BBC video on Savage Peace

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
David
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:04 am

BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby David » Fri May 29, 2015 4:44 pm

The BBC is finally taking a cue from the alternative media and revealing some of the truth about allied atrocities committed against ethnic Germans after the war. However, that only the atrocities committed in eastern Europe are covered.

For those German hating Believers out there, you can enjoy the films of Germans being killed, raped or deported.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTMCE6ZBFL4

User avatar
NathanC
Regular Poster
Posts: 566
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:19 am

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby NathanC » Fri May 29, 2015 5:23 pm

Actually, contrary to David's assertions, "mainstream" sources have covered atrocities against Germans before. See for example, "Hitler's empire" by Pulitzer winner Mark Mazower. Or Antony Beevor's works, which got him attacked by the Russian media.

David seems to forget that most "believers" are Germans themselves. I'm re reading "Soldaten/Soldiers" by Harald Welzer and Sonke Nietzel and they don't certainly "hate" Germans. On the contrary, they urge their readers to look at the events from the perspective of those committing them and portrays them as complex human beings.
Certainly different from the caricature David has of his black beasts.

All in all, just more of David's hollow bluster. It reveals more about his own mental state than those of "believers".

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri May 29, 2015 5:49 pm

Spot on reply, Nathan. I am traveling but when back home later today will post a link to a similar bit of deceit attempted by been-there - which also exploded in his face. Thanks!
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri May 29, 2015 7:33 pm

Here is a somewhat comical, and blessedly short, thread from RODOH666 on aspects of this postwar history. The thread was begun and quickly abandoned by the chronology- and fact-challenged denier a-hole been-there. As Nathan has told David, this history is well known (secret Wikipedia entry on the Vertreibungen) - and denier-liars only {!#%@} it up royally when they try using it. Collectively, the numbskulls possess a limited repertoire - and we can see that they recycle the same failed claims time and again.

Which attempt is more forlorn - been-there's or David's?

Hats off to David! He is truly the gift that gives whenever he graces us with his presence here.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Fri May 29, 2015 8:41 pm

Well, maybe I'll get some kicks in the ass here,
But to state that those events are well known or even widely known is in my humble opinion an overstatement.

Of course, some works like Beevor's "The fall of Berlin" dedicates a lot of pages on that, although only on the first phase which took place during the war, what happened next is not really well known, as shown by the statistics on wiki: estimated number of victims? between 470.000 to 2.200.000! LOL.
We also had Alfred de Zaya much earlier who was the first to propose a estimate of the victims around 2 million. And some deniers have bubbled about it, you also had this Canadian writer who wrote some bad work on it.
And indeed, there is now a wiki entry, but it is not enough to make a subject well known.
No movies have been made on the subject, there is not even a chapter in any school book I know, and indeed those kind of documentary are quite rare.

As a matter of fact, the subject is not well known, nor is well known the soviets actions in the Baltic States whether it is during the first occupation (1940-1941) or the second (1944-etc).
If you have some bibliography on the subject, I would welcome it.

I always use as a proof of genocide the example the cases of family exterminated but 1 or 2 survivors...which I call genocidal proportion when considered family in the largest sense...including uncle, cousins, living in various places. I had an Italian friend who told me he was the sole survivor of a family of 27.

David is a joke of course, as it is not a Allies' policy, but the Soviet approach of ethnic cleansing and genocide. Not that the western allies did not commit their own crimes to some extend, but there were no policy behind it. And as a matter of fact, there was little they could do to prevent what took place in Soviet occupied Europe. But the Soviets did not killed only Germans, they hated the Poles as much, and of course the Baltic peole, they destroyed the foundation of Romania, Hundary, Bulgaria, etc.

He really should be ashamed for his last sentence. He is really a worthless piece of {!#%@}! (sorry)
David,
It happened that I am half German myself, and it happened that I had many relatives in Prussia. As such, I know how lucky I was to have a Grand Pa, and basically to exist. But there is no way I would use this suffering to justify others undeniable ones. Just to think that anyone could enjoy seeing people being killed should direct you to some clinic.
Normal people don't. But the images that just stroke you in this documentary, you just call them "hate-propaganda", a hoax or whatever when those victims are said to be Jews and not Germans.

Well just to say that the only instance I met such a family who was not Jewish, or a should say met a member of such a exterminated family, he was from Lettonia or Lituania (I forgot which one). You find such cases in what used to be Prussia, was well.

The BBC show tells it right away speaking of a "little known story", and little know it is. Those were also the sole case of victim which were not officially recongnized as such, they were not given any compensations, even after the fall of the Soviet Union, unlike many other. They guilt? Adolf Hitler was their leader.
Which one can turn upside down any way one likes, is nothing more than "collective punishment" which was the very same concept responsible for the Jewish genocide.

Now feel free to ask your relatives, neighbors, colleagues, etc what they know about the fate of the East Germans or the non-Jewish population of the Baltic States.
In the case of Prussia, it was no more no less that a genocide in all Lemkin's terms. And I dare to say, the least known in European history.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Fri May 29, 2015 10:18 pm

Fair enough. Here's my reasoning:

By 2015 this ethnic cleansing is no longer exactly shrouded in mystery, as indicated by the coverage in Mazower (a standard history) which Nathan mentioned. A bibliography is included in this collection of papers. I can't tell you how I came to know of this subject - it is covered often enough that I somewhere, somehow absorbed it along the way. My bookmarks for it include recent (since 2010) pieces in Spiegel Online, HuffPo (RM Douglas piece on largest forced migration in history, carried out by violence and terror), The Nation, The Economist, The World Fund, RM Douglas's 2012 book and Keith Lowe's book from the same year, a number of papers on academia.edu and similar sites, a JSTOR review of Schieder's "notorious" document collection, Bryant's book Prague in Black (for last chapter IIRC), etc.

A theme in this spate of recent studies is the long period of inattention to these events - indeed because they didn't fit into the Allies' postwar vision of their victory and accomplishments; my point is better (more fully) stated not that "everyone knows" about this but 1) that the topic has been in the popular media in the past half dozen or so years, perhaps prompted by 2) the impact of genocide studies including recent academic work on the events - also 3) with the recent "mainstream" attention to these expulsions, historians don't need disingenuous and inaccurate posts from deniers to become aware of the Vertreibungen. (I don't mean anything different from your statement that "the images that just stroke you in this documentary, you just call them 'hate-propaganda', a hoax or whatever when those victims are said to be Jews and not Germans.") Contrary to what been-there and David try putting over, it is good, "mainstream" historical work that has led to significant attention to the expulsions of Germans from parts of "eastern" Europe postwar.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Sat May 30, 2015 12:34 am

Well, I should have started with my last paragraph which I addressed to David, and the kind. And I have not noticed Been-there input. Not that I needed it. Now, it was an outburst, and in my opinion he just crossed a line.
Of course, I could have added much more silly thing about the program which I actually watched, like, why do you believe those Lie-Witnesses, where are the graves, 2000.000 Germans in a couple a years? Should we search for 1000 mass graves of 2000, 10.000 of 200, etc. ?
But I get tired of that kind of games.
And sometimes, I feel that even among "our ranks" (I am not targeting you by saying that) things have to be put straight. But the simple fact that most deniers are over their heads, does not mean that every arguments that are opposed to them are correct.
I am sure that no matter what, about 90% of the people in western countries are absolutely sure that the bombing campaign led by the RAF over Germany was a retaliation, just to take the obvious. Recently, it is almost if Nessie on Rodoh did not try to describe Stalin USSR as a peaceful nation which posed no military threats to no one, the list is longer, I am afraid. And again, if you have a scholar work about the first occupation of the Baltic States, I am interested. Not that they not might be some, but the bibliography available is quite thin.

