so, then post a link for us all, please.


Certainly, there was a rationalization by the Nazis that "these" people were not like "us" etc. though. I believe that the subject who pushed the button rationalized their actions by stating that the victim must deserve it though.

That is a given, based on what we now know about social psychology. But some of that "they must deserve it" idea could also be an affect of self justification because they fear repercussions of those in power over them; particularly when the powers that be have no qualms of severely punishing those that resist their orders.


If you knew that if you did not do "the deed" that you may also be sent to a camp to be killed, it is possible that the majority may co operate. It would be survival mode kicking in.

A variation on the "fight or flight" instinct, no doubt.


That would not excuse the person though. If there was no direct consequence from a society and all effort to rationalize your actions were done, you may still have a "guilty conscience" and suffer. If you were amoral such as a sociopath, you may be able to kill without guilt.

A truer word was never said.
Even soldiers in combat often go through the guilt of having to kill another human, even when they know that the circumstances are perfectly acceptable for the act to happen.

We sure do tend to make thing as complex as possible, as a species, don't we?



We do not know really how many people who inflicted such horrors to the people in these camps suffered great stress. I am unaware of any study of this examination. I think that there were factors why we/you refer to the Nazi horrors as the worst genocide of the 20th century. I'm not sure that it was. The Armenians suffered great loss and still do not get the same respect as the Nazi horrors. Of course, I don't think that the Armenians had their skin turned into lamp shades either. The shock value of such deeds made it horrendous. On top of that, the winners wanted to demonize the losers (Nazis).

The shock value may well be the reason that it is seen as the greatest genocide, but then again, many of the folks claiming that have little proper knowledge of humanity's past indiscretions in that area.
Most folks, worldwide, have no clue about the massive deaths under Christian and Islamic internal sectarian violence, and that isn't even including the Crusades where the Christians and Moors were fighting each other. Most other religious wars were more localized, like tribal conflicts, by comparison.



I believe that the Nazi symbols will remain a taboo for several more generations. Remember that it once was a religious symbol sacred to some North American Indigenous peoples.

I agree with you there, but the Nazis symbol was actually reversed from the one originally used in the Pagan/Shamanic religions where it came from.

The original symbol is also in some of the ancient structures in parts of Africa and India as well. So it was a fairly common symbol for various belief systems, long before Hitler and his merry band of ne'er do wells hijacked it.

But after what they did with it, it is going to take a very long time before it will be looked at differently.



What did we learn? Well, I wonder if the study of prison guards did not partially come out of the need to understand the human behaviour exhibited by the Nazis.

I know that we got a lot more than we realized. Not just in directions to study human behavior but in other areas as well.

We learned that an industrialized nation that spends most of it's resources can, almost "overnight" turn to war production;

that nations that have different philosophies can learn to work together for a common good, when the need arises;

That when pushed beyond reason, that some people within an oppressed society will work behind the scenes to help bring about change (maquis, German underground, etc.);

that there are things out there that we need to be watchful of;
Things like power over the government and people handed over to groups or individuals with "personal" or hidden agendas.

There is probably a lot more than just that, but those are the things that immediately come to mind.

[FalconAngel]

Couple points here:

Firstly usage of a Nazi uniform by Prince Harry was in extremely poor taste. It isn't the swastika but the whole uniform that is still revered by some both in the UK and elsewhere. They still believe in the principles espoused by the Third Reich.

Secondly Prince Harry had an uncle(?) (King Edward)who espoused these same beliefs prior to WWII. Which makes it doubly in bad taste.

Thirdly, the Royal houses of Europe, which Prince Harry is part of, have carried out pogroms against Jewish folks in the past.

Lastly, HRH cant take a wee without cameras being trained on the royal dick, do you really think this would escape the paparazzi? Like it or not , he is a celebrity of international proportions.

All that pushes the idea that to wear a Nazi uniform anywhere is a bad idea of epic proportions.

of course that is just my opinion...

And let's not forget that "old money" types and many royals, all over the world, do sometimes believe themselves above both law and social convention.

[FalconAngel]

I kinda' scratched my head trying to figure out bluebiyou's 'real' point.....

But, for what it's worth; here is my take on what we learned - or should have learned - from WW II:

1. Appeasement never works (Neville Chamberlain).

2. Tyranny anywhere is tyranny against everyone.

3. Political extremism - left OR right - is extremely dangerous.

4. True freedom of the press - a politically neutral press, that is - freedom of the people to bear arms and a strong, volunteer military form a nation's best defense against tyranny and extremism, whether internal or external.

5. History must be taught - fully and completely - to subsequent generations or (as the old saying goes) we will be doomed to repeat it.

Those are some of the points that I missed in my previous post, and I think that there may be others who respond that have, or will, missed some or all of them as well.

Numbers 1, 2 and 5 are the biggest ones with the others tying for an extremely close second place. And 5 and 4 are extremely closely inter-related with each other.

Good catch. Unfortunately, there are, and probably always will be, some that believe that lessons 1, 2 and 3 are all completely wrong.

[FalconAngel]

Twyla
The concept about free will is a lovely warm fuzzy. Unfortunately, far too many people have been proven to ignore free will and are too willing to "join the crowd" where ever it is going.

Very true.
Humans, as a species do opt for the path of least resistance for as much as possible. Our various tech developments, particularly in the last 50 years makes that very clear.

And while many of our greatest humanist philosophies do reinforce the ideal of free will, we as a people; as a species, are not quite ready for that to take hold quite yet, because too few of us are really ready to be completely responsible for what our free will would allow us to do.



I think that the reality is that we too willingly do not really think through a lot of things but conform instead to whatever we are told by our leaders. Theoretically, we have free will but for much of our lives we are encouraged to conform to societal norms.

That is the path of least resistance thing again.

Without trying to delve deeply into religion, that has been a problem with some within Paganism.
They take "an it harm none, do as you will" and the entire "free will" concept so literally that it paralyzes them from taking action, even if it means to protect one person from another, thinking that to do so would interfere with the "free will" of the attacker.
To me, that is a ridiculous and ludicrous philosophy for various reasons that I will not state here (trying to not delve deeply into religion) (if anyone wants to know the reasons, then drop me a private message).



When we are presented with rules and laws, few of us use our free will to thoroughly examine the consequences. Our lives become filled with our survival needs and desire for comfort away from stress. We can not examine in sufficient detail all aspects to use our free will. Unless we consider that it is our free will to ignore as much as possible that does not specifically impact us personally.

Also very good points worthy of consideration by all.

[mariersa]

SHOCK:eek: humankind is/has been guilty of the same acts against their own prior/post WWII, for any reason that is presented, usually against an oppressed society which is typically the last victor of record. Great orators can/have/will moved societies to follow whether right or wrong.

Anyone need euros, I couldn't find a Charitable Nun or street beggar that would take them, so the last resort was to purchase trinkets of no value in order to be below the "weight' limit for the pocketbook.

[Long Duck Dong]

Twyla
The concept about free will is a lovely warm fuzzy. Unfortunately, far too many people have been proven to ignore free will and are too willing to "join the crowd" where ever it is going. I think that the reality is that we too willing ly do not really think through a lot of things but conform instead to whatever we are told by our leaders. Theoretically, we have free will but for much of our lives we are encouraged to conform to societal norms. When we are presented with rules and laws, few of us use our free will to thoroughly examine the consequences. Our lives become filled with our survival needs and desire for comfort away from stress. We can not examine in sufficient detail all aspects to use our free will. Unless we consider that it is our free will to ignore as much as possible that does not specifically impact us personally.

personally, I have always seen free will as a choice.... to act or not, to react or not....and thats about it.....
but I do agree, many will automatically * conform * to societies * norm * as they can see no other options available...

the differcult part is that free will is a personal choice....not a choice we can make for others....
a example would be something like * I choose to follow this path, but others do not, and nor do I have the right to make them conform *.....

at the foundation of my beliefs is the simple rule " I have neither the right nor power to change what is not mine to change, but only to share what I know and understand so that others may have the right and power to change what they can if they so choose "

now I do conform to societies *norm * in areas that require me to do so, such as pay taxes and obeying legal laws....but outside of that.....lol...hell I still live by olde celtic time....my day starts at sunset and ends at sunset the following day....

[darkeyes]

what did we learn ???? we learnt nothing....... we can learn about ww2, but we repeat the same mistakes time and time again.....

we can not create the * perfect * race.... as there is none, only the option to accept the differences in others and that we should not to seek to force others to change, but give them the option of change...... for its by them that we define ourselves.....
we still attack race and religion and beliefs as inferior and wrong..... yet we are part of the same race....the human race, we believe our ways are right, and our religion is the * me, me, me * religion

we know the pain of bloodshed and senseless killing, yet every day, its repeated time and time again, and justified or vilified according to our opinions.... be it the war on terror, or the death penalty for a criminal or even medical decisions and misdecisions.....

we know the stupid mistake of judgment on the grounds of percieved differences.... such as the internment of american japanese..... yet we continue to act in the same manner to people we percieve as not LGBT supportive....and I am referring to people that are not anti lgbt, nor pro lgbt, but lgbt neutral....... and we give them a reason to become anti lgbt.....

we have learnt nothing at all from ww2..... but thats not a surprise, as history is filled with us not learning anything but repeating the same goddammed mistakes over and over again.......

and how do I know we have not learnt ????
malaysia, nam, the falklands, kuwait, iran, iraq......and let us not forget society and the fight for rights.....

lest we forget the lessons of the past, and maybe, just maybe, we will finally learn for the future generations to come, so they can live in a world that is not totally fucked up

Dont agree Duckie.. humanity has learned as it does all the time.. but when it comes 2 having a nice lil war... far 2 many dont give a sod an puff up their chests lookin down their noses at others and feeling all superior.. the elite and powerful interests like it that way.. cos they only give a sod 'bout themselves and so play on that.. its called patriotism.. indeed the last refuge of scoundrels.. and these pages are full of people that let them... it is also the first refuge of mugs...:(

[Long Duck Dong]

I am not denying the advances in mankind over the centuries.... changes in medicine, technology, human relations etc lol and yes, I agree with your statements....

I was meaning that we have still not worked out that its impossible to win a war by way of fighting..... yet we have won many wars that could have lead to bloodshed, simply by changing the way that people look at issues...... it can be done... I just tend to view a lot of things from the point of view that people like to *win * and that to them, is more important than the actual victory

[DareMe]

Honestly, what is your point with this long and insipid Diatribe?

A feeble attempt at intellectual discourse?

Trying to find a moral equivalency between the swastika and a naval flag? Where are you going with that?

However dumb of a game show, linking it to 1940s Nazism just defies logic. You fail to point out that some people did refuse to take part in the game and in Milgram's experiment. A mere 10% vocal group is enough to turn the tide of a social balance.

The way the Nazis decimated the Jews is different than the way they banned and killed all other non arian race. The Nazis murdered 50% of the planet's jewish population of the 40s. Today in 2010 there is roughly the same amount of Jews that lived pre WWII. I could go into more details here, but I will leave this historical tragedy alone.

I think I can sum up your "4 point cracker jack philosophy" with a lot less words:

"Stand up to bullies!" PERIOD.

Perhaps you should have taken your own advice and read your thread twice.

DM

[rissababynta]

Okay, I'm sucking ass again, but I hope if I'm ever strapped in a chair, Fran is the one at the control panel, not Rissa, or Twyla, or Pasa, or Mikey3000, or...
Because I don't think there's a lot of question about these other good folks, and many others, being among the 80% compliant...

.

Yeah ok the rest of the post was great and all....

But I just want to know why people always seem to think I'm gonna kill them? Wtf? :rolleyes:

[TwylaTwobits]

Yeah ok the rest of the post was great and all....

But I just want to know why people always seem to think I'm gonna kill them? Wtf? :rolleyes:

Not sure, Rissa, you'd think they want someone at the switch that would be able to look at all sides of the evidence and make doubly sure they were guilty before pulling a switch.. but then some people have some idiotic ideas about what is justice and what is just blind following.

[tenni]

Not sure, Rissa, you'd think they want someone at the switch that would be able to look at all sides of the evidence and make doubly sure they were guilty before pulling a switch.. but then some people have some idiotic ideas about what is justice and what is just blind following.


hmm I seem to think about the US invasion of Iraq as I read these words.

[TwylaTwobits]

and where have I ever stated I supported the war in Iraq, Tenni? I support our troops, big difference. I listened to NPR this morning and they had the commander speaking to the troops of the 101st or 102nd airborne out of Ft. Campbell that is being deployed to Afghanistan as we speak. Biggest load of bs I ever heard telling them they were going to be remembered for turning this war around.

Supposedly we are gonna start pulling our troops out July 2011, I can't wait for that day and pray they are able to bring them home. But I am ever mindful of what someone told me that was in the thick of it. If we don't finish it there it will follow us home.

Right now the US has been lucky, since 9/11 there have been attemps to hit the US again. We didn't stop them because of intelligence, we didn't stop them because of security. We got lucky because they screwed up. The bomb in Times Square...if the guy had used the right kind of fertilizer it would have blown. Instead people were scared but not enough to be called "terrorized".

So don't make the mistake of calling me a Nazi as the OP did. I am as far from a Nazi as he is at being God.

[tenni]

Twyla
If you read my words, you do not see me stating anything about whether you supported the invasion of Iraq, or connect you personally to Nazism. I wrote that your words made me think about the invasion of Iraq. ("they want someone at the switch that would be able to look at all sides of the evidence and make doubly sure they were guilty before pulling a switch.. but then some people have some idiotic ideas about what is justice and what is just blind following.")

Many US people followed like sheep when told certain things that were not true. There was nothing connecting 9/11 to Iraq but people pulled the switch under a misunderstanding about justice and followed blindly along seeking revenge (not justice). Blind patriotic beliefs led to the killing of hundreds of thousands. Was the US people's patriotism any better (morality etc.) than German's patriotism during the Nazi era? I don't think so but I suspect that some US people will be offended by my post. Were the results worse for the Germans? Yes. Does it make the US society guilt any less serious than the German society? I think that is to be determined.




and where have I ever stated I supported the war in Iraq, Tenni? I support our troops, big difference. I listened to NPR this morning and they had the commander speaking to the troops of the 101st or 102nd airborne out of Ft. Campbell that is being deployed to Afghanistan as we speak. Biggest load of bs I ever heard telling them they were going to be remembered for turning this war around.

Supposedly we are gonna start pulling our troops out July 2011, I can't wait for that day and pray they are able to bring them home. But I am ever mindful of what someone told me that was in the thick of it. If we don't finish it there it will follow us home.

Right now the US has been lucky, since 9/11 there have been attemps to hit the US again. We didn't stop them because of intelligence, we didn't stop them because of security. We got lucky because they screwed up. The bomb in Times Square...if the guy had used the right kind of fertilizer it would have blown. Instead people were scared but not enough to be called "terrorized".

So don't make the mistake of calling me a Nazi as the OP did. I am as far from a Nazi as he is at being God.

[TwylaTwobits]

Twyla
If you read my words, you do not see me stating anything about whether you supported the invasion of Iraq, or connect you personally to Nazism. I wrote that your words made me think about the invasion of Iraq. Many US people followed like sheep when told certain things that were not true. There was nothing connecting 9/11 to Iraq but people pulled the switch under a misunderstanding about justice and followed blindly along. Blind patriotic beliefs led to the killing of hundreds of thousands. Were the US people's patriotism any better than German's patriotism during the Nazi era? I don't think so but I suspect that some US people will be offended by my post. Were the results worse for the Germans? Yes. Does it make the US society guilt any less serious than the German society? I think that is to be determined.

Blind patriotism has killed many in many countries, not just Germany, not just US, not just England, not just Canada, but worldwide. I am one of those that delve into the stories of people behind wars beyond what the history books state. You will never see me stating the US won World War II, you will see me openly stating that there are alot of things about my own country I do not like. I have been consistent in stating that across these boards in my two years of posting. I have always been for equal rights for all but I am able to see both sides of an issue. I do not turn my back on my religious beliefs because it doesn't suit me to follow them at the time. I don't denigrate others for their religious beliefs.

Hitler was a very charismatic leader but even some Germans said it best "you can either serve the fuhrer or you can serve Germany, you can not serve both" Some German officers attempted to take Hitler out, they failed. But they tried, not every person in Germany was guilty of following the Nazi regime. Just as not every US citizen is guilty of the invasion of Iraq.

[MarieDelta]

I wouldn't even say what caused the Holocaust could be said to be patriotism.

In my opinion it was something more akin to tribalism.

The jews, homosexuals, christian protesters, and other undesirables that we killed werent all foriegn.

Many of them were as patriotic as the next person.

[tenni]

Good for you Twyla but I am not referring to you personally but the group think of a society. The "We"ism aspect is in the title of this thread. If certain individuals step forward after the events and claim that they were against X but X happens, is that not some form of "sheep" like behaviour like the Germans during the Nazi era? Why is it that there were so few supporters of Nazism five, ten , twenty years after the defeat of Nazism ? Why are there so few supporters of the invasion of Iraq just a few years after? (ok..now the supporters to invade Iraq may give their reasons on why the decision was correct ...at the time with the evidience etc.)

For Marie
Wow? Really? Hitler gave the German's a feeling of pride and patriotism after their soul wrenching shame from losing WW1. He was able to use their low group self esteem and made them feel pride again in being German. One of the major failures of WW1 was how the allies damaged the German psyche after WW1 with the way that they treated the Germans. This was altered after WW2 so that the German psyche would not be so damaged as it was after WW1. Tribalism...no Nationalism Yes. From my perspective the US experienced a similar damage to the societal psyche after 9/11 that left them open to being manipulated like the Germans after WW1.

[TwylaTwobits]

Yet, I was lumped in with people at the end of the first post so I feel the need to defend myself as an individiual.

There are many people in the US at this point in time that not only have always been opposed to the war but are very vocal in their opposition. I'm not talking about the same people that stood on the sidelines when the Vietnam soldiers came home screaming "baby killer". I'm talking about people who fear for the lives of their children, who fear for the lives of their men and women, people who fear any lives lost in a continuation of George Bush's father's issue.

[tenni]

Twyla
I am not responsible for how you feel about my post. I did not connect you other than your words reminded me of the events mentioned and the comparison that I thought about. I'm responsible for my thoughts that I wrote though.

[FalconAngel]

Blind patriotism has killed many in many countries, not just Germany, not just US, not just England, not just Canada, but worldwide. I am one of those that delve into the stories of people behind wars beyond what the history books state. You will never see me stating the US won World War II, you will see me openly stating that there are alot of things about my own country I do not like. I have been consistent in stating that across these boards in my two years of posting. I have always been for equal rights for all but I am able to see both sides of an issue. I do not turn my back on my religious beliefs because it doesn't suit me to follow them at the time. I don't denigrate others for their religious beliefs.

Hitler was a very charismatic leader but even some Germans said it best "you can either serve the fuhrer or you can serve Germany, you can not serve both" Some German officers attempted to take Hitler out, they failed. But they tried, not every person in Germany was guilty of following the Nazi regime. Just as not every US citizen is guilty of the invasion of Iraq.

You make some very salient points here, Twyla.

But many people do not know the difference between nationalism and patriotism.

Now I am not going to speak for other nations; just the US. This country was built on dissent and so, in order to be patriotic, one must be willing to oppose the government for the good of the nation when the government is wrong and still support the government when it is (as it rarely is) right.

The current 2-front war is a prime example. The invasion of Afghanistan was the right thing to do, but once the main issue of opsec was under control, the strategy became wrong for hunting the terrorists and their camps. I have said this before on the war on terrorism.

With Iraq, that was, and is an illegal and uncalled for war that only serves to generate more terrorists. Perhaps that is the reason that we invaded Iraq, to continue the "need" for more control on the population through the fear of terrorist attacks. Of course the more that we allow our Constitution to be usurped, the fewer freedoms we all enjoy.
Some military and political experts have been thinking that for quite a while, but they are outside of the government.

The point being that a nationalist will blindly follow any leader that will use "patriotism" as an excuse to control them, when patriots only do what is best for the nation and ignore other political agendas.

The Bush government and Republicans were very good at throwing out the "unpatriotic" tag for everyone that opposed their nationalist agendas and illegal actions.
But factually, the most unpatriotic bunch was those who acted on that nationalist belief and expected the rest to follow blindly.

A nationalist considers everything that the government does to be in the nation's best interest, no matter what that is; no matter how evil it is. That was the problem under Hitler; the Nazis party and it's adherents were nationalists, not patriots. And they had a very destructive, power-seeking philosophy under that nationalism.

A patriot will stand in defense of his nation, but also recognizes the things that are wrong and opposes them to the best of their ability and in compliance with the law, until the law becomes unusable by the people that it is supposed to protect.

[TwylaTwobits]

I understand that, Tenni. But I am making the point I am always responsible for my posts, I believe a great deal in personal responsibility.

There are a lot of people on this board that think they can sling mud across the internet and be safe in their own insular worlds. But the internet is a grand tool, it opens up worlds of learning beyond anyone's imagining. It lets you talk in real time to someone half way around the world and learn about different cultures and different topics affecting each country's economy. Lately this board has turned from being about bisexuals and the issues they have with their day to day lives and into nothing more than a place where people push political agendas and ram religious beliefs down others throats. Then when someone takes a stand they are told they have no idea what they are talking about, that questioning the validity behind a post is saying you are anti LGBT. It's getting disheartening to watch as the board dies because people are afraid to post without being labeled as something they are not.

I just wish the OP had taken his own advice and read his thread twice before posting insults at people he doesn't even know.

[tenni]

Twyla & Falcon
I've enjoyed and benefited from reading your perspectives.

Twyla, maybe we can try to rise above any mudslinging and discuss the topic? I think as do some others that we do not always need to connect our thoughts on this site to just bisexuality. True, that is the main purpose though but some /most of us after we have become a bit comfortable with our sexuality want to share more about our thoughts.

[MarieDelta]

Good for you Twyla but I am not referring to you personally but the group think of a society. The "We"ism aspect is in the title of this thread. If certain individuals step forward after the events and claim that they were against X but X happens, is that not some form of "sheep" like behaviour like the Germans during the Nazi era? Why is it that there were so few supporters of Nazism five, ten , twenty years after the defeat of Nazism ? Why are there so few supporters of the invasion of Iraq just a few years after? (ok..now the supporters to invade Iraq may give their reasons on why the decision was correct ...at the time with the evidience etc.)

For Marie
Wow? Really? Hitler gave the German's a feeling of pride and patriotism after their soul wrenching shame from losing WW1. He was able to use their low group self esteem and made them feel pride again in being German. One of the major failures of WW1 was how the allies damaged the German psyche after WW1 with the way that they treated the Germans. This was altered after WW2 so that the German psyche would not be so damaged as it was after WW1. Tribalism...no Nationalism Yes. From my perspective the US experienced a similar damage to the societal psyche after 9/11 that left them open to being manipulated like the Germans after WW1.

Yes tribalism. You see the same thing happeing in Dafur.

The "Aryan Nation" was nothing more or less than a tribe. That was why it was so easy to use the Jews(and others) as scapegoats. Even though they were German Citizens, they were painted as being other than / less than.

See my post regarding "MonkeySphere".

Genocide doesnt only occur in humans, we are just more aware of it. Chimps practice the same type of behavior. One tribe exterminates the other , then takes over its territory. This is typical chimpanzee behavior. Mankind shares 90% or more of the same genes, why would you expect us to be different?

So yes, tribalism, not patriotism.

[darkeyes]

Yes tribalism. You see the same thing happeing in Dafur.

The "Aryan Nation" was nothing more or less than a tribe. That was why it was so easy to use the Jews(and others) as scapegoats. Even though they were German Citizens, they were painted as being other than / less than.

See my post regarding "MonkeySphere".

Genocide doesnt only occur in humans, we are just more aware of it. Chimps practice the same type of behavior. One tribe exterminates the other , then takes over its territory. This is typical chimpanzee behavior. Mankind shares 90% or more of the same genes, why would you expect us to be different?

So yes, tribalism, not patriotism.

Yes Marie, its to do with tribalism, and nationalism which is but a modern form of tribalism..but it has to do with patriotism also.. it has to do with humanity's most base instincts, to do with the economic order and economics itself.. with the social order.. to do with racism and xenophobia, with suspicion and mistrust of difference.. it has to do with greed and envy, a desire for power, and a desire to hold on to it.. it has to do with lies and misrepresenting what is, and why.. and so it has to do with history.. a massive corruption of history..it has to do with religion, and the Christian Church's historical persecution of Jewry since the crucifixion of its "Saviour".. it has to do with the ingrained prejudice of European civilisation of the Jew stirred by the church and its servants.. popes, priests, kings, soldiers, for two millenia.. and its prejudice against other groups.. the Roma (gypsies), homosexuals, communists, socialists, heretics. It has to do with war.. for only in war can any people even contemplate getting away with such an outrage..without war we can persecute and can even kill in quite large numbers certainly..but only in war does such madness take hold that wholesale slaughter can so easily take place. It has to do with injustice.. these and many other reasons exist for the holocaust... patriotism certainly bears its responsibility... just like a million and one other reasons...

[Argent 11]

The greatest generation that fought this fight and those who are enlightened through their sacrifice by STUDYING history learned more from WWII than your average human being today could or would ever care to take an interest to comprehend. Hence the old saying:

"Those who will not learn from history are condemned to repeat it"

So far the humans of this world are still doing a damn fine job of showing how little we have truly evolved as a species, especially since the lessons of WWII.

[Lady_Passion]

What did we learn from World War II?


My first thought is any lesson I find valuable has nothing to do with Prince Harry.

Second thought, we live and hopefully learn though we don't seem to be, and don't repeat stupidities which we are also doing regardless of opportunity to do much better.

Third, Rahm Emanuel in office running things on Obama's 'watch', would appear to be an unexpected u turn in the Jewish world :.) I realize he doesn't represent all Jewish interests, but "there can only be one".

Fourth, the U.S. perpetrates travesties on other countries at will (http://main.bisexual.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9213), yet we're not too concerned about that 'cause most of us are too caught up supporting corporate welfare queen (http://main.bisexual.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9215)s. Not that it's new, just disgusting and disheartening if one considers the futility of trying to effect positive change.

I can only speak as a jaded American, but it is a sad fact that we have not been able to question authority since the first lever voting machines. It really is a matter of who counts the votes, not who is voting. Politics is little but a choreographed wrestling match and far less entertaining... Monica Lewinsky has provided the best ringside entertainment and that was shoddy.

As it is, we are (U.S.) going the way of the Romans and we deserve our fate if we continue.

[Bluebiyou]

A lot of great points here.
But please notice that genocide has been common throughout history.
It's not that we aren't, and haven't proven ourselves time and again to be savage animals throughout thousands of years of history dating back to ancient Egypt.
Cortes and the Spainairds loved gold so the Aztecs faired poorly, granted disease (smallpox) assisted the Spainiards in their quest.
The American Indians possessed the area later to be called the USA, and were pushed, killed (and did some killing themselves). But between the begining (1620) and the end (1880), you can say a genocide took place and a land robbery of epic proportions. Okay, in hindsight, recognizing there was some eventual certainty between the higher technology,property claiming, legalistic, and increasing with interest white man and the relatively nomadic American Indian. The end result of killing and banishing the red man to pre equivalent 'concentration camps' or 'reservations'.
It's that we believe ourselves to be 'civilized', the height of human history, social, and personal behavior.
Rather than taking a realist view that... the majority of us would still be sacrificing children, or firstborn if that happened to still be the custom.
World War II was coming to an end, Stalin, Churchill, and Rosevelt were deciding how the remains of Germany would be divided when
"British War Cabinet documents, released on 2 January 2006, have shown that as early as December 1944, the Cabinet had discussed their policy for the punishment of the leading Nazis if captured. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had then advocated a policy of summary execution in some circumstances, with the use of an Act of Attainder to circumvent legal obstacles, being dissuaded from this only by talks with US leaders later in the war. In late 1943, during the Tripartite Dinner Meeting at the Tehran Conference, the Soviet leader, Joseph Stalin, proposed executing 50,000–100,000 German staff officers. US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, joked that perhaps 49,000 would do. Churchill denounced the idea of "the cold blooded execution of soldiers who fought for their country." However, he also stated that war criminals must pay for their crimes and that in accordance with the Moscow Document which he himself had written, they should be tried at the places where the crimes were committed. Churchill was vigorously opposed to executions "for political purposes."[1][2] According to the minutes of a Roosevelt-Stalin meeting during the Yalta Conference, in February 4, 1945, at the Livadia Palace, President Roosevelt "said that he had been very much struck by the extent of German destruction in the Crimea and therefore he was more bloodthirsty in regard to the Germans than he had been a year ago, and he hoped that Marshal Stalin would again propose a toast to the execution of 50,000 officers of the German Army."[3]"
And thus, the world owes an eternal debt of forced moral education; to the UK's Winston Churchill.
Indeed Japan had commited many, many crimes against humanity, numerically equal to the NAZIs. But Japan was not prosecuted in spite of the Bataan Death March, Burma Railway, Korean forced prostitution, and treatment of the Chinese people and Chinese resources equivalent to Germany's treatment of Jews.
Aside: LDD, where have you been to fail to mention the eastern hemisphere lessons of WWII ?
But Germany was accepted as 'high culture' and thusly held to a higher standard.
So, the Nuremberg trials began immediately after the war.
Time and again, the standard defense against any 'war crime' was that he was only following orders/doing what was expected.
This was not just for the most famous (24?) Nuremberg trials, but the thousands of lesser trials.
Nuremberg was the beginning of a new age of personal responsibility.
The sadistic potential of a person under authority was thought out and further explored by the Milgram experiments in 1960? 1962?
It is reflecting upon our "renaissance" of wartime and genocidal morality that I asked the question among us... "Who listened? Who learned the lessons?"

