Botond173
11d ago
During WWII Germany was of course villainized in propaganda and amongst western Allied soldiers; massacres of surrendering German soldiers were not regular but also not uncommon.
I think it's important to point out here that the massacred soldiers in question were almost(?) all Waffen-SS, not Wehrmacht.
Botond173
11d ago
The Japanese didn't adhere to Western codes of chivalry, they routinely tortured and executed their captives and generally fought without either decency or mercy. Such an enemy isn't seen as worthy and earns no respect; I think American attitudes towards them during the war reflect that.
Botond173
11d ago
I’m wondering to what extent the German Wehrmacht is, or at least was present in British and American cultural memory as a worthy enemy in battle, unlike the Japanese and the Italians, in a similar way how, I suppose, Confederates were seen as worthy enemies in the Northern US after the Civil War, unlike the various Indian tribes. It’d largely explain why the so-called myths of the clean Wehrmacht and the Lost Cause of the South came to be.
Botond173
25d ago
If by 'revolt' you mean objectively peaceful political mass demonstrations, then yes. If we use the word in its normal everyday definition, Romania was the only example of a revolt in Eastern Europe in 1989.
Suddenly a single person started booing. And then another.
From Romanian Wikipedia (emphasis mine):
The population, however, remained indifferent, only the front rows supporting Ceaușescu with chants and applause. His lack of understanding of events and inability to deal with the situation was again highlighted when, in an act of desperation, he offered to increase workers' wages by 200 lei per month and continued to praise the achievements of the "Socialist Revolution ", not realizing that another revolution was unfolding right in front of him.
"For a long time it was not known who "ruined" Ceaușescu's rally on December 21, 1989. Various characters appeared who claimed this credit. Now it is known that this fact is due to some groups of Timișoara residents who moved to Bucharest." [32]
Sudden movements from the periphery of the gathering and the sound of firecrackers turned the demonstration into chaos. Frightened at first, the crowd tried to disperse. Some of the participants in the meeting regrouped near the Intercontinental Hotel and started a protest demonstration that later became a revolution.
Subsequent attempts by the Ceaușescu couple to regain control of the crowd using formulas like "Hello, hello!" or "Stay quietly in your seats!" they remained without effect. The live television broadcast has been interrupted for the moment. A large part of the crowd went to the streets, the party activists, the members of the patriotic guards, the soldiers in civilian clothes, the most loyal people of the dictator remained in the square. After a few minutes, Ceaușescu was able to continue his speech, promising salary increases and pensions, then returned inside the CC building.
People who left the square were panicked, throwing flags and placards with slogans on the ground. Many of them regrouped in the streets adjacent to Palatului Square and began to shout anti-communist and anti-Austrian slogans
In short, it was all very much coordinated by groups of provocateurs setting off explosives with the specific aim of causing chaos and a general sense of uncertainty in the capital. Which should not be surprising, because in reality the revolution was a coup by the Party leadership in order to dispose of him and his family and seize power, with the help of the regular army, using false flag methods, with (at least) the tacit approval of the American and Soviet intelligence services, as his regime was by that time a nuisance for both superpowers and long outlived whatever usefulness it ever had.
Botond173
1mo ago
Intent, I think, very much matters if we want to examine if an ethnic cleansing (of Slavs, in this case) took place or not. But anyway, now that I checked this discussion again, it seems the original post was removed, so it's sort of pointless to continue, as it can no longer be seen what the original argument was.
Botond173
1mo ago
I'd say the idea of teenage rebellion as a social reality originates from the era of capitalism when teenagers appeared on the consumer market as a separate target audience. It was no coincidence that the thing all outlets of teenage rebellion had in common was and is their profitability.
Botond173
1mo ago
The original goal was about gay marriage and gay and lesbian recognition.
Are you sure about the former? Because I've read multiple arguments from gay-supporting liberals that this was specifically not the case. Their narrative is that the talking point that homosexual men are just normal, average people like anyone else who want nothing else but to live as average people in faithful marriages and be accepted as such was manufactured by gay rights activists in the '90s for normie consumption and as a pure PR move. It's not something most homosexual men even agree on.