I am fully aware that the subject has been treated, of course, the contrary would have been a shame.
Although I have great difficulties finding works about the soviet occupation (40-41) of the Baltic States and Poland, outside those States national publications.

So of course, I was not even suggesting that Historians were not aware of what in my opinion is more than just "'expulsions", especially in the case of Prussia. But the broad public do not, and hopefully it is gonna change, and some awareness will take place.
But it would be foolish to defend the point of view that those massacres, mass murders, rapes, cultural destructions, and even civilization destructions (Again I am thinking of Prussia, here) have been treated and taught at the same level as other genocides.

And unfortunately, there is this tendency to well...you know...adopting a kind of denier's attitude and justifying or exonerating those events, because Germany was Nazi, so the Germans were all Nazi and why bother where they were living, for how long there were living there, and to conclude, they got what they deserved.
Personally, I don't accept that.

All kind of thoughts that would lead to some kind of collective "Guilt"' which then would allow a collective "Punishment" should be fought and addressed the same way as we basically do when it comes of a supposed "Jewish guilt" which would have justified the collective punishments - genocide - they have been through.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat May 30, 2015 12:47 am

Ah, I thought you were asking for books about the postwar expulsions of Germans from the eastern countries. No?
And again, if you have a scholar work about the first occupation of the Baltic States, I am interested. Not that they not might be some, but the bibliography available is quite thin.
Not sure I follow - do you mean secondary literature on the Soviet occupation under the Non-Aggression Pact? What I gave you was on the topic of the OP, the postwar period, not pre-Barbarossa war years. If so, then there is a lot of literature on this in the Baltics, especially in Lithuania. Scholarship and polemics concerning the Prague declaration of 2008 - equating Nazi and Soviet occupations (Communist crimes “must inform all European minds to the same extent” as Nazi crimes) - are intense, e.g., what the NY Times has called "the suffering Olympics" around the concept of double genocide, the European Parliament's anti-obfuscation declaration in 2012, the activism of Dovid Katz against Ronaldas Račinskas and the so-called “red-brown commission” in Lithuania, etc. This is lively debate generating a lot of material (e.g., Defending History website). But as to books, damned if I can provide a bibliography but here are some I think I am recalling correctly (I'm sure there are others, as discussion of the fallout of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact is standard, I can't dredge up all the sources in which I've read about this) - the titles below vary from coverage woven into a larger narrative to sections or a chapter or two on the Soviet occupation to full books focused on the subject:

- Timothy Snyder, Bloodlands: Europe between Hitler and Stalin
- Karen Sutton, The Massacre of the Jews of Lithuania
- Pritt Buttar, Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II
- Andrew Ezergailis, The Holocaust in Latvia, 1941-1944: the missing center
- Dina Porat, The Fall of a Sparrow: The Life and Times of Abba Kovner (IIRC a full chapter in this biography, from pov of Jewish youth activists)
- Dov Levin, The Lesser of Two Evils: Eastern European Jewry under Soviet Rule 1939-1941 (IIRC including also a lot on Poland)
- Robert Van Voren, Undigested Past: The Holocaust in Lithuania (brief)

I also see cited the following works Johan Hiden & Patrick Salmon, The Baltic Nations and Europe; Valdis Lumans, Latvia in World War II; Andrews Plakans, Experiencing Totalitarianism: The Invasion and Occupation of Latvia by the USSR and Nazi Germany 1939–1991.

Your last two paragraphs detect a risk or tendency of denial of the history of the postwar expulsions. To be clear, I did not, do not, will not, have not in the least, in anything I've posted on the topic of the postwar expulsions, justified or exonerated them in any way. Nothing I've written even suggests such a risk or tendency. Quite the contrary. My comments have uniformly and explicitly focused on denier double standards. I don't want to speak for Nathan - but I read his post as making a similar point and as taking a very critical view of the Vertreibungen.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat May 30, 2015 3:57 pm

This article discusses a study of atrocities alleged to have been committed by Allied troops (American, British, Canadian, and French) against German women after the war; unlike the other topics discussed in this thread, I think it is news. That is partly because discussion of sexual violence in the postwar has been dominated by what troops of the Red Army did in the eastern areas of Germany and partly because of the power of the pretensions of the "Greatest Generation" and all that goes with such heroic imagery.

Gebhardt paints a picture that will unsettle people wed to American exceptionalism and/or an unrealistic view of Allied virtue. Gebhardt's methods and conclusions, however, have been questioned. The Spiegel Online article questiong her study, however, comments favorably on the critical spirit animating it,
many historians are taking a more critical look at the behavior of the American military during the days immediately preceding and following the end of World War II in Germany. Studies in recent years have shed light on incidents involving GIs plundering churches, murdering Italian civilians, killing German prisoners of war and raping women, even as they advanced across France.
I view the emergence of this critical perspective and line of inquiry as a very positive development (see, e.g., David M Kennedy's Freedom From Fear for a study in this vein from over a decade ago). Even if, as Spiegel Online argues, Gebhardt overstates the participation of troops of the western Allies in mass sexual violence against German women, the discussion itself is an important corrective to "onwards and upwards" views of the Allied war effort, particularly, as Spiegel Online has it, views giving an unrealistic or idealized portrait of the Americans and, thereby, of the war and its aftermath.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Nessie
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2565
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Nessie » Sat May 30, 2015 7:23 pm

It was brutal to watch, but compelling. I cringed at how badly German civilians were treated but found myself thinking "you reap what you sow". Yes I know revenge is wrong, but it is so understandable in the context of WWII and the horrors inflicted by the Nazis. Revenge should be seen as a deterrent against those who seek to inflict pain and suffering.

The conclusion at the very end I was not sure about. It claimed the largest ethnic cleansing of the war was Germans being sent back to Germany. I was not sure if that was just Germans who were being moved out of land seized during Nazi invasions. Or Germans who had ended up in non German countries when borders were drawn after WWI. Or Germans who had always lived out with Germany's borders. Or a combination or all of that.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Sat May 30, 2015 9:44 pm

God just punished me as he erased a much too long post in two clicks... :frown:

But Nessie, thanks as your last remarks was somehow the core of what I was writing about.
The "You reap what you sow" is the ultimate justification for Genocide and other forms of collective punishments. And believe it or not, Hitler and the Nazis did not invent the concepts of Genocide and collective punishments. This logic could create never ending circles of retaliations.
Anyway, those were the words of the Turks finally expelling the Greeks of Anatolia and Smyrna, the words of Russian, Bulgarians or Romanians expulsing their Turks, the words of the Greeks expelling the Turks from Thessalonica, the words of the Russians expelling the Turks of Crimea...Insisting that the term "expulsions" here was more or less the same of the "expulsion" of the Germans.
Those were also the words of the people from the Baltic States and the Ukraine when they started their own massive killings of Jews, when they participated in round up, denunciations, so that the EG over there could be efficient.
Those were also the words of Goebbels when he first learned the fate of the Polish Jews.

Those words have been used after Hitler's death, in so many occasions, that it would take pages to give them all.
But even after 9/11 those words were said by some while watching the world trade center towers tumbling down.

And basically, this is what I wrote in the erased part of my post, those massacres are still looked through those eyes that somehow, it was only a consequences of Nazi previous actions. While not being completely untrue, it is still a shortcut. Of course, it can explained some situations that took place in Poland, for example, but this cannot be duplicated for the Germans from Romania for example. It also does not explain the high death toll of the German refugees that escaped to Denmark. Scientifically, it is a clear overuse of the empirical "causes and effects" theory.

In Eastern Europe occupied by the Soviets, if the Germans were the obvious and most visible victims, they were far from being the sole. Stalin used the infamous Potsdam conference to liquidate all kind of people by assimilating them to the Germans. This is essentially true when they entered old fashioned kingdoms like Romania, Bulgaria, or even Hungary. The Russians hated the Poles as much as the Germans did.

My first inquiry concerned a eventual bibliography about what happened in the Baltic States between 1940 and 1941...As I said in a previous post, the Lithuanians - the non Jewish part - paid a heavy price as it is said that almost 30% of the population have been deported (and never to return)...Do they also reap what they have sawn?

As for your last question, indeed those were almost only "Volksdeutschen" as before 1918, all the region were under an imperial regime, German "colonies" were living in Romania, Russia, etc. for centuries. And this also an forgotten story - that is how those German minorities were also victims of the craziness of Himmler. But that is another story. Also as I said, some of them chose to follow him through the SS, but again that is only some of them.

Anyway, your reaction is really what I wanted to pointed out. that is "they reap what they have sown". This is why most of them are even today second hand victims, even though the logic could be used to justify any kind of genocide or massacres in the future.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sat May 30, 2015 10:07 pm

>> My first inquiry concerned a eventual bibliography about what happened in the Baltic States between 1940 and 1941...

Posted above, you saw that, right?

>> As I said in a previous post, the Lithuanians - the non Jewish part - paid a heavy price as it is said that almost 30% of the population have been deported (and never to return)...Do they also reap what they have sawn?

Well, the Jewish part in the first instance, supposedly for the Soviet occupation. Which is the doubly {!#%@} part of the "reap what you sow" proposition - it also targets people who did no such sowing - and in the case of the zydokomuna "reply" in the Baltics, largely targeted people who were also victims of the sowers.

But there is much more at play here (nationalism, impulses toward ethnic homogeneity, conquest, economic and political considerations) than tit for tat.

My difficulty following your arguments here, Balsamo, came from the fact that until Nessie posted, no one made any such tit for tat argument - AND the OP was focused on specific postwar events. Your last post makes your point clearer . . . I myself would not explain or excuse the postwar expulsions of ethnic Germans neatly and simply on the grounds of, well, of course, you know, the Nazis . . . especially since Benes was proposing ethnic separation since about the time of the establishment of the Czechoslovakian state (1918), the "idea" not coming up at Potsdam and not being in reply to the Nazis and their depredations.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Sun May 31, 2015 1:14 am

Statmec said:

My difficulty following your arguments here, Balsamo, came from the fact that until Nessie posted, no one made any such tit for tat argument - AND the OP was focused on specific postwar events. Your last post makes your point clearer . . . I myself would not explain or excuse the postwar expulsions of ethnic Germans neatly and simply on the grounds of, well, of course, you know, the Nazis . . . especially since Benes was proposing ethnic separation since about the time of the establishment of the Czechoslovakian state (1918), the "idea" not coming up at Potsdam and not being in reply to the Nazis and their depredations.

:lol:
I can understand that.

My original post was quite longer, actually. And I don't know what happened, but two clicks later, all was wiped out.

Essentially, I was explaining that i did not really reacted to your posts - that is NathanC and yours - as you were right in your replies to David most insane post so far...the kind I don't forgive - even if I am a very easy going nature.

I had this discussion with a French about the not to be talked subject - France, the war, de Gaulle, Pétain, etc - and - as usual - ignorance added to bad faith, showed me another aspect of the famous "double standard". And that certainly had some influence on my posts (sorry for that)
We all know that it is almost a natural attribution of Deniers, but the fact that those overused it, does not mean that the tendency to use double standard only exists within "Revisionists circles".

As you might remember, as i might have said it in a couple of post, i fell into the Holocaust by surprise when i was working - that was a couple of time ago - on the minorities and nationalist problems in the Balkans. This is how I know Mazower's works...But clearly he is not a best seller.
Beevor sells much more, and he deserves it, even though he is a kind of Ken Follet type of Historian, he does a great job in making History accessible and "enjoyable". But it is important to remember that those kind of mass killings and collective persecutions did take place before Hitler, and that they took place, after Hitler, and will take place in areas where no Hitler could be used as a scope. What the Soviets did in Prussia, they would have done it even without Nazi precedents, and revenge only is more an aggravating factor than a cause. Something that is clearly not understood outside "professional" circles.

My point being that double standard is everywhere to be found. Before and after Hitler's times, i dare to say that it is part of history and even more of political sciences, nevertheless, my point was that Genocides should be studied for what they are, and not through the scope of causes and consequences.

My opinion being at that stage that it is important that the broad people not only recall and have the basic knowledge about the Holocaust, but that the same should be pursue with other important genocides and massacres, not just the fashionable ones.
Today, we are witnesses, at least in Europe; with yet another example of silliness, that is the Armenian Genocide...Seems to be fashion, today. Polictics, journalists are all over the place, up to the European Parliament. Recognition and mourning are the key words, "please, knee and pray"...Although i am pretty sure that 90% of them could give only ONE NAME of a victim or a murderer, nor the when how why of course...But here is the thing, the numbers of deaths have been written down, 1.5 million, so just "Knee and pray".
As soon as Yesterday an Belgian elected MP has been kicked out of all her position and political jobs because she could not accept to consider what happened to the Armenians was a Genocide, while she never denied massacres en masse...Bye, Bye anyway, although as i said, 99% of the Belgian population - and that includes the ones who ruined her life - know {!#%@} about this historical Event, they could not even define what the "Young Turks" stood for. The MP was from Turkish origins, but she was elected nevertheless!
I am not complaining about the fact that genocides are promoted, but about the fact that the promoters are just...well promoters who most of the time know nothing about what they are promoting. Just like the6 million, the 1.5 million of Armenians are now written in stone!
While the Germans should be satisfied with tolls like between 500.000 and 2.200.000 - a way to say we don't know, and we don't care, just like the others...Who could recall the YEAR of the genocide in Ruanda (without googling it)? Double standard ?

