View previous topic | View next topic

The Queen

Page 2 of 6
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

suze
748896.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:34 pm Reply with quote

Well OK. But if the question is "Does Herr Ratzinger now or did he at any time hold the views conventionally associated with the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei?", well he doesn't and didn't.

It's documented that he didn't enjoy the HJ very much, and went to as few of its events as was consistent with awkward questions not being asked. Should he have not gone at all and risked the possible consequences? Well maybe so, but remember that he was a young teenager at the time. How many young teenagers - then, now, or at any other time - would take so bold an action?

I still think he was a bloody awful choice for Pope, but that's a separate debate entirely.

 
AlmondFacialBar
748898.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:38 pm Reply with quote

You're talking about the time before 1933, I'm talking about the time after 1939:

Wiki:

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitlerjugend#Durchsetzung_der_Dienstpflicht

The bit that's mostly relevant for this debate is this:

With the adoption of the second HJ regulation implementing the Act on 25 März 1939 the Compulsory Youth Service was introduced: Now membership of the Hitler Youth could also be enforced against the will of the parents. Thus even the ten year-olds were forced to join the Young People's Movement. However, this law could still make exceptions, eg according to § 4 for young people with certified health problems.Overall, another 1.7 million additional young people were captured in the Hitler Youth that way.

Ratzinger was drafted into the Hitler Youth in 1941, so there.

Regarding his utterances on atheism, no, I wasn't happy about them either, probably even less so than you, because getting to hear that from a German as a German has a whole different impact. Still I feel fighting him with such unfounded allegations is wrong, because

a) It's plain unethical.

b) It means descending to his level of discourse.

c) Fighting someone with unfounded allegations means taking your eye off what's really there to worry about, and that's a whole lot.

Hence - cut it already!

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
Sadurian Mike
748899.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:39 pm Reply with quote

Oh I'm not saying that I think he was a supporter of the regime, and I've said before on this very forum that I have no doubts that he joined the HJ for reasons other than idealogical ones.

I was just pointing out that, as he had been a member of the Nazi party (of which the HJ were a paramilitary subsection), he had been, in fact, at one point technically a Nazi.

I see no reason that people shouldn't make fun of him, and his past is as good a target as any. It is the same for anyone else, so why should he be different? How many other celebrities get made fun of because of their past, often long past? Being pope doesn't make him immune.

 
AlmondFacialBar
748902.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:47 pm Reply with quote

I don't have a problem with him being made fun of at all. If you want to post jokes alleging he's fondled little boys, fine, if you want to post jokes alleging he has fathered five kids, fine, too, if you want to post jokes alleging he likes having coke blown up his rear passageway by midget Thai hookers, grand with me. I'm just sick of the nazi thing because that's demonstrably untrue and, tbh, as a German you get tired of such allegations and jokes roughly at the age of ten.

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
Sadurian Mike
748905.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:01 pm Reply with quote

I somehow doubt such jokes about the pope will just go away, I'm afraid. Certainly not while most of the rest of us find it funny.

 
AlmondFacialBar
748907.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:05 pm Reply with quote

I know... Doesn't mean I have to like them, though, does it?

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
Spud McLaren
748909.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:07 pm Reply with quote

Sorry, Mike, I'm with AFB here - not on the grounds that it's never been funny, but on the grounds that it might have been funny once...

 
Sadurian Mike
748912.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:10 pm Reply with quote

There's a fine line between not liking something and saying so, and going on the offensive, which I believe you just did.

The first one states your opinion, which nobody can argue against. The second, however, invites counter statements and facts brought up in defence (such as the HJ being part of the Nazi party and therefore its members being de facto Nazi part members).

EDIT: That post was obviously directed at AFB rather than Spud.