[Lady_Passion]

<snip

Say WHAT about Churchill? *lol*

OH

MY

GOODNESS!

Churchill was directly responsible for the first runs with gassing innocent people. Insurgents he called them. Although anyone can be called an insurgent now. Why doesn't that concern people more?

[Bluebiyou]

Okay!!!
I was blowing a little smoke up the ass of European pride.
But Churchill was kick ass!
I was focusing on his good stuff!!!
Especially after all the "USA saved Europe in WWII and owes us" comments that upset so many of our European brethren on this site recently.
Churchill's "good stuff" genuinely and truthfully came from him.
Yeah, he made some grievous mistakes... but let's not focus on that at the moment.
They're all dead and the time is gone.
If we introduce too many contradictions, what's the point in looking at ourselves for improvement?

USA Bluebiyou

[Lady_Passion]

If you're not interested in the whole picture, what's the point of having this discussion?

[Bluebiyou]

The hope of the infinitesimal improvement of mankind.
If one regards all of reality, the only rational theory/meaning of life is chaos.


...and if theory/meaning of life is chaos...
what point is there in any discussion at all?
indeed, what point is anything?

[TwylaTwobits]

The hope of the infinitesimal improvement of mankind.
If one regards all of reality, the only rational theory/meaning of life is chaos.


...and if theory/meaning of life is chaos...
what point is there in any discussion at all?
indeed, what point is anything?

Close, but it's not chaos. It's balance.

[Lady_Passion]

entropy

[Long Duck Dong]

LDD, where have you been to fail to mention the eastern hemisphere lessons of WWII ?


the same place I have always been,..... watching quietly...... not everything needs to be said, some things are understood beyond words....

you asked what have we learnt.... I answered.
we have learnt many things about ww2, but nothing from it...

you are referring to what you believe the world has learnt, based around your point of view.....

if the world has really learnt anything, the first thing they would have done, is totally disarm the world....and realise that nobody can win a war, you can only reduce the number of people that do not see things your way....

[darkeyes]

Say WHAT about Churchill? *lol*

OH

MY

GOODNESS!

Churchill was directly responsible for the first runs with gassing innocent people. Insurgents he called them. Although anyone can be called an insurgent now. Why doesn't that concern people more?

*nods*

[darkeyes]

Okay!!!
I was blowing a little smoke up the ass of European pride.
But Churchill was kick ass!
I was focusing on his good stuff!!!
Especially after all the "USA saved Europe in WWII and owes us" comments that upset so many of our European brethren on this site recently.
Churchill's "good stuff" genuinely and truthfully came from him.
Yeah, he made some grievous mistakes... but let's not focus on that at the moment.
They're all dead and the time is gone.
If we introduce too many contradictions, what's the point in looking at ourselves for improvement?

USA Bluebiyou

Churchill's reputation is saved by his premiership during WW2 and arguably his recognition of the Nazis for what they were prior.. in every other way his political career was full of ineptitude incompetence and foolishness..and many questions need asked about his wartime leadership... he was a bigot, an imperialist and a war monger.. his social policies were aimed at ensuring that the masses were kept in their place..we just need to look at the General Strike as but one example of that... he paid lip service to progress.. as he got older he became all the more reactionary.. an unpleasant man the world is better without..

Behave yourself Blue, or I wont let you kiss my bootie ever again (I assume Pasa means my bootie, not having a pet donkey!).. unless we deal with contradictions and try and resolve them and there are many in life, just how pray, do we improve ourselves? To fully reach our potential as individuals and collectively we have to take those contradictions head on.

[Bluebiyou]

Churchill's reputation is saved by his premiership during WW2 and arguably his recognition of the Nazis for what they were prior.. in every other way his political career was full of ineptitude incompetence and foolishness..and many questions need asked about his wartime leadership... he was a bigot, an imperialist and a war monger.. his social policies were aimed at ensuring that the masses were kept in their place..we just need to look at the General Strike as but one example of that... he paid lip service to progress.. as he got older he became all the more reactionary.. an unpleasant man the world is better without..
.. unless we deal with contradictions and try and resolve them and there are many in life, just how pray, do we improve ourselves? To fully reach our potential as individuals and collectively we have to take those contradictions head on.
Yes, Fran, but he did one thing right. One thing so... important as to help improve mankind.
And I don't mean:
Lady Astor: Sir, you are drunk!
Churchill: Madam, I may be drunk but you are ugly and tomorrow, I will be sober.

or:
Lady Astor: If I were your wife I would poison your drink.
Churchill: Madam, if I were your husband, I would drink it.

Personally, I have to believe both Lady Astor and Churchill were simply acting, to provide an appalling social distraction from German bombing and V2s. Imagine the social need for distraction. We have no equivalent. Especially when (WWII) Queen Elizabeth announced appallingly: the smiling Queen, as always, immaculately dressed in a hat and matching coat seemingly unbothered by the damage around her. It was at this time the Queen famously declared: "I'm glad we have been bombed. Now I can look the East End in the face". Referring to the previous bombing of "a lesser" population of England.
Left up to Roosevelt and Stalin, there would have been a simple repeat of history in killing the bad guys.
I mean Churchill's driving for trials.
War crimes.
This was the breach into conscience.
Regardless if Churchill was a baby raper, this is the one thing he did right.

[Pasadenacpl2]

Churchill's reputation is saved by his premiership during WW2 and arguably his recognition of the Nazis for what they were prior.. in every other way his political career was full of ineptitude incompetence and foolishness.

Could be. I don't doubt it. A damn sight better than Chamberlain, however.

Pasa

[darkeyes]

Could be. I don't doubt it. A damn sight better than Chamberlain, however.

Pasa

He was weak and foolish certainly.. and appeasement didnt work.. but from a man who knew of the horrors of war in a nation on a continent which had been ruined by it like no other part of the world at any time in history.. Chamberlain believed in peace and tried to achieve it as best he felt able.. that it was at the expense of peoples of whom we knew nothing was unimportant to him or the British people.. it was he felt in the best interests of humanity and certainly of Europe.. I may not like him, or what he did, yet can understand why he and most of Europe believed in appeasement as the only way to avoid a conflict which they all knew would be much more catastrophic and destructive than the one before.. and so it proved.. so dont turn your nose up at him, Pasa.. I seem to recall that the US weren't that keen on taking on Hitler or anyone else prior to 1941... whatever people think of Rooseveldt..the great mass of people of the US were as shit scared of a war as any in Europe.. and passively sat back, shook their heads just like the people of Europe did, and sighed a great sigh of relief with the words.. thank fuck...

..the fact is it was substantially US wealth that built Nazi Germany..and gave them the wherewithall to build a military machine the like of which the world had never seen.. your country cannot escape its responsibility for the success of the Nazi regime prior to 1939 and even 1942 when the tide began to turn.. my country bears the shame of appeasement certainly... your country has to bear the shame of bank rolling the regime which we appeased...

..what is glaringly obvious.. was that if the world refused to bank roll Hitler and give him the support he got from other nations after 1933..including my own, he would never have been able to threaten the world.. he may have run a cruel and evil regime..but WW2 would never have happened because he could never have built the military he did.. there are other ways to skin a cat than kill it..

Your little quip about Chamberlain has truth Pasa.. just as my views on Churchill have truth.. but its a cold statement of contempt without entirely understanding the world of the 1930s.. my views on Churchill understand only too well, and thats why I hold him in contempt.

[Lady_Passion]

"US weren't that keen on taking on Hitler or anyone else prior to 1941"

"US were as shit scared of a war as any in Europe"

War is about making money. It is a business deal, top to bottom and inside out.

IBM, among others, sure had some interesting connections with Hitler and political connections. Why would they screw themselves?

[FalconAngel]

hmm I seem to think about the US invasion of Iraq as I read these words.

That does come to mind, doesn't it?
And let's not forget Herr Bush's "with us or with the terrorists" remarks after 9-11.

When there is no room for middle ground, there is only room for tyranny.