Then of course, we have the Genocides no one really cares about, and Prussia is being one of them. it is not even recognized as such.
A couple of years ago, we had this Habsburg from New York ( descent of the imperial family of Austria) who received as a gift around 40 million dollars, as a compensation for his supposed loss from Romania (including the famous Dracula Castle), as a condition to be admitted in the EU, the same with most if the eastern Aristocracy who got their castles, properties and city palace back in all EU eastern members, the only one missing? the ones who happened to be from German descent! Oh, and of course, there is the case of a Belgian Jewish friend of mine, whose family was spoiled during the occupation, well the family was not that rich, but still owned a couple of buildings which were confiscated and sold...he finally got official excuses and a compensation of...450 euros!!!!!
fDouble standard?

But you are right, i am kind of bringing the OP where it was not supposed to be, my mistake.

I am calmed down now, so thanks for your bibliography, there are some i don't know.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun May 31, 2015 11:42 am

thanks, that clarifies further where you've been coming from - btw I have no problem with your taking this beyond the OP, I was simply confused because I kept using the OP as a reference point - the OP is no winner, and, yes, absolutely, "mass killings and collective persecutions did take place before Hitler, and that they took place, after Hitler, and will take place in areas where no Hitler could be used"
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Nessie
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2565
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:41 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Nessie » Sun May 31, 2015 2:43 pm

I did not know about the scale of revenge attacks against German civilians as I was not aware just how many lived outwith the 1938 German border. I thought the revenge took place once the Allies had entered Germany. I was also under the impression revenge was primarily meted out against collaborators.
Audiophile, motorbiker and sceptic.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun May 31, 2015 3:13 pm

Nessie wrote:I did not know about the scale of revenge attacks against German civilians as I was not aware just how many lived outwith the 1938 German border. I thought the revenge took place once the Allies had entered Germany. I was also under the impression revenge was primarily meted out against collaborators.
As observed above, the expulsions - which were not purely revenge attacks but had deeper, even more troubling roots - have been covered in many books on the war and postwar. For the ethnic/national violence pre-WWII, Bloxham's discussion (I think Balsamo will agree) is very strong.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Sun May 31, 2015 10:21 pm

Nessie wrote:I did not know about the scale of revenge attacks against German civilians as I was not aware just how many lived outwith the 1938 German border. I thought the revenge took place once the Allies had entered Germany. I was also under the impression revenge was primarily meted out against collaborators.


Nessie, here is a map showing the German population in central and eastern Europe from a wiki page:

Image

and another more detailed including Russia:

Image

On the right of the map outlined is the Republic of the German of the Volga. Those were invited to settle there and colonize the place by Tsarina Catherine II who was German. Those region were only recently conquered over the Ottomans, and there just was enough Russian peasants to be sent there. Those Germans were given many advantages and privileges, at a point it became an autonomus oblast, and a Soviet republic after the revolution. During the XIX century the Tsars attempted to take most privileges (exemption from military duties) back, and to Russify them which initiate a first emigration movement, mostly to the USA. Their fate will change in 1941.

The same logic is to be found for the Germans of Krimea and the Black see. Newly acquired territories and need for settlers. They enjoyed the same privileges as the above. Fate change in 1941.

In Bessarabia, the story is quite the same, Russian expansion at the cost of the Ottomans, need for colonization. Those Germans came western Germany (Schwaben), right after the Napoleon wars. Those were subject to a transfer agreement to be found in the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact, and were the ones (140.000) chosen to colonize the newly acquired territories in Poland, by the will of both the Nazis and Stalin!

The Germans of Romania are the most ancient to have settled there. Some goes up to the middle age and were brought them due to their skills much needed. Some are more recent, as those brought by the Habsburg when they conquered territories from the Ottomans (mid XVIII).
Before the war there were around 800.000 Germans living the Romania.

And so the story goes...In Slovakia and in the Carpathians, the German presence goes back to the XIth century because of their mining skills.

As you can see on the map, Himmler idea was to bring will the lilac spots from the South to the region between the Warthegau and Krimea, not on a voluntary basis of course. Some transfers were more efficient, when cooperation was available (Bessarabia) or when the context became tense and dangereous (Yougoslavia)...But all in all, Himmler achievements can be considered as poor.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Sun May 31, 2015 11:16 pm

nice, Balsamo, thanks
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28320
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Jun 01, 2015 12:10 am

Balsamo wrote:...here is a map showing the German population in central and eastern Europe from a wiki page
Considering the German people were pushing down onto Rome 1600 years ago, it's not surprising Europe is full of mobile Germans. I went visiting Hanseatic league ports and "I got the vibe" the Germanic expansion into Europe, back then, had simply changed to that of commerce.
:D

I wonder sometimes. Imagine if 1920's political socialism "went the other way" and decided to win the world over with subsidised cheap fridges, subsidised better chemicals, high volume cheap BMWs and legal foreign corporate takeovers. The "war" would have been fought through TV advertisements on late 1940's TV sets around the world.
:D

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4624
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Jun 01, 2015 4:48 am

Call me an {!#%@}, call me a cynic, but I have no problem with chickens coming home to roost. It's not like they suffered more than any other nationality in the war, most of whom were assaulted by them.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4624
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Jun 01, 2015 5:19 am

as for this "unknown" BS: anyone who cares to look and research will find out about these issues. The Soviet occupation policy in the Baltics for instance, is widely known.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jun 01, 2015 10:35 am

Indeed, all it takes is a little effort reading a few standard books - and then, if interested, pursuing some specialist literature. In the case of the Baltics, the June 1941 deportations to the Soviet east, in Lithuania blamed on the Jews but including Jewish deportees, became a stock charge of Lithuanian anti-Semites.

On chickens and their roosts, sure, some of the ethnic Germans made out, so to speak, under the Third Reich's occupation, but in my view the Germans living in the east were mostly cynically exploited by the Nazis. Aly's book Final Solution and others show how many of those "brought home to the Reich" themselves wound up stuck in ill-prepared camps, etc. IMO their situation during the war - taken as a whole - falls into the grey zone; some individuals, of course, built up resumes richly deserving of punishment, but that doesn't warrant visiting such punishment on the ethnic Germans as a whole. In addition to which, as I've noted, the expulsions had multiple sources, e.g., Benes was pushing an ethnic cleansing agenda during the interwar years, not a policy of retribution before the fact.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Mon Jun 01, 2015 3:23 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:Call me an {!#%@}, call me a cynic, but I have no problem with chickens coming home to roost. It's not like they suffered more than any other nationality in the war, most of whom were assaulted by them.


Which is a similar reaction to Nessie's, only tougher.
And that just confirms the double standards most of the people treated the massacres compared to others.

There is no gratuitous genocide, contrary to what Lispstadt tends to believe.
In others times, there would have been forum with different orientation, and topics like " Refuting the notion of Volksdeutschen = SS murderers" ;)

Secondly, both reactions also illustrates the little knowledge - don't take it badly - you both had/have on the subject, which is of course the second point.

