Skip to content

Historical Revisionism in Germany?

Tyler Cowen, professor of economics at George Mason University, criticizes in his blog Marginal Revolution a "disturbing, trend in contemporary German culture to whitewash the past."
Prof. Cowen took the Oscar winning movie The Lives of Others
about the system of observation in former East Germany as an example: "The film shows many small acts of defiance against the Stasi, as if to redeem an otherwise sorry East German record."
He also expresses his dislike of the Sophie Scholl movie: "Last year -- fortunately I cannot remember the title -- we were shown the German martyrs against the Nazis." 
He stresses that his friends consider him "a cultural Germanophile (I could do "My Favorite Things German" for weeks), but I tend to be a cynic about the blacker historical episodes in the German past." Quite a few of his readers disagree strongly with Prof Cowen's statements on the movie and his comments on "whitewashing the past."
The Atlantic Review wrote about the Lives of Others and posted the trailer.

Last week, the state premier of Baden-Württemberg Günther Oettinger came under fire for praising his predecessor in a eulogy as an opponent of the Nazi regime, although Mr. Filbinger actually was a Nazi judge, who personally signed death sentences for soldiers deserting Hitler's army late in World War II. Mr. Oettinger has now "saved his political skin" by backing down from his original statement, writes DW World.
I think the fact that Mr. Oettinger did not get away with his attempt to rewrite history, indicates that historical revisionism does not have a chance of succeeding in Germany.
Related: Sign and Sight has translated Arno Widmann's article in the Frankfurter Rundschau: "The fine art of whitewashing"

John Rosenthal, an American journalist living in France, wrote about "Germany and Historical Revisionism" in his Transatlantic Intelligencer blog in 2005 and took the Neue Wache memorial as an example:
After Reunification, in 1993, the Neue Wache was re-opened as the “Central Memorial of the Federal Republic of Germany”. The inscription had been changed. Instead of the “Victims of Fascism and Militarism”, it is now dedicated to the “Victims of War and Tyranny [Gewaltherrschaft]”. The substitution of “Tyranny” for “Fascism” served to establish an equivalence between the Nazi regime and the Communist regime of East Germany. The substitution of “War” for “Militarism” served to evade the question of responsibility: notably, of German responsibility for the Second World War and hence for the carnage it entailed.
He concluded:
Although it is true that when Chancellor Schröder and President Köhler lay their wreaths before the Kollwitz Pietà they paid tribute to the victims of Nazi crimes, this is only part of the truth. They also – silently, without having to say any words that might provoke unease outside of Germany – paid tribute to many of the perpetrators of those crimes.
Personal comment: I don't notice a fundamental historical revisionism in Germany. I think that the past is commemorated rather than rewritten. There is still a lot of Vergangenheitsbewältigung in Germany, i.e. a sort of a reflective "coming to terms with the past." German history is part of every debate about sending German troops abroad. Recognitition of German victims of the second world war is more prominent now than before, but there is not more to it.
Though, maybe
Tyler Cowen and John Rosenthal are right, and I am just too biased and blinded to recognize the revisionism in Germany... What do you think, dear readers?

Trackbacks

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as Linear | Threaded

Pat Patterson on :

I know its only one blog but for up to date historical revisionism try EuroYank. [url]http://euroyank.blogspot.com/[/url]

JW-Atlantic Review on :

I like the Matrix stuff on that website best. Everytime I encounter a Deja Vu I think the Matrix got it right ;-) Is "Euroyank" somebody with dual citizenship?

Zyme on :

There is no revisionism going on here at all. This claim is simply a desperate measurement in trying to keep germans from gaining a more neutral point of view on the past and pursuing our interests actively again in the 21st century.

SarahS on :

Contrary to what Zyme says, I think that a certain amount of revisionism is necessary in Germany so that new generations can move [url=http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=260091083175765]forward[/url]. It can and must occur so that the grandsons and granddaughters who had nothing to do with these events can pursue their own interests with a blank, or at least neutral, slate. That doesn't mean I condone it.

Zyme on :

Maybe we have a different understanding of the term "revisionism". For example as long as the EU exists, there will hardly be any plans of re-claiming east-Prussia, Schlesia and Alsace-Lorraine. That´s why I don´t think we are in a process of revisionism right now. Far from it, we are simply in the process of getting our own point of view on world affairs - those of the past and those of the present. If you think this is revisionism, then of course you will come to a different result.

Bill L on :

Yes, which reminds to ask why the occupiers of east-Prussia, Schlesia and Alsace-Lorraine don't have to give that land back?

Zyme on :

That is easy: We are pursuing our interests via the EU today. The biggest partner in a Union always has the biggest influence. Why change Europe with force if you can do so without firing a single shot? :)

Don S on :

Revision is a normal part of the historical process. New generations of historians bring new viewpoints (and new explanations) to bodies of historical data. They may even dig up new facts or get access to records previously kept secret. When I attended university I recall one historian who proposed the idea that Stalin killed 10 million citizens of the USSR, a callow viewpoint which was utterly scorned by all right-thinking historians and academics everywhere. A few years later Gorbachev and Yelsin opened the books. The historian was wrong of course. Stalin's final toll was more like 30 million..... What Joerg describes is different, of course. But I wonder whether it is 'revisionism' or perhaps something a little more benign - the human tendency to 'gild the lily' or 'wear rose-coloured spectacles'. The deceased official was a Nazi judge. Well - they all were. Under National Socialism eveyr single judge worked for the National Socialism government. Some of those judges were obviously complicit by intent in the crimes - others may not have been very complicit or perhaps even tried in their way to work against what was happening. Most probably tried to close their eyes - a very human reaction. What do I think? I believe that when virtue equals suicide that one won't seem much human virtue, even from men and women who would normally act in what most consider a 'good' manner.

2020 on :

1985, President Reagan defended his visit to Bitburg (a military cemetery housing Nazi soldiers) by claiming the German soldiers "were victims, just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps." At last, I think we are superdenazified now.

Pat Patterson on :

I think Zyme has confused revanchism, the demand that those areas of Poland be returned as national policy. While revisionism would tend to see that seizure as an undeserved outcome of the war. Reagan's comments at a press conference came before, not after, he visited the military cemetary at Bitburg, on the same day he also visited Bergen-Belsen and the USAF base nearby. He noted that most of the dead were not SS(2,000+ vs. 50), that they were conscripts and still teenagers. Stating the obvious hardly qualifies of historical revisionism.

David on :

Tyler Cowen is completely off base in his criticism of The Lives of Others. The film shows how insidious the East German regime was in attempting to control everyone, even cooercing the cooperation of opponents, like the central female character - in the film, the actress Christa-Marie Sieland - who is forced to betray her own husband. I don't see any revisionism at all. (BTW, everyone NEEDS to see this film). Also where is the revisionism in Sophie Scholl, Die Letzten Tagen? Sophie was a true heroine of the resistance, and the film makes it clear that her heroism - and that of her brother - was the exception, not the norm. For me, a key figure in the film was the janitor at the university - the Good German who informs the Gestapo about the Scholls activities.

Fuchur on :

Spot on. I was also wondering whether Cowen really referred to "Sophie Scholl" when he complained about that movie last year that showed "German martyrs against the Nazis". If this really is the case, then I find this utterly stupid and disgraceful. There is nothing "fortunate" about not remembering the names of Sophie and Hans Scholl and their friends! Rather, I'd consider it a serious lack of education in a self-proclaimed Germanophile. And what an absurd notion is this anyway? Should we just forget about all the "great" people, if they were not "representative" of their time? I mean, isn't that just the point of being "great" - to not be like everybody else, to be different, exceptional?

EuroYank on :

I think EuroYank's blog is the best example of Historical revisionism on the net. His in depth research, and attention to detail is a masterpiece. EuroYank is numero uno, and he makes the the historical standard look like what it is - propaganda. A great job EuroYank!

