Nazis and the Nature of Evil

[Jonathan101]

I think it's a VERY bad idea to sympathize with people like that, or trying to claim their victims did. That's the classical definition of victim-blaming.

I'm pretty sure it's not the "classical" definition.

And there are absolutely cases of victims sympathising with their victimiser- the most obvious is Stockholm syndrome, and it goes on from there. It doesn't justify or excuse what happened to them, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

As for sympathising with victimisers being a bad idea, I hate to break it to you but the most successful prison systems in the world, the ones with the lowest rate of repeat offenders and the fewest people in prison, are generally the ones that are built on sympathy and rehabilitation. As far as I'm aware, Norway has only one offender in the entire country who will never be allowed out, and he was a pretty extreme case being a mass murderer and all.

Let me say this, and have you judge me. I don't think the sympathy should lie with those who were guilty of that, because it takes the spotlight away from those who are the real victims here, those who had to deal with the pain their whole lives, and then have horrible jerks today try and downplay it. Those who got away with their crimes versus those who were never the same. It feels more political than anything remotely related to human decency.

What would you rate me, psychologically?

If I was to rate you psychologically I'd probably do an interview with you, although I'm only studying right now so you shouldn't imagine me to be a therapist.

Although I'd say you have a bit of the Devils Advocate in you, since that seems to contradict some stuff you've said earlier in this thread and others about not wanting to blame the whole German nation for the Nazi's and not liking it when things like female Nazi's are brought up.

I do think you're fishing for opinions because you aren't sure of your own personality and kind of want to know what I think since I'm acting like I know what I'm talking about, but that's just my guess.

I'm not sure what you mean by "rating" you.

[Yukaphile]

Female Nazis are one thing. They existed. But if they weren't part of the institutional power structure, but an average civilian, then blaming them for the crimes of the government is stupid. It also ignores most women weren't like that. Only assholes like CharlesPhipps will tell you they were collectively guilty down to the last man, woman, and child, that they are covering up their history. If there's two million victims, and more, obviously you can't insist they're all criminals. How does somebody do that? The crimes of the Nazis were state abuse. The crimes of the Red Army are individuals making personal choices based on upbringing and genetics. Difference.

[Yukaphile]

As for rehabilitation, that opens up an interesting question I'd like to pose to you. Do you think a man guilty of sexual abuse or serial rape deserves a second chance? If he's reformed, do you think he deserves a chance to have a girlfriend or wife? I don't trust somebody like that, and I never will. I think that's insulting to their victims.

[Dragon Ball Fan]

I'm saying that people who study and research empathy professionally would probably disagree with you. It is only "all or nothing for you" because you are defining it in a particular way. Being reluctant to hurt even flies is not empathy but kindness- I avoid hurting flies too, but it isn't the same as imagining what it is like to be a fly, or imagining feeling the pain of a fly, or trying to understand the fly, which is closer to what empathy actually is.

As for being incapable- do you WANT to be capable?

I'd say I do want to capable because this whole debate IS my attempt to understand from people who might know better then me but I still can't grasp it.

and maybe I was using the word empathy wrong but my main point of all those times I did still stands, people like Hitler and Stalin had nothing but cruelty and hate in them. I don't see any sort of kindness in those individuals or anyone else remotely like them.

[Yukaphile]

Some of the Soviet soldiers guilty of hunting down women and girls to vent their evil on would pet their horses and coo to them. Seriously. There are documented cases of this.

[Jonathan101]

Female Nazis are one thing. They existed. But if they weren't part of the institutional power structure, but an average civilian, then blaming them for the crimes of the government is stupid. It also ignores most women weren't like that. Only assholes like CharlesPhipps will tell you they were collectively guilty down to the last man, woman, and child, that they are covering up their history. If there's two million victims, and more, obviously you can't insist they're all criminals. How does somebody do that? The crimes of the Nazis were state abuse. The crimes of the Red Army are individuals making personal choices based on upbringing and genetics. Difference.

In both cases it was state abuse, upbringing and genetics- those things don't stop. The Red Army came from Stalinist Russia after all, not the Garden of Eden.

And yes, there were female Nazi's who were part of the institutional power structure, at much higher levels than the average Red Army predator.

[Yukaphile]

I can concede to that. I don't deny they were real. Female camp commanders or whatever. But not millions and tens of millions. Come on.

[Yukaphile]

It really does feel there's an attempt here by the victims themselves to "take the suffering of the victimizers" and "blame of the Nazis" onto themselves as they retell their stories, which is abhorrent. They were civilians. It's not their duty to be kind to people like that. And then there's historians who really downplay what happened to them. Despite it being a lifelong, double trauma, they still miss the point. It's bad messaging and bad history.

[Yukaphile]

If we can't summon an inch of fucking compassion for the victims here in the worst crimes against women in human history, when there's millions of them, when we have to make it fucking political, when people shove their own agendas into this, when they downplay and victim-blame and misrepresent them, assassinate their characters, seriously, it does show we've grown very little in the last 70 years.

[Jonathan101]

As for rehabilitation, that opens up an interesting question I'd like to pose to you. Do you think a man guilty of sexual abuse or serial rape deserves a second chance? If he's reformed, do you think he deserves a chance to have a girlfriend or wife? I don't trust somebody like that, and I never will. I think that's insulting to their victims.

Insulting or not, trustworthy or not, it's not exactly a thing you can just stop or not allow. Hell even if they are not rehabilitated it DOES happen and it WILL CONTINUE to happen- regardless of steps taken to prevent them abusing again, at least some of them are going to find girlfriends or get married, whether or not they harm anyone again.

I'm saying that people who study and research empathy professionally would probably disagree with you. It is only "all or nothing for you" because you are defining it in a particular way. Being reluctant to hurt even flies is not empathy but kindness- I avoid hurting flies too, but it isn't the same as imagining what it is like to be a fly, or imagining feeling the pain of a fly, or trying to understand the fly, which is closer to what empathy actually is.

As for being incapable- do you WANT to be capable?

I'd say I do want to capable because this whole debate IS my attempt to understand from people who might know better then me but I still can't grasp it.

and maybe I was using the word empathy wrong but my main point of all those times I did still stands, people like Hitler and Stalin had nothing but cruelty and hate in them. I don't see any sort of kindness in those individuals or anyone else remotely like them.

Well, firstly, it's your own biases and preconceptions that prevent you from understanding them- that isn't a knock on you, because everyone has those, but it's a thing to keep in mind. No matter how much anyone tries to explain it, the reality is that if you truly wanted to understand you'd need to challenge yourself.

As for Hitler and Stalin, it isn't like they were just born with blood on their hands. They both took paths to becoming mass murderers and they both made choices that took them down those paths, for various reasons. It is a combination of their natural personalities as well as their particular life experiences that led to them turning out the way they did, regardless of how you see them.