Welcome to Gaia! ::

Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Michael Noire
You are right. It is interesting that someone who opposes the right of Jews to defend themselves would call another an antisemite for trying to promote the continuation of their existence. ******** amazing Wendi, how are you so right so often? Is it aliens?
The right which the Jews would have needed to defend themselves (birthright citizenship) had already been denied them three years before they were denied firearms. When we elect a Chancellor and then give him the emergency power to unilaterally pass unconstitutional laws and have them immediately enforced, then he passes a law that Jews are not citizens, our second amendment will cease to apply to them in any case.
Wendigo
Michael Noire
You are right. It is interesting that someone who opposes the right of Jews to defend themselves would call another an antisemite for trying to promote the continuation of their existence. ******** amazing Wendi, how are you so right so often? Is it aliens?
The right which the Jews would have needed to defend themselves (birthright citizenship) had already been denied them three years before they were denied firearms. When we elect a Chancellor and then give him the emergency power to unilaterally pass unconstitutional laws and have them immediately enforced, then he passes a law that Jews are not citizens, our second amendment will cease to apply to them in any case.


Was the Reichstag decree in effect? I would think that if you already had the capacity to defend yourself, and some dictator came along and started singling out your ethnic group as being non viable, you would react negatively, but I also recall that the Jews in Germany were in trouble because the fiasco with the Muslim controlled countries they had fled. I think the Jews are a special case in that they have been constantly mobile throughout history with no place to really call their own. There's some overlap with Gypsies and Irish, but the Jews diaspora is better documented. Do you think it was a 'mentality' similar to slave mentality, but based on their multigenerational refugee status that prevented them from taking up arms en mass, or more of an aspect of the European culture? I mean, I understand that the United States is supposed to be unique in the sense of the experiment of liberty, but the people with IEDs and baby bombs didn't seem to mind fighting back. So the question is, are only people who feel they are occupied willing to put up resistance? Or can people discover within themselves, despite a refugee status, the will to fight for their lives and the lives of their families? Does being a foreigner guarantee failure?
Michael Noire
N3bu
Michael Noire

I happily defecate on the memory of any individuals that submit themselves and their families to mass slaughter as a consequence of refusing to act - out of fear of mass slaughter. Back home we call that stupid.

That's because defecating on the memory of Genocide is usually considered stupid.


Are you still here?

No, I'm over there.
Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Michael Noire
Was the Reichstag decree in effect?
The Enabling Act (which made Hitler dictator) is 1933. (Shortly after the Reichstag fire, which it is generally agreed the Nazis set themselves to frame the Communists.) Nuremberg Laws, which placed a number of restrictions on German Jews (including, as I mentioned, revoking their citizenship), were 1935. The Nazis made revisions to the Weimar firearms laws (including forbidding Jews from owning, buying or selling weapons) in 1938. It is worth noting that these restrictions on gun ownership were not general, and for everyone but the Jews, the existing restrictions were loosened. (The Weimar Republic had attempted to ban firearms entirely after WWI, and had defaulted to mandatory registration as a fallback position in 1928.) It also bears pointing out that private firearms ownership was not enormous in Germany during that period - certainly it wasn't comparable to the contemporary United States, where we have more firearms than people. (Although many people own zero firearms.) It's more like one gun for every hundred or every thousand people. Which, considering the economic climate in Germany at that time, makes sense, since firearms are a luxury product for the average city dweller.

Hitler was 'singling out' the Jews long before he actually became a dictator, of course. The "Twenty Five Points, which the Nazis proposed in 1920, already incorporated much of what made it into the Nuremberg Laws:

Quote:
4. Only those who are our fellow countrymen can become citizens. Only those who have German blood, regardless of creed, can be our countrymen. Hence no Jew can be a countryman.

5. Those who are not citizens must live in Germany as foreigners and must be subject to the law of aliens.

6. The right to choose the government and determine the laws of the State shall belong only to citizens. We therefore demand that no public office, of whatever nature, whether in the central government, the province, or the municipality, shall be held by anyone who is not a citizen.
...
8. Any further immigration of non-Germans must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who have entered Germany since August 2, 1914, shall be compelled to leave the Reich immediately. ...
23. We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press. In order to make possible the creation of a German press, we demand:

(a) All editors and their assistants on newspapers published in the German language shall be German citizens.

