Hellworld Thread (2 Viewers)

Lili Marlene

FURIOUS
Supporter
Contributor
Thread starter
Joined
Oct 14, 2002
Messages
30,603
Solutions
3
Location
Way beyond the Rubicon
I suppose any attempt to make a chart like this is going to inevitably invite quibbling, but putting “deep state” up in the red zone, without any further context or surrounding, seems... unhelpful? simplistic? reductive?
I mean, remember "i work for the deep state and we are doing our best to undermine the current president" anonymous essay?

 

Cormcolash

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2002
Messages
23,178
Location
THIS IS SPARTA!!!
Website
geocities.com
How shadow are they really?
2_ITV-Archivejpgerson-King.jpg
 

flashback

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
8,442
Location
Trumpland
Interesting and also, like, wrong. They're not synonymous ... but "antisemitic" and "bad" are synonymous, and the chart maker is just clumsily saying "anyone who believes anything above this line is a bad person"
yeah, that was meant to be my point.
It's not that people start having suspicions about moon landings, and as a result suddenly concurrently start hating Jewish people.

There's a couple of things going on, one of these things is the domination of the narrative. Continually restating that it's Jewish people that are those who are on the receiving end of fringe group's hatred, you move the focus away from other groups. It's not Islamophobia, it's not misogyny, it's not treating POC like shit, etc, it's the Jewish people who are subject to this hatred. You see the same kind of thing with the numbers of people quoted as dying in German death camps, people usually quote the number of Jews killed as if the other half of those killed didn't matter quite as much.

The other thing that's going on is this attempt to modify the meaning of the word Antisemitic to just mean "generic lunatic", so it becomes a slur you can throw at people. Don't believe in the moon landings? Stupid anti-Semite! Once you kind of merge the meaning with "general stupid person" you can sling it about more. At that point you brand anyone you disagree with, for any reason, as an anti-Semite.
 

Lili Marlene

FURIOUS
Supporter
Contributor
Thread starter
Joined
Oct 14, 2002
Messages
30,603
Solutions
3
Location
Way beyond the Rubicon
Can I put "EU military hunting down refugees in polish forests and then moving them into internment camps under a state of emergency where press are banned" into hellworld thread?

 

taubstumm

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
4,584
Location
52° 30′ 41.69″ n., 13° 27′ 38.42″ e.
Website
www.kvt.red
You see the same kind of thing with the numbers of people quoted as dying in German death camps, people usually quote the number of Jews killed as if the other half of those killed didn't matter quite as much.

the point is more that among the people explicitly targeted by the nazis for extermination, the jews were not only the vast majority of the victims, but were also the intended target.

millions of soviet citizens went to camps, not because the nazis ardently wanted them dead specifically, but because they were, essentially, inconveniently located on the way between berlin and moscow and were suspected of being communists.

whereas the reason that the camps were ever built in the first place was to kill jews. so the reason to insist on the significance of the jewish experience is because they were the main targets.

I realise this is all a digression on a digression, but there is a reason why the historians go to the trouble of this singling-out
 

Cornu Ammonis

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
8,611
Solutions
1
Location
Dublin
Website
brainwashed.com
the point is more that among the people explicitly targeted by the nazis for extermination, the jews were not only the vast majority of the victims, but were also the intended target.

millions of soviet citizens went to camps, not because the nazis ardently wanted them dead specifically, but because they were, essentially, inconveniently located on the way between berlin and moscow and were suspected of being communists.

whereas the reason that the camps were ever built in the first place was to kill jews. so the reason to insist on the significance of the jewish experience is because they were the main targets.

I realise this is all a digression on a digression, but there is a reason why the historians go to the trouble of this singling-out
It’s worth remembering that the holocaust began not with the Jewish community but as an extension of the Nazi eugenics programme. In 1939, the Nazis moved from sterilising those with disabilities or other “undesirable” traits to murdering children under 3 - ostensibly placing the children into “care” and telling the parents they died of natural causes at a later date. In reality, they were murdered by overdose or being left to starve. To argue that the disabled were not an intended target is wilfully dismissive. I agree there was opportunistic mass murder but the holocaust was pervasive and more inclusive than the society that birthed it.

When the Nazis shifted gears to include adults in their genocide programme, they needed to increase their efficiency and potency of their execution methods by switching to gas. They disguised the gas chambers as showers at this point and the rest, as they say, is history. And none of this should be forgotten or glossed over by weight of numbers or what their ultimate goal might have been. The path to the holocaust is paved with the bones of the most vulnerable in any society.

Even Asperger, who has been championed as an Oscar Schindler-esque protector of the disabled, was a Nazi murderer - sending children to their deaths based on sitting down with them and their families, earning their trust and then using that to help sort the German population into grotesque keep or reject piles. Berg, the inventor of EEG (which he hoped to use to prove psychic powers existed), was worse and the medical establishment colluded with the Nazis to rid Germany of those deemed too infirm or ill to be kept alive.

Maybe this hits home more for me as under that regime I would almost certainly have been sterilised. Possibly my children too if I had had them by then. Then we would have probably been rounded up and sent to an early camp or medical centre to be murdered because economically Germany would be better off without having to care for us. They may have hated the Jews but the disabled were just figures on a balance sheet to them.
 

taubstumm

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
4,584
Location
52° 30′ 41.69″ n., 13° 27′ 38.42″ e.
Website
www.kvt.red
There’s a lot to say in response to what you’ve raised. it might be getting to maybe beyond messageboard-level chats.

When I say “intended target”, I mean that Hitler basically laid out a plan in Mein Kampf to try to kill every jewish person in Europe, and then he went and did it. This is the reason for the centrality of the jewish experience in the holocaust. but just to be clear, I’m not trying to invalidate, minimise, or relativise what happened that preceded that.

This is all in the context of almost unspeakably grim reality of that entire time, and, again, to be clear, it does not invalidate the fact that the nazis began with disabled people. (indeed, it also makes sense to go back a little further and consider the Herero genocide, which was basically the technical research phase that made the holocaust possible — and, politically, was an imperial project, not a nazi one).

I hope I’m being clear here; we all know that this is a subject that can get pretty fraught. Let me know if you think I’m being unclear, or unfair, or imprecise. I’m trying to make a fairly narrow point, which I know can be interpreted more broadly than intended. That’s not my intention.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Activity

Loading…

Support thumped.com

Support thumped.com and upgrade your account

Upgrade your account now to disable all ads... If we had any... Which we don't right now.

Upgrade now

Latest posts

Trending Threads

Latest threads

Top