 
AlmondFacialBar
748918.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:25 pm Reply with quote

Yes, I did go on the offensive, and I'm fully aware of that. Keep the counter statements coming, should you want to, and I'll have something ready to contradict you. I'm just sick and tired of a complete generation (or two) of my fellow country people being considered fascists. My blood boils when I hear the poor guys who were conscripted into the Wehrmacht as "Nazi soldiers" and my heart aches for war widows like my grandma, whose husband was a social democrat through and through, yet finds himself filed under that moniker (and for my dad, who has one thirty second glimpse of memory of his father). Yes, I know Hitler came to power by democratic means, yes I know he had to have a whole lot of Germans behind them or he couldn't have made the Third Reich work as efficiently as he did, yes, I know we started the war, yes, I know the victims of the Holocaust didn't happily dance into the gas chambers of their own account. None of that, however, changes the fact that there were also a whole lot of Germans who were decent people simply trying to survive life under a fascist dictatorship (and who, I'm almost 100% sure, didn't know about the death camps. There was a reason why the Nazis had built them way out east). The Ratzinger family, amongst others, strikes me as one of the latter. I'm not trying to dismiss historical responsibility here, I'm simply sick of my grandparents being tarred with a brush that doesn't fit them.

On the whole I guess you could say I'm taking offense, make of that whatever you like.

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
Sadurian Mike
748922.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:34 pm Reply with quote

Now you are taking offence at words that were never said.

This guy is not some ordinary working German. He is the head of the Catholic faith - someone who tells others how to live their lives and to fight against aetheism.

He has been voted in to the most powerful religious position in the Western world and is (and was) in charge of dictating people's lives.

His past behaviour is therefore fair game.


Last edited by Sadurian Mike on Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:37 pm; edited 1 time in total

 
Neotenic
748923.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:37 pm Reply with quote

I sympathise, AFB. If nothing else, I too am thoroughly sick and tired of the continuing obsession with 39-45 - which I suspect is due to the fact it is the last time we were clearly and demonstrably in the right, and successful with it.

After sixty five years worth of victory laps, I think it's probably time to move on.

 
AlmondFacialBar
748928.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:48 pm Reply with quote

I know no one said my Opa was a fascist (though the other one wanted to join the SA. Mostly for the beer they served at the meetings apparently. He was something of a Homer Simpson type). Geez, how can I explain this? From my German brain it seems absolutely clear. Right - imagine people said all 17th century brits had been genocidal bastards because of Cromwell did to the Irish. Now imagine hearing that over and over and over again, essentially since you were tiny and even from your teachers in school. Now imagine the whole thing multiplied by a couple of factors, because the events referred to are still in living memory. Would you be likely to take offense if people came up with the same joke about a decent guy (well, decent in regard to the Irish genocide) from that period over and over again?

And i still maintain that there's a rational reason behind my ranting there, too, please refer to my a, b and c above.

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
Sadurian Mike
748930.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 1:54 pm Reply with quote

Neotenic wrote:
I sympathise, AFB. If nothing else, I too am thoroughly sick and tired of the continuing obsession with 39-45 - which I suspect is due to the fact it is the last time we were clearly and demonstrably in the right, and successful with it.

Actually, I think the "obsession" with WWII is mainly down to it being the major factor in shaping our modern world.

 
AlmondFacialBar
748936.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 2:06 pm Reply with quote

Today being the day that's in it (20 years of German reunifcation and the last rate of reparation payments for World War I), could we maybe move on? It seems a good point to do it. We've learned our lesson, we're a liberal, democratic, peaceful country. Nothing to see here.

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
suze
748962.  Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:02 pm Reply with quote

Neotenic wrote:
I sympathise, AFB. If nothing else, I too am thoroughly sick and tired of the continuing obsession with 39-45.


I also. Our TV screens never seem to be short of a docu about WWII, a commemoration of some obscure anniversary related to that conflict, or something of the kind.

The last WWI veterans seem to have died in the last year or two, and that does seem to have reduced the amount of team our media spend on that conflict. But the last WWII veterans will be around for twenty or more years yet, so things seem unlikely to change.

 

Page 2 of 6
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group