(b) Non-German newspapers shall only be published with the express permission of the State. They must not be published in the German language.

(c) All financial interests in or in any way affecting German newspapers shall be forbidden to non-Germans by law, and we demand that the punishment for transgressing this law be the immediate suppression of the newspaper and the expulsion of the non-Germans from the Reich.

Newspapers transgressing against the common welfare shall be suppressed. We demand legal action against those tendencies in art and literature that have a disruptive influence upon the life of our folk, and that any organizations that offend against the foregoing demands shall be dissolved.


As far as "reacting negatively," well. I'd have a pretty negative outlook on the Nazi party if I was a Jew in the 1930s. I'd seriously consider, y'know, fleeing the country ASAP, as some did. (Sigmund Freud, for example, eventually fled Austria following the Anschluss. Einstein left in 1933 following Hitler's rise to power.)

As far as violent resistance, I think that it bears pointing out that the Shoah was not a widely known fact in the 1930s. Many of the details only became public knowledge after the Allies were victorious and began liberating the extermination camps. Up until they reached the camps, many Jews believed that they were being resettled into new communities, like the ghettos.

If it had been known, rather than rumored or suspected, maybe things would have gone differently. But it does bear pointing out that by the time the camps were open for business, the Nazi military/police/secret police apparatus was obscenely powerful, and the Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and political dissidents were not. So things may have gone much the same way if armed resistance had been attempted in 1938.

Me personally, I'd favor the prevention of Hitler's appointment as Chancellor as the necessary tipping point for stopping what followed. After that, I'd get the hell out. The option proposed mainly results in being shot.
Disa Uniflora
Can we at least keep this jackassery confined to a single thread? Thanks.


jackassery - n. A word commonly used by Liberals who don't like that history has disproven an object on their agenda to indoctrinate all American citizens The next time he brings up how Socialism has failed miserably in every government it's been tried on, I'm going to accuse him of jackassery and pretend that Canada is Socialist.
Steam Punk Adept's avatar

Witty Genius

9,000 Points
  • Partygoer 500
  • Conventioneer 300
  • Perfect Attendance 400
Caffienated Sprite
Disa Uniflora
Can we at least keep this jackassery confined to a single thread? Thanks.


jackassery - n. A word commonly used by Liberals who don't like that history has disproven an object on their agenda to indoctrinate all American citizens The next time he brings up how Socialism has failed miserably in every government it's been tried on, I'm going to accuse him of jackassery and pretend that Canada is Socialist.
User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Whoever made that image sure has a big collection of pictures of crying, naked children.

By the way, Sprite, Disa is Canadian. While Canadians may or may not want to indoctrinate American citizens, I don't think I'd run around accusing them of it just on principle, it comes off kinda paranoid.
Maurice, if I may, you have a fine show here and I'm glad to be on it, but everyone within the sound of my voice and smell will die in the fires of doom. It is written, TV is trash, radio is trash, our newspapers are run by Canadians with an agenda. Our very way of life is threatened.

We formed this great state to plague all, and I'll be damned if any weirdo hippies are going to tell us we can't fill in wetlands and make a home for ourselves, complete with eighteen hole championship standard courses and selective admission. Heathens will ruin the land, acid will rain from the skies, we'll never hear my voice again; It will be anarchy!
Steam Punk Adept
Caffienated Sprite
Disa Uniflora
Can we at least keep this jackassery confined to a single thread? Thanks.


jackassery - n. A word commonly used by Liberals who don't like that history has disproven an object on their agenda to indoctrinate all American citizens The next time he brings up how Socialism has failed miserably in every government it's been tried on, I'm going to accuse him of jackassery and pretend that Canada is Socialist.
User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.