Bill L on :

I don't know about Cohen, but Rosenthal is certainly right. Responsibility was never owned. It was all dumped on the Nazis. The Solution of Caiaphas. Germany's repentance was to point the finger at a small segment of their society and say, "They did it. They are the ones to blame. We are innocent." And the political left just capitalized on it to tar their political opponents. And what do you suppose anti-Americanism is if not a way to say, "See those Americans are just as bad as we were." Bizarre. You should see through our eyes when some aged German, Pole, or Austrian interviewed still tries to mock us with the line that they didn't know what was going on in the death camp 100 yards upwind. It's a joke over here. It has been abundantly proven that it happened because people went along with it, because they became as stupid and brutish as necessary to unknow what was going on, because they cashed in on the spoils, because they looked the other way, and because they liked feeling inherently superior to another kind of people = nationalism. The behavior of the bystanders was disgusting. That's why Eisenhaur was so furious he marched them through the camps to force them to look at what they'd done. Only then did they suddenly find their lost sense of shame. Momentarilly. And it wasn't just the Germans. In every occupied country people stood by and did nothing but gain from the Holocaust. Originally, the Nazis pleaded with the Vichy French and the Slovaks not to ship them the Jewish women and children too. But the Slovaks (head of state a Catholic priest at the time) wanted their property so much that they paid Germany to take them. Correction, only in some of the Scandinavian countries did a significant number of people try to save Jews instead of turn them in for a pat on the back and a cut of spoils. The stink of that still has not dissipated. It must be owned before it can be dealt with the legimate and effective and wholesome way. You can't smear it off on another people. By remaining in denial you just repress the shame and guilt, you don't get rid of it. And it keeps driving your behavior. To smear off on America and to make a virtue of being a bystander who STILL looks the other way while people are massecered by the million, pretending to do so in the name of peace and love. Yuck. If only European society could own it, and then move on. Europeans would soon know the joy of life again, because they would see that they aren't like that anymore and have reformed. But I doubt it will ever happen. I don't think anyone ever faces having done something like that.

Fuchur on :

You mean of course Pontius Pilate, not Caiaphas /smartellek off. IMHO your assessment of "Germany's repentence" is completely off the mark. And Rosenthal's logic is just above me: So now it's revisionist to remember the "Victims of War and Tyranny"? And to commemorate the Holocaust with a huge memorial in the nation's capital is a dead sure sign that Germans just want to forget about the whole thing?? That's, um, rather peculiar reasoning... Undoubtedly, dealing with such a painful and dark chapter in history as the Nazi era is an immensely difficult task. But overall, I think Germany has done a pretty good job. Here's an example that came to my mind: A few years ago, a proposal was put forth to name a school in my vicinity the "von Stauffenberg Gymnasium", after one of the "heroes" of July 20th 44. It was turned down, mainly on initative of the history teachers, who pointed out that the role of von Stauffenberg and his accomplices had been quite questionable in the long years leading up to 1944. IMO that reveals a high level of awareness, and it is not at all the blind hero-worshipping that Cowen feels to perceive. It is not at all the black-and-white "the Germans against the evil Nazis"-view that you accuse Germans of. Instead, it shows a very distinctive and mature approach.

Bill L on :

No, I mean what I said. It was the high priest Caiaphas' idea that one man should die for the sin of the whole people. Economical solution. That's why they went to Pilate. They were throwing a scrap to the dog who was about to release the soldiers on the whole city. They blamed Jesus for the unrest. I'm an atheist and I know that. What's your excuse? That ain't what Rosenthal said. I reject your straw man. If Germans (and other Europeans) had faced it, they wouldn't still feel the need to keep smearing off that guilt on the Great Scapegoat. Who do you Germans think you're fooling? You prance around like the Emperor in his new clothes, sure that nobody can see that your accusations against us are projection. All projection. Not that we have no faults. You just don't see them. It's YOUR faults you see in us. The same with all the bystanders - your parents and grandparents and even you if you're old enough. Own it. Weep for it. Make what amends you can. It's called repentance, and you dodn't even need to believe in a God to cure yourself this way. But if you Euros keep trying to cheat by continuing to smear and smear smear it off instead, to tar the shiny spot on the nation that put you to shame, then you'lll never get over it. And then of course, national character assassination of "the Americans" adds more guilt that needs to be smeared off. So it's a vicious cycle. Deal with it already. Face it. Your parents, your grandparents. And you if you're old enmough. Deal with what you did so that you can be free of it already. Because the way you are trying to cheat is making you crazy.

