|
Post by Galadriel on Mar 9, 2009 15:00:02 GMT
2 % of the British youth thinks Auschwitz is a beer, 8 % thinks it's a neighbouring country of Germany, 2 % thinks it's about a religious festival and 1 % thinks it's the name of a bread... A study of 1.000 students between 11 and 16 gave that result. 60% of today's youth don't know anything about the Final solution or the Endlösung, when they were asked about it they had no idea what it was. 1/5 of the teenagers thought it was about the peace talks in the Middle East. It's a down right scandal! What do teachers talk about in history class these days? Hitler himself seems to be easier, 97% of the students could recognize his picture.
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Mar 9, 2009 15:38:26 GMT
I know what Auschitwz is but... what's "Final solution/the Endlösung"?
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Mar 9, 2009 16:19:48 GMT
I think 'Endlosung' needs translating. 'The Final Solution' was the Nazi answer to 'The Jewish Problem' - ie extermination.
If you think that's bad, Gal, try asking Brits about their OWN history. Most of them think Nelson is Nelson Mandela...
History teaching in Britain is a joke and has been for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Mar 9, 2009 19:24:50 GMT
How about Teachers are a joke?
As a whole the British Education system IIRC fell BEHIND the American one something like 2 years ago, and outside of its "Higher End" schools, as a whole is the worst in the top 22 countries in the world.
|
|
|
Post by Galadriel on Mar 9, 2009 20:53:41 GMT
Endlösung is what Elliot explained, it was in fact a genocide on the Jewish people. Adolf Eichmann came up with the idea to destroy the entire Jewish nation by any means, and gave his idea the name "Endlösung" or "Final Solution". Here is a wiki page with more info about the Final Solution/ Endlösung I don't think people should live with a memory of a Europe of 60 years ago, but I do think that a teacher should pay attention to this subject once a year just to make sure that it wont be repeated.
|
|
|
Post by Hildor on Mar 10, 2009 7:05:00 GMT
I learned of the Holocaust only last year in history class. In the sixth grade, at 17/18 years, when we were old enough to really understand it. But I knew of it before last year.
|
|
|
Post by cleglaw on Mar 11, 2009 17:28:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Mar 12, 2009 9:44:07 GMT
Eh, I think its horse [Censored]coming in and arresting him now, as if it means anything at this point. What morons. And normally I like Israel, but grow up.
"See, look how evil this guard was at Treblinka!"
"Uhm... he was at Sobibor."
"... Lies!"
"no, look."
"... >.>.. <.<... >.>.. FINE THEN!"
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Mar 12, 2009 10:24:37 GMT
I'm kinda with Terror at this point. It's clear from the fact that the guy was convicted of crimes he couldn't possibly have committed that time and failing memory have made convictions unsafe. War criminals should be hunted down, don't get me wrong, but only when concrete evidence exists that they are who they are said to be should they be brought to trial.
All trials of war criminals must be absolutely fair. We're talking about an executable offence, after all.
At 88 this guy is gonna bear no physical resemblance at all to the man he was 65 or more years ago, which makes witness testimony completely irrelevant. So what's left?
|
|
|
Post by cleglaw on Mar 12, 2009 12:02:12 GMT
So, if somebody gets away with a crime for a long enough period of time they should go unpunished? If he is not the man then that will come out at trial.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Mar 12, 2009 14:19:27 GMT
If someone cannot possibly get a fair trial, they should not be tried.
'If he is not the man' didn't seem to work very well last time, did it?
|
|
|
Post by Galadriel on Mar 12, 2009 19:53:33 GMT
So, if somebody gets away with a crime for a long enough period of time they should go unpunished? If he is not the man then that will come out at trial. I agree with Cleg. If he is the man they are looking for, I want justice to be done. After all, he had the choice to torture his prisoners or to leave them alone. If he did his job without being a sadist, he wouldn't be bothered at this age.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Mar 12, 2009 19:59:44 GMT
IF he is, yes. But as he's already been found guilty of being someone he was not, how reasonably can he expect to get a fair trial this time? Is it reasonable to expect a jury to look at the case with an open mind?
Right now, we can't even be sure what the exact nature of the charges are, of course, but this time I hope they have really good actual evidence.
It is vital in these cases that Justice is done, else the whole system falls into disrepute. War crimes trials, more than any other, need to be fair and SEEN to be fair.
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Mar 13, 2009 5:16:18 GMT
So, if somebody gets away with a crime for a long enough period of time they should go unpunished?
Ever heard of the statue of limitations?
Now it doesn't cover murder, but guess what? The evidence against this guy cannot be truly justified. And even if so, how petty is it to throw an 88 year old man into jail in a nation he's long since left? And not only that, to throw a man in such a jail, when we've seen people be unable to properly identify him, his victims themselves! (The Jews of Israel anyone?)