Believe it or not, if one succumbs to the temptation of justifying one genocide - because in some cases, it was a genocide - then all the genocide are potentially justifiable. After all, the Herero did revolt against the colonialist, used actions of violence, and were said to be a pain the ass to other peacefull tribes in the Region.

This is not a German:
[img]http://idata.over-blog.com/4/06/12/34/1430695977-copie-1.jpg
[/img]

Even the Armenians can be described as a revolutionary people, they allied the Young turks to overthrown the Sultan, and then they got into a dispute. The problem took proportion during WW1 as the Armenians living in Russian territories were serving the Russian army, etc.

It is not that the "White man" has a monopoly on Genocide...The Zulu when expanding south into today's south Afrika used to annihilate all traces of enemies tribes, until they met the dutch.

In Haiti, Dessalines killed ALL remaining white population...100% of them. But those were white colinialists so they deserved it as well.

And we could keep the journey through the history of genocidal actions going for pages.

The question is about the notion of "collective punishment" and the theories which is based on. If one accepts the concept of collective punishment in some case but condemn it as criminal in other, this is a double standard. And double standards are unscientific in a sense that its use force the one who adopted it to stick to it indefinitely...until something called "Bad faith" becomes too obvious.

Regarding the Jewish genocide, well Been-there has pages and pages of so-called justifications, which were already to be found during the Dreyfuss case in France, and of course in any Anti-Semitic works even before Hitler was elected. " The Jews did too much arms to France" was a sentence you could find everywhere during the occupation. What I want to stress out is that it is a never-ending circle.

A recent study - from I don't know which NGO - estimates that during the last 20 years, the American policy in Irak is responsible for the death of more than 1 million people, should we then conclude that any blind terrorist attack like the 9/11 is somehow justified? Guess what, many in the Muslim world do think so.

Should - sorry Mathew - all Australians be held responsible for the past suffering of the Natives?

Point is - in this case - that very few criminal actions can be attributed to Volksdeutschen let say in the Volga, Romania, Slovakia, Bessarabia, the Carpathians, etc. In some case they did participate, essentially in Poland, but even then it concerned only 10% of the population. They were also victims of Himmler craziness, sometimes forced to volunteer in SS unit - as the famous "malgre nous" in Alsace-Lorraine, although some did volunteer freely. The Germans of Bessarabia did not ask anything to no one, they were just victims of a deal between two criminal regimes.

Now I am not calling you an "{!#%@}" or "cynic", but I take your statement as a "passionate one", and not a "thought through" one... ;)

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jun 01, 2015 3:45 pm

another good post, Balsamo, and let's not get into the American Indians or my blood pressure will become a problem . . .
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Mon Jun 01, 2015 4:36 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:another good post, Balsamo, and let's not get into the American Indians or my blood pressure will become a problem . . .


Which tribe should we start with?
North, Central or South America first ?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4624
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Jun 01, 2015 4:37 pm

You are absolutely right Re: the Volksdeutschen. I was assuming that David was referring to actions carried out by the Red Army In Germany itself, as well as the strategic bombing campaign.

I should know re Native genocides. My country has been far from kind to our Aboriginal inhabitants.

What I should have said was this: They drew first blood and most supported it. The push for Lebensraum would have resulted in the enslavement of most of eastern Europe and the destruction of centuries old civilizations. Had the Germans won the war in the east they would have blown Mao out of the water as pertains to death tolls. It would have been nothing short of Armageddon.

Add that to the occupation policies characterized by brutality and callousness towards the local population and what happened next is understandable if in no way justifiable.

Think of this: A soviet soldier finds himself in Germany,he probably has no education but he knows that he is considered a subhuman, he may have lost family due to occupation, perhaps in terrible deaths. He has seen massacre victims, entire towns destroyed, suffering, privations. In Poland he might have passed through the remains of the death factories and saw what Nazism was really all about. He may have partaken in the liberation of concentration camps, including Sachenhausen, where most of the prisoners were Russian POW's and most did not survive. Driven insane by grief and rage, reduced to a base state of elemental savagery by years of brutal fighting and suicidal tactics, he finds himself doing things he could not have imagined himself doing just a few years before.

None of that is right or good. But context is important when studying the atrocities.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Mon Jun 01, 2015 7:28 pm

Jeff wrote:
Think of this: A soviet soldier finds himself in Germany,he probably has no education but he knows that he is considered a subhuman, he may have lost family due to occupation, perhaps in terrible deaths. He has seen massacre victims, entire towns destroyed, suffering, privations. In Poland he might have passed through the remains of the death factories and saw what Nazism was really all about. He may have partaken in the liberation of concentration camps, including Sachenhausen, where most of the prisoners were Russian POW's and most did not survive. Driven insane by grief and rage, reduced to a base state of elemental savagery by years of brutal fighting and suicidal tactics, he finds himself doing things he could not have imagined himself doing just a few years before.


You raise a very good point as it is indeed at the core of individual and groups behavior. It is sadly an inevitable consequences of brutal and total wars. Many atrocities in the east do fall into this category, let's call it self-induced barbarity, on both sides.
But when it comes to genocides, a clear distinction has to be drawn between crimes which - as above - results of human nature and behavior, and crimes committed as a result of official policy.
And given the proportions that both types of crimes can take, it is sometime hard to make those essential distinctions when proceeding the analysis, especially in the context of a comparative approach.
Many atrocities - most of the time local and isolated ones - were provoked by this kind of situations you described, involving Men who would not have thought to be able to commit such crimes under normal circumstances - you say years before, it could have been only weeks - and the eastern theater of war kind of favor that behavior.

As Armagedon, I guess you refer to the General Ost-Plan, and you are right. Which can clearly be considered as a genocidal enterprise had it been applied. Himmler's whole projects had genocidal consequences - even outside the Holocaust. The same way, Stalin's projects had nothing to do with a illiterate Russian peasants armed with a guns. In both case, we are dealing with State plans or at least plans from bodies of State. Plans and projects that have been thought through.

The coexistence of both makes it difficult to distinguish what went on for example in Prussia.
Granted, Prussia was part of Germany, and the basic soviet soldier after 3 years of hell and sacrificed was expected to act as it did, especially since no clear measures were taken by the authorities to prevent such actions. In this case, things are confused between the Human behavior and a semi-official orders not to intervene and not to do anything about it.
But what took place after the spontaneous rapes and murders, that is the round up of the remaining population, their deportation in Russia (often a one way ticket), the destruction of everything that looked German, castle churches, along with the population, is a policy. The Soviet or Stalin's policy.

Now when one considers Prussia, the tendency is always to use the arguments which are valid to the first type of crimes and to duplicate them to some State "human behavior", as if Stalin and the Soviets let their army have a go in Prussia, BECAUSE Germany did the same thing in Russia.
As I said in my previous post, it is not necessarily untrue, but it is almost never enough.
As our Deniers love to assimilate the massacres of Jews in the Baltic States and the USSR as a war against Partisans. Well truth is there were unlawful partisan's activities, and it is also true that some partisans were Jews, but the addition of the two cannot explain why 95% of those shot by the EG were exclusively Jews. So it is clear for us that the situation was an opportunity and a pretext to kill as much Jews as possible, and just like in Yugoslavia, to temper the temptations of killing non-Jewish Russians in order not to favor more partisan activities.