Bill L on :

I forgot to mention something crucial. Europeans DO have to reform. You can't ever be happy again until you know you are no longer like that. That's redemption. It means Europeans have STOP DOING IT. But you're STILL doing it. Look at what is done to the image of "the Americans" in your media and in polite conversation even in public? In no way is it different from what was done to the image of Jew back then. So you still haven't learned your lesson. You're no different. Get a clue: bigotry is bigotry, whether the kind of people you're trying to get a step up is Jews or Americans. And you're still looking the other way while millions are massacred. And you mock doing so out of - of all things - humanitarian concern. Gag me with a spoon. You demonize those who do take action. Why? Because their courage puts you to shame? So, don't tell me Europeans learned their lesson. You anti-learned it. No wonder most Germans are so crazy they think America is a bigger threat than Iran.

Volker on :

We don't own our History? Maybe your right, after all there are more WWII movies from Hollywood than WWII documentarys from Germany (and we have made many). But History is nothing that you can own, what you propose is denial. Something like "Yeah it happened but we moved on, so this shit will never happen again."? Sure we can do that, but to tell the truth, it will happen again, maybe not in Germany or the U.S.. Shit like that happens in Africa now and what do we do? Not enough, neither one of us, so maybe we are already in denial and YOU aren't better or worse than us. "Because the way you are trying to cheat is making you crazy." Get a Doc, fast!

Fuchur on :

So Jesus was just a pawn sacrifice from Caiaphas to appease the Romans?! Well: no. Actually, it's the other way around: Pilate sentenced Jesus to death in order to appease the angry mob that Caiaphas had incited. And... whatever, just read it up. "That ain't what Rosenthal said. I reject your straw man." It's exactly what Rosenthal said. Just that he draped some gobledygook around it, so that it wouldn't sound so obviously demented. "your accusations against us are projection" We've had several discussions here on this already, z.B. in this thread [url]http://www.atlanticreview.org/index.php?url=archives/563-How-Widespread-is-Anti-Americanism.html&serendipity%5Bcview%5D=threaded[/url]. I stick with Katzenstein and Keohane's excellent analysis, and their statement that "big theories" (i.e. the attempt to find the ONE predominat reason for anti-Americanism) generally turn out to be flawed when you take a closer look at them. Same thing with yours. First of all, I'd like to point out that you've provided nothing at all to underpin your thesis. Jörg has provided the Öttinger example, I've contested Rosenthal and brought an exmple from my personal experience - what have you got? I mean, it's your point, so at least try to make it! Ok, here are a few reasons why I don't buy your theory: 1. Anti-Americanism exists also in states that unlike Germany have no particularly shameful past to project, e.g. GB, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, or India or Latin America. 2. Often, anti-Americanism comes from international groups (Greenpeace, Attac, AI, ...). 3. "Anti-Americanism" exists in the US itself - so, what are these people "projecting"? 4. I'd like to see you explain how e.g. criticizing the US for not signing Kyoto is a projection of Germany's Nazi past?? 5. It wasn't only America which "put Germany to shame", but also e.g Canada and GB. So, why don't we Germans also project our horrible past also onto Canada and GB? Concerning your accusation that Germany doesn't deal with its past properly: Again, you've provided nothing to make your point. Have you ever read a German school-book? Do you have any idea of what's on the "recommended reading" lists for German schools? What German books or movies do you know that deal with this topic? What exactly is your judgement based upon??