User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
That's a seriously dumb political cartoon. In terms of ratings, of course, Fox (the highest-rated cable news channel, spawn of the third largest media company in the world) comes out way ahead of MSNBC and CBS. Never mind that "Hollywood" (Goliath's spare tire, there) is heterogeneous in its political leanings, with different producers coming at problems from different angles. The "liberal Hollywood" idea, propagated by the behavior of celebrities in attempting to appear altruistic, neglects the whole...you know...range of beliefs represented in cinema.
washu_2004's avatar

Shameless Heckler

11,600 Points
  • Brandisher 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Peoplewatcher 100
Wendigo
Michael Noire
Oddly enough, Switzerland has guns all over the place but their violent crime and even gun fatalities are relatively low.
Not very oddly, the median income in Switzerland is the rough equivalent (after taxes) of $95,000 US, roughly three times ours. And they have a robust social "safety net," financed by all residents of Switzerland.


Finally someone gets it!!!!

Switzerland addresses the root causes of crime thus preventing a lot of crimes from being committed. Making widespread gun ownership a non issue as far as crime is concerned since the owners of these guns do not commit crimes with them.

America on the other hand has next to nothing in the way of social policies and what little they have is woefully inadequate to prevent crime, and since guns are freely available in the USA the amount of harm a criminal can cause is increased dramatically.

So rather than demonizing social policy as communist the gun lobby should be going all out to introduce and support social policy so that the number of gun related crimes falls and they do not have a new PR disaster to deal with every second week (which they usually address by blaming everything else except the blindingly obvious reasons why it happened).
Akiko-infinity's avatar

Wheezing Lunatic

12,300 Points
  • Alchemy Level 10 100
  • Survivor 150
  • Bidding War 100
Michael Noire
N3bu
Amusingly enough you didn't even answer your own god-damn rhetorical question.

What would have happened had the Jews been armed? They still would have been slaughtered. The difference being they would of taken some Nazis with them and there probably wouldn't have been any left to free from camps by 1945.


No, I answered it pretty clearly, when addressing the few jews who didn't surrender their weapons. As a minority surrounded by people who hated them, they would have had to have first converged and then left as a mobile army to a foreign land. Many would die but more of them would have survived in the long run. Many of them didn't leave though, because they grew too comfortable where they were and they believed things wouldn't get as bad as they became. While keeping their arms meant many were certain to die, you MUST think about the logistics. The majority of captured happened not with tanks, but with armed men. If they had killed some of the people who came to capture, imprison, and execute them, then those dead could not participate in the capture and execution of others. The infrastructure for genocide would have also been disrupted.

The reason the slaughter was so high was because of the lack of resistance. Where there is resistance to genocide, the total casualties are reduced.


Boy you're an ignorant one, aren't you? Most Jews WERE trying to leave. Other countries refused to let them in, preferring to not get involved, or due to anti-Semitic feelings. Getting out of their countries was difficult. Furthermore, what were they going to do? Go Rambo on the Gestapo? Oh good. Then you know what would have happened next? They would have been plowed over with tanks, bombed from the sky, and killed by their own neighbors. A gun won't protect you from a missile or a tank, sorry.

And why is it only Jews? What about the millions of others who died at the hands of the nazi's? Gays, Blacks, Gypsys, Poles, Communists, other political dissenters, and even those who obeyed Hitler's every command?

And many people DID survive. If they'd tried to shoot their way out, it's most likely that less would have lived, especially since THEY HAD NOWHERE TO GO! Even the countries that were working to get some Jews out of Europe could only do so much, so many were left with no recourse.

What about other victims of Hitler's regime? The enemy SOLDIERS that died at the hands of his armies and weapons? Guns didn't ensure their survival, did it?

One last thing. WE are NOT Nazi Germany. Those advocating certain gun laws do not display (for the most part) racism and hate for groups of people. AND NO ONE IS TRYING TO TAKE AWAY OUR DAMN GUNS. Get over yourself. We just don't think you need an automatic rifle with fifteen or thirty or more bullets in one clip to go hunting, or for home defense. And background checks are not a big request, okay? Mental health issues should be addressed in this whole gun business too, but I'll settle for background checks. How about classes and training to use the gun before you buy it, how about that? So you don't shoot off your friend's foot by accident. That stuff would be lovely.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games