States or bodies of State may use the human nature of its soldiers to pursue its political objectives. That is what Propaganda stands for.

The same logic might apply to the Soviet policy in Prussia.

And this distinction, I am trying to outline, is what makes the distcinction between a genocide and a massacres.
Hitler and Himmler had ideas about how the conquered territories had to be ruled, even if the Soviets were gentlemen soldiers - well they were not - but had they been, it would not have changed a thing, or only to some extents.
The reverse is also true, Stalin considered those territories - Baltic States, Poland, Prussia - as belonging rightfully to the USSR. And my belief is that even in the case that the Nazis had behaved like gentlemen, it would not have changes a thing, or only to some extent.
Prussia - which was almost a 1000 years old - had to disappear! Prussia was the last feudal state in the world, something that is not well known, but feudal servitude was only abolished there in 1918! Nevertheless, when Prince Alexander Dohna withdraw with his 300 carts long treck - as he took all his peasants with him - most of his "subjects" followed and escaped, All those who didn't died, the village of Schlobitten was obliterated.
What I want to point out, is that in such a society - even within Nazi Germany Prussia was a "Free land" - the only way to Sovietized the region was through genocidal methods.
Just like for the Nazi, the Jewry sometimes as old has to disappear one way or another, and ultimately through death!
Both actions responded to State logic, or bodies of States logic.

If we let ourselves understanding one policy and not the other, then comprehension becomes impossible.

Now if we forget Prussia for a moment, and take a look at the Kingdom of Bulgarie, the facts that the country never declared war to the USSR, had no real genocidal policy towards the Jews, it did it best and succeeded in saving most of the Bulgarian Jews, did not preserve the country to be put inside out by the Soviets. The same with Hungary or Romania, although those were at war with the USSR, Poland, although at war with Germany was not treated more gently.
So the cause and effect theory, so easy to find, does not apply.

Now as you mention the bombings over the German cities. Now of course, it was part of the war, and Hitler used it as well, and all the usual arguments I agree with.

But the mistake -although of course it has been promoted - is that the Aerial strategy was adopted again as some forms of retaliation.
Well I have tried to initiate a debate on this forum, but without success. But basically, although it sounds nice to our consciences, there is no cause and effects to be found either. Most State just don't behave like "humans" even though States are ruled by Humans, but States follow their best interests anytime they can.

My point being, that considered the position of Britain during most of the second world war, it would have used this strategy even if there were no Luftwaffe. Just like the USA - with its tremendous technologic advance- don't prevent itself from using their advanced weapons just because the enemy has just guns and horses. Mers el Kebir was not motivated by any bad action from the French fleet against the Royal Navy.

My conclusion, at this point, being that if one wants to confront those fools who are justifying crimes against humanity, genocides and other kind of war crimes, and bloody they do and double standards is basically their language, one has to stick with a neutral objectivity, and if one has the ambition to teach, then one must not teach solely the facts, but also the dynamics and the logics behind the actions. And that has to go through the admittance that a bunch of Czechs hanging a 6 years old German child have the same brain disorders and are under the same kind of evil influences than the Nazi killers had when they killed a 6 years old Czech.
All those criminals had their "Reasons", or reasons they were told and believed it, to act as they did, as painful as it is to admit it. Unfortunately, it has no frontiers, is not limited to such or such ideology, etc.

Sorry to have bothered...

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Jun 01, 2015 7:48 pm

Balsamo wrote:. . . Many atrocities in the east do fall into this category, let's call it self-induced barbarity, on both sides.
But when it comes to genocides, a clear distinction has to be drawn between crimes which - as above - results of human nature and behavior, and crimes committed as a result of official policy.
Agree, very much so, and also a question of leadership - how leaders deal with bottoms up genocidal actions (and impulses). Did officers and political leaders turn a blind eye, encourage, fail to step in, go wink-wink - for their own purposes? Did they allow (or egg on) bottoms up violence against people and populations because it helped further state goals? Or did they explain clearly what was permissible - and act accordingly (with punishments, etc as warranted)?

Balsamo wrote:Himmler's whole projects had genocidal consequences - even outside the Holocaust. The same way, Stalin's projects had nothing to do with a illiterate Russian peasants armed with a guns. In both case, we are dealing with State plans or at least plans from bodies of State. Plans and projects that have been thought through.
Agree, Nazi genocidal policies were broader than the Final Solution and the Holocaust. They included Poles, Russians, Romani people, and others: the only way that the Nazis understood realizing their ambitions in the East - and creating what they considered a state of security - was to eliminate populations in their way.

Balsamo wrote:As our Deniers love to assimilate the massacres of Jews in the Baltic States and the USSR as a war against Partisans. Well truth is there were unlawful partisan's activities, and it is also true that some partisans were Jews, but the addition of the two cannot explain why 95% of those shot by the EG were exclusively Jews. So it is clear for us that the situation was an opportunity and a pretext to kill as much Jews as possible, and just like in Yugoslavia, to temper the temptations of killing non-Jewish Russians in order not to favor more partisan activities.
Just as a matter of the history, AFAIK the partisan activity in the Baltics, of any consequence, emerged only after about 80% of the region's Jews had been murdered in fall 1941 . . . so, doubly, the "partisan" rationale is {!#%@}.

Balsamo wrote:But basically, although it sounds nice to our consciences, there is no cause and effects to be found either. Most State just don't behave like "humans" even though States are ruled by Humans, but States follow their best interests anytime they can.
A very important point, IMO.

Balsamo wrote:My point being, that considered the position of Britain during most of the second world war, it would have used this strategy even if there were no Luftwaffe. Just like the USA - with its tremendous technologic advance- don't prevent itself from using their advanced weapons just because the enemy has just guns and horses. Mers el Kebir was not motivated by any bad action from the French fleet against the Royal Navy.
As a thought experiment, consider US bombing campaigns in Indochina: they were for military purposes, not because the NLF or army of North Vietnam had done bad things. Some may disagree with me but I believe, likewise, 9/11 became a pretext - using a new version of the Gulf of Tonkin known as Hussein's supposed WMDs/nukes and his supposed role in the 9/11 attacks - for a war which Bush/Cheney wanted to have against Iraq for policy reasons - especially US geopolitical interests in the region.

Balsamo wrote:My conclusion, at this point, being that if one wants to confront those fools who are justifying crimes against humanity, genocides and other kind of war crimes, and bloody they do and double standards is basically their language, one has to stick with a neutral objectivity, and if one has the ambition to teach, then one must not teach solely the facts, but also the dynamics and the logics behind the actions. And that has to go through the admittance that a bunch of Czechs hanging a 6 years old German child have the same brain disorders and are under the same kind of evil influences than the Nazi killers had when they killed a 6 years old Czech.
All those criminals had their "Reasons", or reasons they were told and believed it, to act as they did, as painful as it is to admit it. Unfortunately, it has no frontiers, is not limited to such or such ideology, etc.