Bill L on :

Don't put words in my mouth. What makes you think I give a rodent's behind about whether you agree with my "theory" or not? You assume a lot. What makes you think I must publish a freakin' thesis here to justify what I think? I just told you what I think. Reread that last sentence carefully. That's the point: that's what I think. How do you like what I think about Germans and Europeans? I think German and European anti-Americanism is pure, unadulterated bigotry and projection - accusing us of your flaws to smear them off. That's what I think. How do you like me thinking that about Europeans? Maybe Europeans had better change their ways to make me think the better of them, no? If not, then why do you think that Americans should react to European bashing of us by trying to make Euros think well of us? It doesn't work that way, does it, duh? Moving on, you are absolutely correct that projection of shame for the Holocaust doesn't tell the whole story. There's much more to it. The most important other part is how the politics of the Left have been exploiting that shame for purely political purposes. Successfully. Anything to denigrate capitalism (and by association, their political opponents). The European socialist "ruling class" is actually the most to blame, because they have plagued Germans with never-ending guilt trip over WWII and the Holocaust to prime them for projection and then they sic them on America through the anti-Americanism they broadcast. Get it? Prime people with a need to smear off and then point at a target for them to smear off on. Typical socialist tactics. But that's another long story. And then there's the story of Europe's chief export to the world - anti-Americanism. For decades. A never-ending daily barage of it to every corner of the planet, especially the Middle East, in dozens of languages. And then there's just plain envy in other parts of the world. yes envy. Not a rare motive for what people think and say about others, but a common one. Europe's socialist political class exploits that too. I don't care if you are convinced. I wasn't trying to convince you. But I will say that your logic is flawed. You say that just because my "theory" doesn't explain every act of anti-Americanism that it is flawed. Try thinking straight on that.

Pat Patterson on :

And as usual EuroYank has a tin ear for sarcasm and grammar.

Markus on :

"He also stresses that his friends consider him "a cultural Germanophile" I am convinced that he has black friends as well. He can't be a racist then.

EuroYank on :

In Israel today, in the USA today and in every country where genocide is committed be it against Palestinians, or Vietnamese or all over Africa, the West is strangely silent. The USA for example has waged genocide against 3rd world countries since the Phillipine insurection in the 19th century. Americans have exterminated 6-8 million lives. Stalin exterminated 30 million of his own people and Mao Tse Tung of China has the world record of 50 million Chinese exterminated. The Israeli survivors are receiving regular payments to this day and have been for over a half century from Germans that were not even born. The Vietnamese and the Phillipinos have received not once cent from the Americans, and the Palestinians are still persecuted. Today the Americans barely notice the millions of Iraqis they butchered since 1991 or the millions of babies killed because of sanctions. So much for your theoretical tripe. When it comes to nationalism and patriotism, Americans are no better than any other people. They will kill indiscriminately innocent lives and then write the history to justify it all. Bull shit to all of you part time historical justifications!

GM Roper on :

Joerg, great post; interesting info with a really good discussion. I'm somewhat aghast however at those that wish to pin the holocaust on any German born say after 1930, children living during the Nazi Regime had nothing to do with the decisions of Hitler and company. Even those "forced" into the Hitler Jugend cannot be held accountable for their actions as they were under the age of majority. Does the record need to stand as written (sans new additional information? Of course it does, but if all of Germany wishes to dissassociate itself from the trepidations of the Nazi's, who can blame them? My grandfather was an ethnic German, I was born in Germany, though my parent's were American and as a a child in the United States, I remember being called a Nazi by kids who were only acting as kids act and repeating the crap of their parents. I've been asked if I apologize for the actions of my countrymen. What? How can I possibly apologize for something I didn't do? How can modern Germans apologize for behavior they had nothing to do with? Does wearing sackcloth and ashes never end? I also note in the thread above a comment "You should see through our eyes when some aged German, Pole, or Austrian interviewed still tries to mock us with the line that they didn't know what was going on in the death camp 100 yards upwind." What nonsense, not all Germans/Poles/Austrians lived "100 yards upwind" of the ovens, please, there may well have been some that didn't know. Most of the perpetrators and those who did know are dead, the rest will be dead sometime in the next 20 years or so. Do the sins of the father really need to be passed down to the 7th Generation? The only ones that need to apologize are those that actually did something, or knew something and did nothing. No one else. See my article on [url=http://gmroper.mu.nu/archives/216842.php]The Psychology Of The Apology[/url]. Someday folks, we have to grow up and move forward. Remember the past, but don't relive it every time you turn around.

Fuchur on :

As a German born long after 1945, I have never felt the need to apologize for the Nazi crimes. I've always felt that a person is only responsible for his/her own actions. What's more, I'd even consider it somewhat inappropriate, "grandstanding", as you put it in your article: What's my authority to issue such an apology? And I see a danger here: Because assuming all the responsibility for this great terrible evil in a way makes you yourself "great" - and, being fraught with it, you can now also claim a greater amount of wisdom and experience. But of course, things are not so easy. I've always seen it like this: When a friend of your father asks you for help - then you of course feel you have some sort of responsibility to help him. Likewise, if someone is in trouble, and you know that it's your father's fault, you feel in a way responsible. So, we are not totally detached from our parents' doings. It's just not so easy to define how far this responsibility goes. I guess every German will agree that we have a special responsibility towards Holocaust survivors. But beyond that... everybody will have to decide for himself.

Bill L on :

Who demanded an apology? Read again. You read an awful lot of invisible ink. Documentary after documentary comes out with people (Europeans from every occupied country as well as Germany) still denying (even when confronted with written proof that they turned a neighbor in for the price of his property) that they don't know how those records got there and that they didn't know what was going on. It's the same ol same old "I see nothing. I hear nothing. I know nothing." A joke over here. Europeans need to get out of denial, in which they blame other people, Nazis only, and face the facts about the bystanders. Is that saying it clear enough? They need to stop making the same mistakes. 1. Refusing to lift a finger to save people form being mass murdered, condemning those who do take action, and then mocking us with the line that their refusal to step up is for humanitarian reasons. Millions may die, and they don't lift a finger. Is there anything unreasonable in that requirement? That was their error during the Holocaust, and they are still committing it today. So how different are they? Millions die and all they can do is talk. What a virtue they make of callous cowardice. Have Euros given in and agreed that their soldiers in Afghanistan may acctually do any fighting yet? Have they upped their force to contributions that they don't have to keep secret for shame? 2. They need to stop trying to pull an identity switch with "their friends," by portraying us as evil Nazis. Too much to ask? They demonized and dehumanized the image of the Jew while working themselves up into the Holocaust, and now they're doing the same thing to image of the American. That's reform? Only when they face facts that it wasn't "other" people who did it and STOP doing it, will they be able to move on. Because then they will no longer be people who do that stuff. But in denial and through anti-Americanism, they will never be able to. Now, I am eager to see what you will make out of that.

JW-Atlantic Review on :

"Europeans need to get out of denial, in which they blame other people, Nazis only," What makes you think that today's Germans blame "the Nazis" rather than Germans? Nazis were Germans, obviously. "They need to stop making the same mistakes. 1. Refusing to lift a finger to save people form being mass murdered, condemning those who do take action, and then mocking us with the line that their refusal to step up is for humanitarian reasons. Millions may die, and they don't lift a finger." What are you saying here? Todays Germans do the same mistakes as the generation of their grandparents? You seem to think refusing to help the people of Darfur thousands of miles away is as bad as refusing to help your Jewish next-door neighbor. To follow your logic: Americans are guilty of not stopping the Holocaust thousands of miles away. Americans are guilty because they only joined WWII after they were attacked. Actually, I don't know if you were talking about Darfur. You are not specific enough, but talk in very general terms. "condemning those who do take action," I guess you are not talking about Darfur, because the US is not "taking action." The US is sending food (just like Europe is), but the US refuses to contribute troops to a UN mission to Darfur. What kind of action do you want to see anyway?

Bill L on :

Glad you mentioned Darfur. Back when Secretary of State Colin Powell and the UN Secretary general went there to focus world attention on the genocide a few years ago, we were preparing to establish a no-fly zone that would immediately stop the killing. It would have grounded the Sudanese air force so they could no longer fly support for the junjaweed and it would sent the junjaweed scattering for caves in the hills. But French President Chirac (with German Chancellor Schroeder's support) made a speach in which he said he feared that the US was thinking of invading the Muslim land of Sudan. End of plans for no-fly-zone. That was a bridge too far = once too often perverse Europe played that stunt on us. Now accuse us of isolationism, right? Now say that the only reason we haven't taken action is because the Sudan has nothing we want. But if we had taken action, you would say that it was for Sudanese oil. That's Europe. Double-dealing and treacherous, through and through, as in sandbagging Colin Powell over Iraq. In fact, when the tsunami struck, Chirac did it again. When the US sent a battle group to aid the victims, Chirac had another public premonition, this time that the US was thinking of invading Muslim Indonesia! Every goody-goody Euro sucked that one up too. The UN guy in charge did likewise till he got word that we were sending orders to tell the battle group turn around and go back to Japan with its helicopters. Then all of a sudden you should have seen the UN guy falling over himself to reverse himself and say that those fears of the US being out to invade Indonesia were ridiculous and that our ships and helicopters were worth their weight in gold for saving lives. That's Europe, always with its anti-American foot in its mouth. So, Darfur? Let Europe do it. We do not have to walk into that trap. By playing that dirty trick, Europe releived us of the moral obligation to act militarily. Because we have the inalienable right to pursue happiness. No one ever is morally obligated to do something that will bring hurt upon him for the sake of others. That is a law of Nature. So, we don't have to help others when we know that they are being used as bait for a trap. If we took action there, Euros would scream that we evil as usual, inciting more anti-American hatred of us to get Americans hated and killed just for being American. That's Europe's plan: get America to do it (through moral bullying if necessary) and then demonize America for doing it. So Europe is morally obligated to take action in Darfur, not the US. Which is why nothing will ever get done for those people. They are as callous as Chirac, upon whose head is the blood of all in Durfur murdered since.

JW-Atlantic Review on :

I don't care what Chirac might have said. I wonder why the US cares. Please, just tell me what Schroeder had to do it. What has Schroeder done to "support" Chirac on Darfur. If you don't get specific, I will have to assume that you are just telling one of these popular conspiracy theories about the evil Chirac-Schroeder alliance, which somehow manages to prevent the lone superpower to do what it pleases. I have heard so much blame on Chirac and Schroeder for the mess in Iraq. I am sure, Schroeder and Chirac are also responsible for the Virginia Tech shooting: German Anti-Americanism is the fault. Therefore the killings in a German language class....

JW-Atlantic Review on :

@ Bill Just to add: A No-Fly-zone would slow down the killings, but would not end them. Unfortunately. Why do so many people exaggerate the power of the Air Force to win military battles?

EuroYank on :

and Pat Robertson I purposely misspelled a few words so you would have something to squak about. But I wish to thank you for mentioning my site. For a guy that wears a dress and uses makeup, and has homosexual tendencies I do owe you a debt of gratitude and will not make any remarks regarding your personal demeanor which I disaprove of. Please try to keep a civil tongue when you respond to this post.

Bill L on :

"For a guy that wears a dress and uses makeup, and has homosexual tendencies I do owe you a debt of gratitude...." What does your wearing a dress and having homosexual tendencies have to do with it? Please, keep things like that to yourself. We aren't interested.

JW-Atlantic Review on :

Just ignore him.

ADMIN on :

Please note that by default the comments in this blog are threaded rather than linear, i.e. some of the latest responses to comments are not at the bottom, but in the middle of the thread right behind the comment they respond to. At the top of the comments section you have the option to change the view from threaded to linear (=chronological), which enables you to see the latest comments at the end of the thread.

EuroYank on :

Reply to JW-Atlantic Review Just ignore JW (Atlantic Review) he is part of the "Establishment," and anybody that knows military history also knows that an enemy that is willing to commit suicide in the nuclear age will eventually find a way to rain nukes on America (be it in the form of suitcase nukes or missile nukes) and this type of terrorism has no borders. And most of the world thinks the ISRAELIS are the NAZIS today. (they have 500 nukes and never signed any agreements!) And also most of the world thinks AMERICANS are just PAID MERCENARIES for the JEWS!

Zyme on :

You should be more careful what you write online - at least if you intend to visit Germany :P

EuroYank on :

Zyme very wise of you to notice BUT, as you know the Americans fought a civil war (1861-1865) and the Yankees won and according to Abe Lincoln slavery was ended. Even after Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King, and John F Kennedy, and Robert Kennedy were assassinated, slavery was not ended in the 1960's in the USA, but the USA claims it is a FREE country under its constitution and all its people are created equal. Just look at Katrina and the promises 50 billion dollars reconstruction, the (corrupt CRACKER:WHITE TRASH)state of Lousianna is holding the money and building 300 thousand dollars luxury homes to prevent the homeless blacks from returning and rebuilding with FEDERAL money that NEVER ARRIVED. And yet the SLAVE LOVING USA wants the world to follow its NAZI example. Every country be it CHINA or RUSSIA, or Serbia, or most of AFRICA has a NAZI TRADITION. The fact is the Germans LOST THE WAR, that is why they must pay COMPENSATION even today 65 years after the fact. American war crimes against other people since its American Empire beginnings are well documented BUT the Americans won those wars and even the LOST Vietnam war, NO AMERICAN COMPENSATION was ever paid to Vietnam,or the Phillipines, or Nicaragua, or has any COMPENSATION for SLAVERY to American blacks or dozens of other countries every been paid BECAUSE the AMERICAN PSYCE of SUPERIORITY forbids it. GERMANY YOU LOST THE WAR and you fought THE ENTIRE CAPITALIST and COMMUNIST WORLD. Therefore the SAGA CONTINUES

Zyme on :

What Saga?

mbast on :

Very interesting topic. And one you can't really comprehend unless you happen to live in Germany. Why? Because nazi Germany is a constant in the German psyche. Most Germans I know will always, always check their actions against their cultural and political conscience with a special check for any trace of Nazi ideology. It's got nothing to do with "having a bad conscience", since there are not many Germans still around who really had a part in these events. However, it does have to do with a perception that Germany as a whole has a specific responsibility to make sure events like these will never be repeated. If you have been to school in Germany you will find that a very large part of the history curriculum deals with Nazi Germany and the reasons for the war and the holocaust. Most Germans know more about this than they do about medieval history or antiquity. In politics, you will find that any kind of even remotely nazi or nationalist ideology will raise a lot of discussions and soul-searching. There is still a lot of concern that national socialist ideologies might become too powerful again, and a huge majority of Germans still fears this. IMO they do have a point, considering there are now NPD representatives in the parliaments of Saxony and Mecklenburg-Western Pommerania. In foreign policy, relations with Israel receive extra care and the Israelo-German relationship, as seen from the German side, is by itself a constant reminder of the German "special resonsibility". However, during the last decades, this perception of "special responsibility" had a tendency to degenerate into paralysis and self-castigation. It was politically incorrect to be "proud to be German" like an American would be proud to be American or a Frenchman proud to be French. This tendency seems to have vanished, or at least to have been diminished. Films like Sophie Scholl or "The Lives of Others" are not revisionist in nature. First because they show real events or have a historically correct context (so how could they be revisionist?) and secondly because these films are offset by a plethora of other films, books etc. that correctly depict the darker side of Germany (Nazi Germany, Holocaust, but also GDR, Stasi etc.; btw, talking about Filbinger, if you want to learn about judges in Nazi Germany, read the book "Furchtbare Juristen" by Ingo Müller). IMO,Germany, as any other nation, has a past. In this past, as in any other nation's past, there are very dark chapters, with the nazi period being particularly dark. This does not mean that Germany is per se bad or evil. It does not mean that Germany is per se good either. It means that Germans have a cultural and historical responsibility, but not to the point of always having to be ashamed to be German. On the contrary, modern Germany has a lot of things going for it, and Germans should be aware of the good things in their history and culture as well as the bad. That's not revisionism, and it's certainly not whitewashing. It's simple common sense.

Add Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

Form options