Look, its bull[Censored] I'm not saying he didn't do it. I'm saying that its too late to catch him on it, especially given the passage of time just in general.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Mar 13, 2009 9:55:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Mar 13, 2009 15:34:15 GMT
This is a touchy subject for me - for one, I'm German, with an interest of history. For two, I have been at Auschwitz in 1975, during our graduation class tour - and, believe me, it was a lasting and very uncomfortable impression on a 18year-old (Nonetheless I'd be in favor of such experiences, as they speak much more than text books or even films).
1975 was also the year the lifting of the statute of limitations was discussed in Germany (and subsequently put into effect) for war crimes and murder (before it was 30 years). Hence there nowadays is no limitation any more.
Atroce as it is, but the Nazi's 'final solution' did also cover mentally handicapped, carriers of genetic deficiencies, Roma and Cinti... (a fact that unfortunately gets forgotten often enough).
As bad as history teaching is about everywhere nowadays, this topic is and should be addressed in more classes than 'just' history, like ethics, social science, (even religion, if there is)!
|
|
|
Post by Galadriel on Mar 14, 2009 17:49:03 GMT
This is a touchy subject for me - for one, I'm German, with an interest of history. For two, I have been at Auschwitz in 1975, during our graduation class tour - and, believe me, it was a lasting and very uncomfortable impression on a 18year-old (Nonetheless I'd be in favor of such experiences, as they speak much more than text books or even films). 1975 was also the year the lifting of the statute of limitations was discussed in Germany (and subsequently put into effect) for war crimes and murder (before it was 30 years). Hence there nowadays is no limitation any more. Atroce as it is, but the Nazi's 'final solution' did also cover mentally handicapped, carriers of genetic deficiencies, Roma and Cinti... (a fact that unfortunately gets forgotten often enough). As bad as history teaching is about everywhere nowadays, this topic is and should be addressed in more classes than 'just' history, like ethics, social science, (even religion, if there is)! As for visiting concentration camps, I'm totally pro the idea. I went to Breendonk when I was 12, and though this camp wasn't a termination camp for Jews, but more of a work camp for political prisoners, the torture room and the execution place left such an impression on me, that I had nightmares for about a year. The problem for me is that I can feel the pain, the misery, the cries, I feel the moods that were there too well. I never went to Auschwitz for that same reason.
Don't forget the homosexuals too, with their pink triangles. Actually every minority that didn't fit in the Ariën idea was only good enough to be killed.
All in all, it's a black page in history, not only for the Germans, but worldwide that we cannot efford to forget about. Like any other genocide we can't forget.
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Mar 14, 2009 21:46:36 GMT
Visiting a concentration camp or the like at age 12 is hard - that is something that should be rated 16+ - with good background preparation.
Like any other genocide we can't forget. We certainly shouldn't - unfortunately it seems, we can (much too often and easily).
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Mar 14, 2009 23:33:55 GMT
Pft.
Who honestly cares? And I mean that.
Look, not to be offensive or anything, but looking at the raw numbers Adolf Hitler instigated the death and slavery of far more slavs than he did Jews. Millions of Poles, Ukrainians, and Russians met a rather dismal end by Nazi plans.
Post War, Hitler had plans to exterminate an even greater amount of these populations, in order to properly create his "living space", wanting to recreate Slavic settlements into more simply designed areas, whilst building new German colonies to colonize his brave new world.
Lets not forget, even outside of combat the Germans killed millions of Slavs, the Gestapo was not "kind" to occupied Russians, Poles, and Ukrainians by any means. Millions of them reportedly being sent to organized death camps as well.
But we always hear about how terrible the Jewish holocaust was. And it was terrible.
But the real tragedy is concealed. So who really cares?
I personally don't give two [Censored] if genocide happens. Let it happen. Its natural. That said, if you are guilty of war crimes, something I think is retarded to begin with, and are fallaciously made to make us feel better. There is another term for War Crimes, Victors Justice. Then yes, get your trial and be done with you, you were weaker, you lost, you get to go away now.
But I don't even see the evidence for that even. To me, it appears to be bull[Censored]to throw this guy away over this, especially when the people aren't even entirely sure what part of the tragedy they want him to be guilty for.
So, in short. Yea, the holocaust was bad. The 50% of the people who died during the entirety of world war II were Slavic, I think they'd agree with me that 6,000,000 people is a drop in the bucket. To bad so sad.
|
|
|
Post by ss on Mar 15, 2009 1:20:29 GMT
@ Glance Auschwitz is, of course, a word that conjures up the image and reality of the Holocaust. Although Germany gets the blame, and rightly so seeing as they started the war, there is plenty of blame to go around. The Holocaust was the systematic mass murder in WWII of most of the Jews in Europe by Nazi Germany. It should be taught in all the schools in the whole world. It should also probably be re-taught in ethics classes in college. Most people don’t study enough history, or they slant their vision to suit their own ends, and still don’t want to know what it was all about, but I think it has to be viewed in light of the German mind set after WWI, and even before. There was no more anti-Semitism in Germany than anywhere else in Europe…France was anti-Semitic as well as Russia. The question is, where did they get it from?? Everyone on this thread knows that I am an “overt, proud to be one, professing, Christian”. That being said, I believe that the Christian church, especially the Medieval Church, is primarily responsible for half the worlds view of the Jews. The teachings of early Christianity, especially the Roman Catholic Church (and then the Protestants) had raised “myths” to the level of “truth” about the “evils” of the Jews. First they (wrongly) taught that the Jews had killed Jesus Christ. Jesus was, in fact, a Jew Himself, lived in the Roman province of “Palestine” (shouldn’t be called that-was British that messed that one up IIRC). Jesus had Jewish followers as well as Jewish opponents. Historically (worldly) when his followers could not convince the Jews that Jesus was, in fact, their “long awaited Messiah”, a new religion formed gradually from primarily non Jewish people. (spiritually-biblically) Jesus (through Paul) stated that because of their “unbelief” that the nation of Israel had been “blinded” to the truth of His Messiah-ship and they were to turn to the Gentiles to build the “church” and when it was “complete,” He would lift the blinders on the Jews…(hasn’t happened yet). Politically it seems they blamed the Jews. It was the Romans who crucified Christ. The Jews were under the control of Rome and even their High Priests could not “kill” and they had to turn them over to the Romans to carry out any death penalties. They accused them of being “Christ killers” and “satanized” the Jews. The Church viewed Jews (wrongly again) as agents of the Devil who conspired to rule the world, corrupted the civilization of the countries they lived in, kidnapped or killed Christian children….etc…The Church taught that unless Jews converted to Christianity, they were condemned to eternal damnation….after a 100 years or so, it bore fruit…the Jews in medieval Europe suffered discrimination from church AND state laws, they were isolated in ghettos, shoved from their homelands, brutalized by violence and death in pogroms and massacres. They were often barred from owning land and political jobs, so they became proficient in trade and money lending, which, of course, made them even more resented by non-Jews. By 1543, Martin Luther (father of the protestants—himself a former Roman Catholic priest) wrote in “About the Jews and Their Lies” denounced Jews in the worst way and urged they be persecuted for their refusal to convert to the new form of Christianity. Nazi ideology owed much of its image of the Jew to Christian, and other early forms of anti-Semitism. This doesn’t even address the lack of response by the Allies to stop the Holocaust years early (which they knew about). by 1942 and after, lots of information about what was happening to the Jews and others reached the West, especially Britain and the United States. That is historical fact...but even then..(a quote) "The Western Allies nor most of the victims of the Holocaust realized what Hitler did about the war: He would use, as he had threatened publicly before, to destroy the Jews and thereby, in his view, lay the foundation for Germany's conquest of Eurasia and eventually other portions of the world. Only the physical removal of the Jews from the earth, he had decided, would pave the way for Germany's defeat of other rival peoples and politico-economic systems. These included Russian Communism, Western liberalism, and "international capital." all of which he claimed the Jews had invented or used to help them rule the world." @ TD...You are right, one of Hitlers goals which he had talked about since his early days in the Nazi party back in 1919 and 1920 was to conquer new territory for "living space" for his world vision....especially from the Slavs of Eastern Europe and Soviet Russia. He counted the Slavs as racial subhumans and he started initially in Poland and then Russia, to enslave, displace and murder them. Before the war was over several million Poles died as well as even more Russians. Also during the war the Germans murdered many more of other alleged "racial inferior" groups such as the handicapped of his own country, Gypsies, and homosexuals. They experminted with mass sterilization techniques, and planned along with murder, to put an end to ALL the racial subhumanity (as they defined it), which would include the world's black population in Africa and America and other non-German racial groups when they fell under future German rule.. They definitely had a plan... It was called the "Final Solution", but its full term was "Final Solution of the Jewish question." Hitler had made earlier statements, concise and clear, that he had thought about killing Jews and using war to do it.. He killed Slavs, Russians, Poles, and others based on their status and usefulness (which were in the millions) but the Jews were condemned without regard for their status, occupation or politics....they were killed because they were Jews.!! Hitler—“How many diseases have their origin in the Jewish virus!” and “We shall regain our health only by eliminating the Jew.” It was ALWAYS about the Jews...and the following shows the mindset of the Nazi party... Before he committed suicide to escape being tried as a war criminal, Robert Ley, the Nazi Labor Front leader, wrote “We National Socialists, starting with Hitler, considered the fight which is now behind us a war merely against the Jews—not against the French, English, Americans, or Russians. We believe that they (Frenchmen, etc.) were only instruments of the Jews, and when reading the indictment, I feel inclined to believe that it actually was like that.” How could you deal with such true believers...
|
|