Botond173
1mo ago
In the end normies really wish their chosen pets would all get along with each other, and can't be bothered to actually talk to blacks or muslims to see what they think of lgbt or women.
So there was this time a long time ago when I was sort of interested in Sam Harris’ podcast and kept checking it out. One time he had Bill Maher on as a guest rather predictably, who, to his credit, wasn’t holding back. One argument he made about liberal/centrist normies is that one reason why talking points on the threat of Islamism and other negative consequences of Muslim immigration don’t resonate with them at all is that usually the only Muslims the typical suburban middle-class liberal White woman ever interacts with are those two funny and exotic Arab guys at the office that she’s sympathetic to already. That’s the only point of reference she has. Needless to say, those two swarthy guys know the score and will make sure never to offend her pro-gay/trans sensibilities. (Also, we know that ‘multiculturalism’ to this White demographic doesn’t usually mean more than funny clothes, exotic restaurants and that one coffee shop your female coworkers will tell you about.)
Botond173
1mo ago
The "Hunger Plan" is a term that was never officially used, and was instead invented as a reference specifically to the supposed Nazi masterplan to exterminate the Slavic peoples of the USSR through manufactured famine. You'd think that the Wikipedia article on it will provide detailed evidence of this. What it describes instead are 1. the massive death rate of Soviet POWs in general (again, not all of them were even Slavs, and the idea that this was a pre-planned act of mass murder is suspect, as I mentioned in another comment in this thread) 2. Jews in ghettos not receiving sufficient food (again, this was a measure against Jews, not Slavs) 3. famine in German-occupied Greece (which has scarcely anything to do with the matter at hand.) Such Wikipedia articles are suspect in my eyes, because it's obvious that they were written by political activists.
Botond173
1mo ago
the efforts to reclaim it back in the 2010s
It seems somewhat odd that the whole phenomenon basically fizzled out everywhere after a year or so, or was captured by different interests, as it appears according to this part:
In 2017 the chairpersons of Chicago SlutWalk wrote, "We still stand behind Dyke March Chicago's decision to remove the Zionist contingent from their event, & we won't allow Zionist displays at ours", referring to a then-upcoming demonstration of the Chicago SlutWalk. The Chicago SlutWalk declared of the Star of David, "its connections to the oppression enacted by Israel is too strong for it to be neutral & IN CONTEXT [at the Dyke March Chicago event] it was used as a Zionist symbol."[43]
In 2017 Slutwalk Detroit was held in Palmer Park by Metro-Detroit Political Action Network (MDPAN). The event was also named "The March for Consent" the event was held in Detroit's "Gayboorhood" due to the high violence rate against transgender women in the area. Key speakers included Transgender Chair for MDPAN Brianna Kingsley and Jennifer Kurland who ran for Michigan Governor 2018 as the Green Party candidate.
Botond173
1mo ago
I wonder what that "profound harm" actually was, according to the judge's argument.
Regarding the “Hunger Plan” I already commented on one aspect of it above in another response, and I’ll only add that if you check out the Wikipedia article on it in general, you’ll see that it essentially lumps together multiple aspects of Nazi policy that are objectively not closely related, I think. And what it markedly does not argue is that the plan was designed with the deliberate genocidal aim of starving masses of Slavs to death, or that it was ever implemented on a larger scale:
By the end of 1941, plans to starve the entire civilian population of some areas had been abandoned, due to the failure of the German military campaign[1] and the impossibility of cutting off the food supply to cities without causing major uprisings.[6] Except in isolated cases, the Germans lacked the manpower to enforce a 'food blockade' of the Soviet cities; neither could they confiscate the food.
Also, any lengthy Wikipedia article that almost entirely hinges on just one official document, in this case a policy proposal made during a meeting of state secretaries, is rather suspect in my opinion.
Regarding the so-called “Generalplan Ost” it was actually not even that, as it was supposedly an early resettlement policy proposal put together in multiple versions, but not one copy survived the war. Only second-hand sources and commentaries on it exist.
Botond173
1mo ago
I assume you mean Boomers? Because I doubt there was ever significant racism present among them.
Botond173
1mo ago
By 'normie ideological purity standards' it's the law of the land. Whether it's popular or not doesn't matter.
Botond173
1mo ago
The bird lovers and tree lovers use the same studies for their estimates of yearly bird deaths from turbines: between 140,000-679,000.
If we accept that wind energy is indeed mostly a farce, then these birds are getting killed pointlessly. Any society that causes such a massacre for no reason at all other than virtue-signalling should at least examine itself closely.
Botond173
1mo ago
The Wikipedia article on the so-called "Hunger Plan" includes this part:
The most reliable figures for the death rate among Soviet prisoners of war in German captivity reveal that 3.3 million died of a total of 5.7 million captured between June 1941 and February 1945, most of them directly or indirectly from starvation.[20] Of these 3.3 million, 2 million had already died by the beginning of February 1942.[21] The enormous number of deaths was the result of a deliberate policy of starvation directed against Soviet POWs. The German planning staffs had reckoned on capturing and thus having to feed up to two million prisoners within the first eight weeks of the war, i.e. roughly the same number as during the Battle of France in 1940.[22] The number of French, Belgian and Dutch POWs who died in German captivity was extremely low compared with deaths among Soviet POWs.
Based on the last two sentences, it seems to be that this case of mass starvation was due to two erroneous assumptions based on faulty and insufficient military intelligence data, namely that the Red Army is much smaller than it actually was, and that it can be defeated in 8 weeks, that is, before the autumn rain season begins in 1941, rendering most roads in the Western USSR practically impassable.
Botond173
1mo ago
There appears to be a consensus between Millennials and late X-ers that, say, for the average fresh college graduate looking for a job, or for a college student looking for a summer job, the job market was better in 2001 than in 2011, and was better in 2011 than it is now. Also, the overall sentiment of doomerism, anomie and stagnation was much less palpable in society even back in 2011.
Botond173
1mo ago
Any world war by definition entails a European war on more than one front, which the Germans were never going to win and they knew it, never prepared for it because they didn't think it'd either be necessary or even feasible, and didn't think the war they started was going to escalate into another world war. In that sense, you're correct, Germany was never going to win a world war. That, however, also applies to any other great power, or even any alliance of two great powers as well at the time.
Regarding the atom bomb, I think it's worthwhile to point out that 1) the atomic bombings were carried out in a war situation with practically non-existent enemy air defenses, which was not going to be the case in your hypothetical scenario 2) Germany had an extensive program as well to develop and stockpile weapons of mass destruction, namely nerve gas agents and other chemical weapons, which entails second strike capability 3) I wouldn't be so sure to declare that they were never going to develop a functioning atom bomb.
Botond173
1mo ago
My only nitpick is that you seem to be assuming that there's an overlap between racists and social conservatives. I doubt that is, or even was the case.
Botond173
1mo ago
Indeed, but that was a different era, before the Great Awokening. It's also true that feminist websites posted recommendations to women for avoiding getting raped back then. It's no coincidence that liberal critiques of the movie have also appeared.
Let's be precise.
The argument that high-IQ women should either get married and start having children as a first step after graduating from college, or avoid going to college altogether and focus on becoming mothers, i.e. that society should incentivize them to do so, I think it's fair to say, counts as borderline dissident among middle-class college-educated normies today. It doesn't count as 100% badthink maybe, but it's close. Ultimately this is the essence of positive eugenics.
Negative eugenics, i.e. the argument that the fertility rate of low-IQ people should be curbed in various ways, on the other hand, is definitely outside the Overton window. Yes, you can argue that liberal policies pertaining to abortion and birth control actually have this effect in the real world, but I doubt they actually reduce the relative fertility rate of low-IQ people as compared to that of high-IQ ones, so there's that.
Also, it's fair to say that, to the extent eugenics is dismissed as deplorable junk science by the Guardian-reading demographic, it is done so because it's interpreted as an outgrowth of White supremacism.
Didn't the warriors of various Indian tribes routinely take hostages/captives and kill/torture them?
More options
Context Copy link