Basically every powerful civilization has committed at least one horrific genocide. The only special thing about the Nazis seems to be that they were better and more efficient at it.
Nazis killed europeans so it's bad. The British Belgian and French killing billions of africans and indians is nobody cares because those would have killed one another in even greater numbers if not for the benevolent foreign mingling anyways.
>>18664074The deliberate slaughter of unarmed civilians was seen as evil and dishonorable pretty much every time in history. Look up how Christian writers described the slaughter of Muslim civilians in Jerusalem during the 1st Crusade, or the mass killings by the Mongols.>basically every powerful civilization has committed at least one horrific genocideThe way the Nazis went about it israre. Most mass death events happened as a consequence of other policies, such as starvation and violence in the context of economic exploitation (Bengal famine, Belgian Congo etc.) which is bad, but people could at least justify the deaths as not the main intent. The Nazi's main goal was the killing, which is rare, though not unique (other examples are the Armenian and Circassian genocides, which were also widely condemned).
>>18664074>Basically every powerful civilization has committed at least one horrific genocide.The Nazis planned to genocide the Jews, the Northern Slavs, the Romani, the Gays and your mum for being too fat.The Germans also deal with insurgencies about as well as the Russians, so lots of hearts and minds were lost.
>>18664074They were better than the people they fought
>>18664084The Germans redistributed food from the east to feed Germany to avoid a 1918 situation.How is that different from Britain redistribute food from India to feed Britain?Yeah the Bengal famine was smaller than the famines in occupied east but Britain had greater access to world market and didnt have to feed an entire continent that was also under blockade.Were the nazies ideological nutjobs? Without a doubt, but lets not pretend here that circumstances played no part whatsoever.
>>18664074>genocided white people and put jews in well kept camps>sent jews with their money to make israel>gave jews a "tragedy" to get what they want>gave power to bolsheviks>ruined europe>ruined nationalism>ruined racism>ruined swastikas>ruined cool military uniforms>ruined prussionism>ruined aryanism
>>18664074They were ok, just 6000 years late to the civilization.
>>18664084>deliberate slaughter of unarmed civilianssomething which Germany never did.>evil and dishonorableThe mongols and timurids did this as sport lol.africans do it today.>the nazis main goal was killingnope. No such policy statement exists that say "we are going to target explicitly unarmed civilians">widely condemenedby whom?Where is the wide condemnation of the mongols from the 1200s??rather eurocentric to be against genocide desu.
>>18664084First of all I don't like Hitler or the nazis but...The holocaust would never have happened without ww2, and many jews killed were communists on the east front anyways. What you need to keep in mind is that the nazis didn't kill the jews because they thought of them as biologically inferior (although they did of course think that aswell) but rather because they thought the jews were their enemies on an almost spiritual level, they were "agents of communism" and an anti-German force, and they were guilty untill proven innocent on this charge.The actual cause of the holocaust of history is in-fact a lot more similar to the way lefties think about "whiteness" as a road-block to their agendas than anything to do with social darwinism or whatever.
>>18664097They were not meaningfully different from those they fought
>>18665074This.The holocaust was a consequence of ww2, not pre-planned before ww2.
This is what we’re honestly talking about now?
>>18664074I don't think you can glide over the sheer scale of it, but I read "A History of Fascism" by Stanley Payne which went into both fascist Italy and the Third Reich. Payne is a relatively conservative historian (who has been accused of being sympathetic to Franco, apparently, due to some of his other works). The details of Italian fascism was the most interesting, and I don't get the sense that it was particularly "evil" and was in fact much less murderous than the Bolsheviks by a long shot. But when I read the chapters on the Third Reich, there were parts of it that reminded me that they had a real and radically evil streak. