 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Who killed Anne Frank? |
| Charles Darwin |
|
1% |
[ 1 ] |
| Karl Marx |
|
4% |
[ 3 ] |
| The CEO of I.G. Farben |
|
1% |
[ 1 ] |
| Christians or some other mystic sort |
|
5% |
[ 4 ] |
| Some liberal guy |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Some conservative guy |
|
1% |
[ 1 ] |
| Adam Smith |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Other |
|
16% |
[ 11 ] |
| All of the above |
|
1% |
[ 1 ] |
| Hitler |
|
67% |
[ 45 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 67 |
|
| Author |
Message |
MissPickwickian
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Age: 16
Posts: 729
Location: Tennessee
|
 Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 10:47 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| codarac wrote: | | Odin wrote: | | The rise of the Nazis was the end result of the Romantic Nationalism that started in the early 1800s. |
And the Nazis are now a tool for the demonisation of nationalism by the new power elite in the Western world: the internationalists, who seek to abolish nation states via mass immigration, endless propaganda about “diversity”, and making sure (with support and pressure from Jewish groups) that the Holocaust gets shoved down the throats of schoolchildren, while these same schoolchildren are told next to nothing about the millions who were killed by Communism.
In fact, the Holocaust is so important to the powers-that-be that Holocaust revisionism, which is already a thought-crime in some countries, will soon be a thought-crime throughout the EU.
Why? What do these people have to hide? |
1. Internationalists are not nationalists. That's rhetorically impossible.
2. The Holocaust is misused, but perhaps less than you say. It is talked about so much because it represents everything embarrassing about human nature that needs to be fixed. Communism should be talked about more often, as it also represents everything embarrassing about human nature, but what are you going to do? It's used symbolically, not politically.
3. What, in your opinion, do "these people" have to hide? What are you implying here?
_________________
Talk nerdy to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Odin
Supreme Genius
Joined: Oct 13, 2006
Age: 22
Posts: 1878
Location: Moorhead, Minnesota, USA
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| codarac wrote: | | Odin wrote: | | The rise of the Nazis was the end result of the Romantic Nationalism that started in the early 1800s. |
And the Nazis are now a tool for the demonisation of nationalism by the new power elite in the Western world: the internationalists, who seek to abolish nation states via mass immigration, endless propaganda about “diversity”, and making sure (with support and pressure from Jewish groups) that the Holocaust gets shoved down the throats of schoolchildren, while these same schoolchildren are told next to nothing about the millions who were killed by Communism.
In fact, the Holocaust is so important to the powers-that-be that Holocaust revisionism, which is already a thought-crime in some countries, will soon be a thought-crime throughout the EU.
Why? What do these people have to hide? |
BS.
_________________
My Blog: http://selzshaven.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
Odin
Supreme Genius
Joined: Oct 13, 2006
Age: 22
Posts: 1878
Location: Moorhead, Minnesota, USA
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| iamnotaparakeet wrote: | | Darwin in an excuse sense |
No.
_________________
My Blog: http://selzshaven.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
SleepyDragon
La Irritatissima
Joined: May 29, 2007
Posts: 2953
Location: 2914: Amaroo ACT
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
To ask "Who killed Anne Frank?" is to understate the matter somewhat. Many people, due to their origin; political or religious convictions; or sexual orientation, had their lives destroyed as a result of Nazism.
- More than 60% of the Jews in Europe died through Nazi actions
- Occupied Poland: 3 million Christian deaths in addition to some 3 million Polish Jews
- 3.3 million Soviet POWs died in German custody
- Soviet civilian deaths: 5 million Russian, 3 million Ukrainian and 1.5 million Belarusian
- Between one-quarter and one-half of the Romani population (i.e. the Gypsies) killed, upwards of 220,000 people
- At least 75,000 mentally and physically disabled people executed
- People of African and Asian origin resident in Germany executed
- Black POWs (e.g. French colonial troops) executed
- Between 5,000 and 15,000 homosexuals in Germany and occupied territories castrated, imprisoned &/or killed
- Anti-Nazi political activists and captured WWII resistance fighters, many summarily executed
- Communists, socialists and anarchists in Germany and occupied territories detained or executed
- An estimated 80,000 to 200,000 Freemasons murdered
- Thousands of "enemy nationals," mostly diplomats, interned or executed
- Dissident Catholic and Protestant clergy persecuted or killed
- An estimated 2,000 Jehovah's Witnesses died in concentration camps
- Social "undesirables" – prostitutes, vagrants, alcoholics, drug addicts, open dissidents, pacifists, draft resisters, and common criminals – often imprisoned in concentration camps
- Rich persons holding seditious liberal views and members of women's rights groups targeted for persecution
To attempt to put the blame for this on one single person, or even a small cabal of people, seems disingenuous at best. |
|
| Back to top |
|
SleepyDragon
La Irritatissima
Joined: May 29, 2007
Posts: 2953
Location: 2914: Amaroo ACT
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Als die Nazis die Kommunisten holten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Kommunist.