Agree. You are arguing, as I read this, for some form of a rule of (international) law.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4624
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Jun 01, 2015 8:18 pm

We mustn't forget that in many cases the actions of the Soviets were not condoned by Higher-ups. There were many cases where officers tried to control their men, often shooting many of them to stop the rampages.

Erich Hartmann, a Luftwaffe ace, witnessed a mass rape of German women while in captivity. He stated that the next morning, an officer arrived, identified those responsible and shot them while the whole unit was made to watch.

I was referring to GP Ost and also the Hunger plan, which was basically a racially motivated pre-colonial extermination. When it was all said and done, the remaining population was to be reduced to servitude and would be limited to a 4 grade education that would teach them to obey Germans. Large numbers would be deported and certain areas would be cleaned out entirely. Himmler was pushing for an even more radical solution: to ensure that no slavs would be living west of the urals at all. Judging by Hitler's comments on the issue, it appears that Himmler would have won out had the war gone the Germans way. Yikes....

So put yourself in the shoes of a peasant soldier. You have seen what Koch and his goons did, you may have lost your family to Dirlewanger. You see the piles of corpses of Soviet POWs and civilian slave laborers as you go westward. You put two and two together. It's inevitable that you go more than a bit insane when confronted by your nemesis in his home turf.

As for the expulsion policies from high above, that is a war crime that cannot be understood, only condemned. It belongs with the Betrayal of Warsaw and the destruction of Anti-Stalinist elements in eastern Europe as part of the great catalog of Stalinist crimes.

All I'm saying is that it's tough to feel emotional when you consider the scope of Nazi crimes or the pure evil of Nazi ideology. This isn't even an eye for an eye, it's more like a broken nose for an eye or something like that.

There is a German movie called Joy Division that deals rather heavily in these events. It's very ham-fisted and leers occasionally into a Goebbles-esque view of things, but It's proof that these events are far from Unknown.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Mon Jun 01, 2015 10:14 pm

Jeff said:

We mustn't forget that in many cases the actions of the Soviets were not condoned by Higher-ups. There were many cases where officers tried to control their men, often shooting many of them to stop the rampages.

Erich Hartmann, a Luftwaffe ace, witnessed a mass rape of German women while in captivity. He stated that the next morning, an officer arrived, identified those responsible and shot them while the whole unit was made to watch.


Except that an officer does not represent the Higher-ups. As a matter of fact, all the Russians were not barbarians, and there were also instances where whole regiments behaved correctly. I could share familial experiences which would shows that Russians could also behave really nicely, which allows me to write to you.
SO you are right, and in some cases, some instances like this can even be found among the Nazis, or at least the German army, and "thanks god, for that"... But again, all this belongs to the first category described above, and not State or bodies of State policies.

I was referring to GP Ost and also the Hunger plan, which was basically a racially motivated pre-colonial extermination. When it was all said and done, the remaining population was to be reduced to servitude and would be limited to a 4 grade education that would teach them to obey Germans. Large numbers would be deported and certain areas would be cleaned out entirely. Himmler was pushing for an even more radical solution: to ensure that no slavs would be living west of the urals at all. Judging by Hitler's comments on the issue, it appears that Himmler would have won out had the war gone the Germans way. Yikes....


I agree with that - with some little reserves with the Hunger plan that are not even worth discussing - and maybe the "pre-colonial" notion that I don't quite understand, as the whole plan was a purely colonial way. And I guess that they would have kept some Slavs as well they would have needed slaves.
As I like provocatively to point out, the colonial doctrine was based on two assertions:
the brutal ones which has been adopted and not only by the Germans, was the "right for a superior race to exploit an inferior one if that was in its interest", the second - more humane but also hypocrite - was "the right and the duty for a superior race to civilize inferior ones...basically for the same reason".
It is almost unconceivable today to imagine that France and Great Britain used to own more than a third of the earth and rule over half a billion humans, and the concept of colonialism is not that far from the concept of Lebensraum.

As StatMec would say, don't push me on the French colonial subject or my blood pressure will rise...And I really suffer of high blood pressure... :lol:

So put yourself in the shoes of a peasant soldier. You have seen what Koch and his goons did, you may have lost your family to Dirlewanger. You see the piles of corpses of Soviet POWs and civilian slave laborers as you go westward. You put two and two together. It's inevitable that you go more than a bit insane when confronted by your nemesis in his home turf.


Agree...This is why I refrain myself from judging individual actions - these should be left to God or appointed Judges - while Historians as well as Political scientists should focus on State's actions or mass behaviors, not specially judge them, but put them into perspectives. Eric Koch managed to appear crazy even for some fellow Nazi eyes...And yes, this is within the scope of Historians.
You are right on your conclusion.

All I'm saying is that it's tough to feel emotional when you consider the scope of Nazi crimes or the pure evil of Nazi ideology. This isn't even an eye for an eye, it's more like a broken nose for an eye or something like that
.

I assume you mean "NOT TO FEEL EMOTIONAL", and again I agree. And this was even one of my basis point. This can be a difficulty for Historians, and explains some of the bad works that have been produced on this tragedy, without calling for an international conspiracy. This could even be a subject for an essay, in some way. But I thing we all understand what you mean.
But those kind of emotion is to be found on both side of the track, as there is always two sides of a coin...I am not speaking about the Holocaust, saying that, but I guess that Iraqis must have some kind of hate toward the so called "international community", just to take this example.

Before the rise of nationalism, that is when Kings were fighting each others - and that was quite frequently, and sometimes very brutally (like the destruction of Heidelberg by Louis XIV (the sunny one), every treaty had a clause (provision) of forgiveness of what had happened before...Seems crazy today, but while it did not prevent further war, it prevented hatred between people. Nationalism does not allow that. And as a matter of facts, the secular hatred between France and Germany only appeared after Napoleon defeat, that is the rise of nationalism...which is basically the EVIL.

There is a German movie called Joy Division that deals rather heavily in these events. It's very ham-fisted and leers occasionally into a Goebbles-esque view of things, but It's proof that these events are far from Unknown.


:lol: Sorry, never heard of that one.
But in this perspective, you might want to watch " Unsere Mütter, unsere Väter "(our mothers, our fathers) which at least gives a another perspective to things. Very well played, and although it is a German movie, it is worth watching. ;)
Again, as usual in those cases, IT IS ONLY A MOVIE...So I would not even think to use it in a historical work.

Well I guess we got through this...

PS: just a small comment on the American Indians, maybe...just for our StatMec... or not... :D

PS: EDIT: Are you sure about the title of the Movie, Joy Division seems to be a rock band...

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4624
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Jun 01, 2015 10:44 pm

And a highly overrated rock band at that.

here is the movie http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy_Divisi ... 06_film%29

I tried to find an article/review En Francais for your benefit but was unsuccessful.

I disagree totally re Our Mothers, Our Fathers. That series, IMO was an extension of the "Clean Heer" campaign started by Erich von Manstein. It's portrayal of the AK was sickening and simplistic. In reality the Ak was a very complicated, divided organization with conflict between the far right nationalist units (presumably the ones depicted in the film) and the more center and left wing units who actually made a great effort to save Jews and document/report the goings on in the camps.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1735
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Balsamo » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:05 am

Hi and thanks for the link...

Well, I agree on the AK, but I never expect a movie to settle a Historical debate, I think that the only transgression - or so it was perceived anyway - was to highlight that the AK was not supporting the Soviets at all, and that the London Polish government was indeed anti-Semitic and anti-Bolshevik. But of course, it was a little more complicated that that.
What I like is the approach, which focus on a bunch of "Nobodies" taken away in the storm. IMHO, it at least manage to catch the spirit of those times.
But again, I also liked Schindler's list...much to the annoyance of StatMec... LOL
Anyway, that is getting a bit too far from the OP...

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28320
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:16 am

Jeff_36 wrote:And a highly overrated rock band at that.
How rude. However, I imagine a particular ex-editor of a rock magazine may agree with you, who occasionally posts here. cough cough

I believe the name Joy Division is from a novel and not from reality. I may be wrong. It was that weird time when the first wave of punk banks were ending but the next wave kept the "attention seeking names".
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4624
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:17 am

I just think Nazi crimes were so massive and unjustified so as to reduce any post war actions to irrelevancy. What goes around comes around. It doesen't make it right, but it makes it understandable.

As was said in one of my favorite films: "they drew first blood".

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4624
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:23 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:And a highly overrated rock band at that.
How rude. However, I imagine a particular ex-editor of a rock magazine may agree with you, who occasionally posts here. cough cough

I believe the name Joy Division is from a novel and not from reality. I may be wrong. It was that weird time when the first wave of punk banks were ending but the next wave kept the "attention seeking names".


IIRC PIL was getting started at this time as well. My father was a big first wave punk fan but the post-punk acts leave me cold...... I am much more inclined towards the previous generation of rock, Saxon, Zepp, Sabbath, Purple ect...

Also, I believe that "Joy Division" was a term for formations of Hitler Youth hastily slammed together in the final days of the war. In the film the main character was a member of such a formation. It is very heavy handed and dips into nazi apologia at points, which disturbed me a lot. It did not take into account the context that I mentioned either, which partially explains Soviet atrocities in Germany as the product of out-of control raging revenge-lust on part of many, many individual soldiers as opposed to a systematic policy.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:32 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:I believe the name Joy Division is from a novel and not from reality. I may be wrong.
Per Wikipedia,
To avoid confusion with the London punk band Warsaw Pakt, the band renamed themselves Joy Division in early 1978, borrowing their new name from the prostitution wing of a Nazi concentration camp mentioned in the 1955 novel House of Dolls.[13][17]
From The Guardian, in May, a re-run of an old interview with the band:
When everyone thinks of Joy Division they automatically think of this Nazi thing. Perhaps it’s because of your previous name (Warsaw). What have you to say about that?

Bernard: “We picked Warsaw simply because it is a very nothing sort of name. We didn’t wish to be called ‘the’ somebody.”

Rob Gretton: “Back to this Nazi thing. It’s good if people can jump to conclusions. I think that people can be very naive sometimes.”

Bernard: “People tend to take a radical viewpoint on everything, whereas if they would just think for a change they would see that it was absolutely nothing.”

Rob: “You wrote in your review that ‘Joy Division still persist in this Nazi-history chic’. What does that mean?”

It’s a feeling that circulates around your audience, plus the way you look on stage. (Incidentally, does Ian Curtis shout “Have you all forgotten Rudolph Hess?” at the start of the Joy Division track on the Electric Circus album?)

Rob: “They may look dark and mysterious on stage, but why do people connect that with the Nazis?”

Ian: “Everyone calls us Nazis.”

No, I didn’t say that you were Nazis. I said that you seemed to be interested in Nazi history.

They Walked In Line (Ian Curtis, 1978): “All dressed up in uniforms so fine, / they drank and killed to pass the time. / Wearing the shame of all their crime, / With measured steps they walked in line…”

Bernard: “Everyone says that, but compared to Jimmy Pursey, who was an out-and-out racist…”

Why?

Bernard: “Well, you don’t think so, that proves my point. Nobody can remember the beginning of Sham 69 and the things he said then. Now he tries to disconnect himself from his past. Still, his lyrics are great.” (General laughter).
I truly hated Joy Division. Even though they were fans of The Fall. I hated New Order, too - again, per Wiki:
Rob Gretton, the band's manager for over twenty years, is credited for having found the name "New Order" in an article in The Guardian entitled "The People's New Order of Kampuchea". The band adopted this name, despite its previous use for ex-Stooge Ron Asheton's band The New Order. The group states that the name New Order (as was also the case with "Joy Division") does not draw a direct line to Nazism or Fascism.[11]
Which seems a little, well, odd. To wit:
The Band's official story is that their manager, Rob Gretton had spotted a news article in the paper which spoke of the "The People's New Order of Kampuchea", and the phrase 'new order' caught his attention.

But this excerpt from a 1981 article in NME offers more insight:

The name New Order, which was obviously appropriate considering the circumstances, had been used before. As was pointed out earlier, the band were great Iggy Pop and the Stooges fans, and after guitarist Ron Asheton left the group he formed, in Los Angeles in 1975, a band called The New Order whose 1977 album sleeve contained a lot of Nazi paraphernalia. It is unlikely to the point of improbability that Joy Division were unaware of both the group and their album.

Though other names were put forth as possibilities (many as jokes: "Stevie and the JDs", "Sunshine Valley Dance Band", "The Eternal", etc.), the band kept returning to New Order. They realised that they would immediately be taken to task again as "Nazis", but decided that they liked the name and that was the only consideration..
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:44 am

Jeff_36 wrote:IIRC PIL was getting started at this time as well. My father was a big first wave punk fan but the post-punk acts leave me cold...... I am much more inclined towards . . .
Yes, PiL would have been around 1978-1979 - I think Joy Division became New Order, around 1980.

My favorite post-punk band was in a very different vein - the Gang of 4. Now, their name could not have had any political overtones, could it have?

Wire, the Au Pairs, Kleenex, the Embarrassment, Mission of Burma, Pere Ubu - all great bands that I still listen to. The Fall, well, punk, post-punk, MES's own thing: probably the band I've enjoyed most over the years. But, no, I didn't like the synth, dance post-punk stuff.

I always loved the band name Desperate Bicycles ("Remorse Code"), a more obscure post-punk band.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4624
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:46 am

EVERY TIME I SEE YOU FALLING I GET DOWN ON MY KNEES AND PRAY, I'M WAITING FOR THE FINAL MOMENT......

Now it's stuck in my head. Thanks guys.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21119
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:53 am

Ok I am officially meandering:

phpBB [video]


Back to mass murder . . .
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4624
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: BBC video on Savage Peace

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:56 am

Basically: Nazi Crimes and Intents> Allies Crimes and Intents, both in scale, intent, and ideological rationale.


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest