Nazis and the Nature of Evil

[Mecha82]

Justified to the extent of portraying such people in a very negative light - they're thoroughly vile, but we're talking about the inability to recognise those we hate as fellow human beings - it's exactly what a lot of the people you hate do to justify their position, and probably believe it themselves. You claim that you've nothing in common but that's simply not true because you're thinking in a very similar manner, albeit with a more noble motivation.

Indeed. In history there are lot of cases of cruelty being justified by dehumanizing others. Crusaders did that do Muslims back in day as did Nazis for Jews, Slavic people and some others during WWII that they considered inferior just to name view cases of this. We should never forget that or that vile deeds done by one side aren't less vile than those done by other side. Just because Soviets did that doesn't wipe out fact that Nazis did it as well. But I guess it being done to Russians doesn't count for some reason just because Soviets did it as well to Germans.

[Yukaphile]

Because there's an agenda being pushed to sympathize with them, their "traumas," as if that somehow made it okay, and the stigmatization against white people paints a false narrative that it was only the Germans they did that to, rather than whole other ethnic populations including Holocaust victims. It also leads to an implication they deserved it simply for being weak enough to be brainwashed or being white. And this is hardly "my" paranoia like some might scoff it off as. This is a point of view being endorsed by web sites claiming to want to honor the victims, yet honors their attackers right alongside them, The New York Times, and Harvard. What does that tell you?

[Mecha82]

I don't get were you get this idea that there is some agenda. Just because some people might think some way that conflicts way you think doesn't make that agenda. This is problem in today's world were people want to label everything that they don't disagree with as something that sounds as negative as possible while not wanting to hear views of other people and even consider what others say. Besides what you just said gives impression that you think that only what German civilians suffered matters and what other civilians suffered doesn't. If I got wrong impression I hope that you correct that.

[Yukaphile]

My big problem is the hypocrisy, the double standards. They will only try to make you sympathize with the "war traumas" of the Soviets, yet what about the Japanese, huh? I mean, it's safe to say the war stresses were just as hard on them, yet do people try to get you to side with those stresses? Just because the average soldier was a man thrown into fighting a war he did not want to doesn't make it any less wrong, or the fact he would have been a molester and harasser at best even in civilian life given the way he was raised. I think it's complicated by the German leadership starting an unprovoked invasion, that makes people more inclined to wanna focus less on the fact they would've been the same in civilian life, just less exaggerated, and try and instead focus on the "war traumas." It's another way the winners write history, because we tend to focus on the pain of our victorious soldiers, but for my mind, that only applies to those who conduct themselves honorably. Those who don't already had problems they weren't dealing with. True war PTSD is having nightmares, triggers, and feeling trapped and helpless. Not exploiting a conflict and other people's suffering for personal gain. You won't look back with regret, you'll look back with glee. Assuming you bother to do so at all. Those who claim regret in a half-hearted way don't strike me as genuinely sorry.

[Mecha82]

You forget that Nazis pretty much started Holocaust before WWII started and plans for it were already laid down in well advance and they would had done same to everyone that they considered inferior if they had won war while also killing, torturing and raping during war. Does that sound like they only crime was starting unprovoked invasion? Maybe German civilians would had continued living in peace without knowing what Nazis were doing but that doesn't change fact that you are basically putting Nazis to pedestal while only blaming Soviets from same things. Do you hate Russians that much and love Germans that much that it makes you biased.

[Yukaphile]

No, I just hate blaming the victims. It still persists to this day. The leadership and the armed forces were certainly awful, but I think there was a lot of unfair racial hatred against the Germans even back then. They blamed them for WWI when from my understanding and my reading, every single country wanted to fight. And today all we see them as is being collectively guilty even though they were hardly any different from any other Western nation and the fact that they were potentially victims at all times if they said the wrong thing at the wrong time in the presence of the wrong person. No, I don't think they were the only ones who suffered, but there's always a filter of blame when discussing their victims, because people filter it through the benefit of hindsight and what we've been told over 70 years. That they were collectively guilty and sharing in the crimes of the government even if they weren't part of the government or the atrocities going on elsewhere at all. It's especially sickening when men would exploit camp prisoners that way. So it was hardly them. But when it comes to these specific people, there's just an aura of blame to it. It's also a big problem for the victims of the assault given their lifelong trauma was shoved to the side to make room for the Holocaust, mainly because there was overlap with Holocaust victims. And assault victims are already pressured by society to forgive the attacker, so this just put more pressure on them to make them think in terms of how badly their attackers had suffered, to get them to think they deserved it. I think it is very important to disconnect the actions of the Nazis from the Soviets, because it puts it through a filter of blame and ignores the personal choices they made, that nobody forced them to do.

[Yukaphile]

Another problem is how the Germans have apologized for their crimes. Putin and his government has not. The Japanese have, to an extent, apologized. It is entirely unfair the Germans need to keep apologizing and they do not. And hell, I'm American. Lots of my countrymen are guilty. If an apology would make somebody happy, I'd gladly give it.

[Yukaphile]

Anyway, things have gotten tense again lately, so I'm taking another break from the forums. Possibly longer this time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmPhaG1ud38

[Mecha82]

Sure but thing is Holocaust isn't only thing that Nazis did that targeted innocent people that didn't fit they ideal and Russian civilians also faced that. It's hypocritical to pretend that Nazis didn't do that to them or that it doesn't matter because they did and did it happen and it's not propaganda but historical fact. IIRC reason why Soviets did it to German civilians is because they saw it as revenge from what Nazis did to Russian civilians so while it was vile it doesn't nullify Nazi warcrimes. In war all sides commit those. It's sad nature of war so there is no point in setting blame on one side while pretending that other side is innocent. This is also why dehumanizing others is dangerous because it makes it seem like you can be cruel to others and do what ever you want to them without any problem.

Also if some government doesn't apologize something that happened 70 years ago it's problem with that government not wanting to do that. So really you should have issue with them not wanting to do that instead of ranting about how some how done that while others haven't and consider it unfair.

[Yukaphile]

Last post before my hiatus.

I think calling it "revenge" is another way to tie it to what the Nazis did. And their crimes have been discussed for seven decades. That's the only reason I feel no need to dwell on it. The crimes of the Soviets seems to have only recently been brought to light, given how they pretty much covered them up. I maintain those still would have been men like you see today who after a few drinks stick their hands down some woman's pants and think that's "flirting." Revenge implies they deserved it, but doing that to women and children for what someone else has done hundreds of miles away does not work on an individual level, only a collective level, when you will be the one carrying out said act and have to remember that for the rest of your life. That also ignores how it was many ethnic women too, and children, who can hardly be blamed for the actions of adults, as well as societal problems that combined with war hardships only add fuel to the fire, like heavy drinking. I do know the Nazis loved to coke up their soldiers, which explained their cruelty. It's another way the Soviets could take pleasure in their sadism while pretending it never happened, to get so drunk it'd feel justified or to black it all out. And look at the attitudes today. German government acts with maturity to their past crimes, which is noteworthy. Russia today just reacts with thin-skinned outrage and do not even teach it or honor their victims in the classrooms and museums and universities. And even when it is discussed it is always filtered through the "pain" of those guilty of said crimes. Why must we focus on "their pain" given they never faced international justice for said crimes and that they then went on to marry, have kids, and offer false apologies decades later? That's my thinking here. It has nothing to do with bias. I want to be as fair as possible. but filtering stuff like that through the "pain" of the guilty party and collectively blaming the victims for abstract reasons such as race or national background has all sorts of unfortunate implications.

But that's just my feeling. I hope I clarified that at least. See ya guys in a few weeks.