Als sie die Sozialdemokraten einsperrten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Sozialdemokrat.
Als sie die Gewerkschafter holten,
habe ich nicht protestiert;
ich war ja kein Gewerkschafter.
Als sie die Juden holten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Jude.
Als sie mich holten,
gab es keinen mehr, der protestieren konnte.
Translation:
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
— attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kalister1
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 09, 2007
Posts: 2882
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| slowmutant wrote: | | I agree, and that's why it worries me when a guy talks about reading Mein Kampf as if it were a Book of the Month selection. Now there's the kind of reader who might seek out the diaries of imprisoned serial killers. Ignorance of certain things can actually be good for you. |
You are a moron.
_________________
Warghh!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
SleepyDragon
La Irritatissima
Joined: May 29, 2007
Posts: 2953
Location: 2914: Amaroo ACT
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In order to oppose something effectively, understanding it is essential. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kalister1
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 09, 2007
Posts: 2882
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was reading Mein Kampf last night. I don't like his manner of prose. I have it in my library, which is ever increasing. He seems to have been influenced by a number of different sources.
_________________
Warghh!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
SleepyDragon
La Irritatissima
Joined: May 29, 2007
Posts: 2953
Location: 2914: Amaroo ACT
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kalister1 wrote: | | I was reading Mein Kampf last night. I don't like his manner of prose. I have it in my library, which is ever increasing. He seems to have been influenced by a number of different sources. |
The OP's assertion, that "the ideology was a sponge that soaked up every possible influence," would appear to be true, then.  Hitler was an effective and persuasive public speaker, but perhaps his writing style didn't lend itself well to English translation. I can't say, since I've not read Mein Kampf, myself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kalister1
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 09, 2007
Posts: 2882
Location: California
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SleepyDragon wrote: | | Kalister1 wrote: | | I was reading Mein Kampf last night. I don't like his manner of prose. I have it in my library, which is ever increasing. He seems to have been influenced by a number of different sources. |
The OP's assertion, that "the ideology was a sponge that soaked up every possible influence," would appear to be true, then. Hitler was an effective and persuasive public speaker, but perhaps his writing style didn't lend itself well to English translation. I can't say, since I've not read Mein Kampf, myself. |
He sounds, distinctly German. I've read a lot of Germans, from Marx to Nietzsche, from Schopenhauer to Kant, from Goethe to now Hitler. I want to read Heideigger. Those Germans, they be crazy.
_________________
Warghh!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragtime
Legal Eagle Eye
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
Age: 29
Posts: 7392
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kalister1 wrote: | | SleepyDragon wrote: | | Kalister1 wrote: | | I was reading Mein Kampf last night. I don't like his manner of prose. I have it in my library, which is ever increasing. He seems to have been influenced by a number of different sources. |
The OP's assertion, that "the ideology was a sponge that soaked up every possible influence," would appear to be true, then. Hitler was an effective and persuasive public speaker, but perhaps his writing style didn't lend itself well to English translation. I can't say, since I've not read Mein Kampf, myself. |
He sounds, distinctly German. I've read a lot of Germans, from Marx to Nietzsche, from Schopenhauer to Kant, from Goethe to now Hitler. I want to read Heideigger. Those Germans, they be crazy. |
Ja. Try reading Hegel (if you haven't). Your head will lit'rally spin! 
(I like the way the British say "literally".)
He uses language formally and extremely technically. (Aspie?)
From The Phenomenology of the Mind:
| Quote: |
IN the kinds of certainty hitherto considered, the truth for consciousness is something other than consciousness itself. The conception, however, of this truth vanishes in the course of our experience of it. What the object immediately was in itself — whether mere being in sense-certainty, a concrete thing in perception, or force in the case of understanding — it turns out, in truth, not to be this really; but instead, this inherent nature (Ansich) proves to be a way in which it is for an other. The abstract conception of the object gives way before the actual concrete object, or the first immediate idea is cancelled in the course of experience. Mere certainty vanished in favour of the truth. There has now arisen, however, what was not established in the case of these previous relationships, viz. a certainty which is on a par with its truth, for the certainty is to itself its own object, and consciousness is to itself the truth. Otherness, no doubt, is also found there; consciousness, that is, makes a distinction; but what is distinguished is of such a kind that consciousness, at the same time, holds there is no distinction made. If we call the movement of knowledge conception, and knowledge, qua simple unity or Ego, the object, we see that not only for us [tracing the process], but likewise for knowledge itself, the object corresponds to the conception; or, if we put it in the other form and call conception what the object is in itself, while applying the term object to what the object is qua object or for an other, it is clear that being “in-itself” and being “for an other” are here the same. For the inherent being (Ansich) is consciousness; yet it is still just as much that for which an other (viz. what is “in-itself”) is. And it is for consciousness that the inherent nature (Ansich) of the object, and its “being for an other” are one and the same. Ego is the content of the relation, and itself the process of relating. It is Ego itself which is opposed to an other and, at the same time, reaches out beyond this other, which other is all the same taken to be only itself.
|
 Day-am!!!
_________________
Anyone who is interested in philosophy, the of meaning of life, and answers to our hardest questions, I suggest you check out the free, online mp3 archive of Ravi Zacharias at www.rzim.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
sartresue
Radical Aspergian
Joined: Dec 19, 2007
Posts: 1832
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ragtime wrote: | | Kalister1 wrote: | | SleepyDragon wrote: | | Kalister1 wrote: | | I was reading Mein Kampf last night. I don't like his manner of prose. I have it in my library, which is ever increasing. He seems to have been influenced by a number of different sources. |
The OP's assertion, that "the ideology was a sponge that soaked up every possible influence," would appear to be true, then. Hitler was an effective and persuasive public speaker, but perhaps his writing style didn't lend itself well to English translation. I can't say, since I've not read Mein Kampf, myself. |
He sounds, distinctly German. I've read a lot of Germans, from Marx to Nietzsche, from Schopenhauer to Kant, from Goethe to now Hitler. I want to read Heideigger. Those Germans, they be crazy. |
Ja. Try reading Hegel (if you haven't). Your head will lit'rally spin!
(I like the way the British say "literally".)
He uses language formally and extremely technically. (Aspie?)
From The Phenomenology of the Mind:
| Quote: |
IN the kinds of certainty hitherto considered, the truth for consciousness is something other than consciousness itself. The conception, however, of this truth vanishes in the course of our experience of it. What the object immediately was in itself — whether mere being in sense-certainty, a concrete thing in perception, or force in the case of understanding — it turns out, in truth, not to be this really; but instead, this inherent nature (Ansich) proves to be a way in which it is for an other. The abstract conception of the object gives way before the actual concrete object, or the first immediate idea is cancelled in the course of experience. Mere certainty vanished in favour of the truth. There has now arisen, however, what was not established in the case of these previous relationships, viz. a certainty which is on a par with its truth, for the certainty is to itself its own object, and consciousness is to itself the truth. Otherness, no doubt, is also found there; consciousness, that is, makes a distinction; but what is distinguished is of such a kind that consciousness, at the same time, holds there is no distinction made. If we call the movement of knowledge conception, and knowledge, qua simple unity or Ego, the object, we see that not only for us [tracing the process], but likewise for knowledge itself, the object corresponds to the conception; or, if we put it in the other form and call conception what the object is in itself, while applying the term object to what the object is qua object or for an other, it is clear that being “in-itself” and being “for an other” are here the same. For the inherent being (Ansich) is consciousness; yet it is still just as much that for which an other (viz. what is “in-itself”) is. And it is for consciousness that the inherent nature (Ansich) of the object, and its “being for an other” are one and the same. Ego is the content of the relation, and itself the process of relating. It is Ego itself which is opposed to an other and, at the same time, reaches out beyond this other, which other is all the same taken to be only itself.
|
Day-am!!! |
Hegelian nonsynthesis topic
Stream of discontinuous consciousness. The more nebulous he reads, the more erudite he appears to his scholarly readers. 
_________________
Radical Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind
Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory |
|
| Back to top |
|
WillThePerson
Tufted Titmouse
Joined: Apr 08, 2008
Age: 12
Posts: 37
|
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hitler caused the Holocaust.
No one else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
sojournertruth
Toucan
Joined: Dec 02, 2007
Posts: 252
|
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| He couldn't have done it all by himself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Quatermass
Why so serious?
Joined: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 16051
Location: Wreaking havoc in Gotham
|
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In my opinion, the genesis of the Holocaust goes back much further than Hitler. I think the first major pogroms occurred around the times of the First Crusade, by a bunch of retarded, power and money hungry coprocephalites who thought it was stupid to slaughter Muslims in the Holy Land (which it was) when the real killers of Christ lived amongst them (that was stupid as well).
Anti-semitism took a long road to the Holocaust. Anne Frank, in a sense, was killed by Hitler, but due to a chain of circumstances and events that lead to this moment.
I think that the Holocaust, in itself, was inevitable. Something had to have happened to shock mankind out of Genocide and race-superiority. Am I saying Hitler would inevitably do so? No. It may have been the Russians or the Italian fascists. If Mosley came to power in Britain, the British may have started the Holocaust, or the French. Now the French were very anti-Semitic, as anyone who has heard about the Dreyfus affair knows.
Xenophobia and anti-Semitism will never go away completely, especially given the widespread nature of Jews in society, and their rather heavy-handed tactics in creating and preserving Israel. And, unfortunately, something tells me that anti-Semitism will last as long as the Jews exist.
I chose 'other' on the poll, as so many events and people's decisions came to a point in which the industrialised killing of millions of people, not just Jews, but Gypsies, Slavic people, homosexuals and the disabled happened.
In truth, it was xenophobia that killed Anne Frank.
_________________
I believe whatever doesn't kill you simply makes you.....stranger. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
  |
Wrong Planet Forums Forum Index
-> Politics, Philosophy, and Religion |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next
|
| Page 6 of 10 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
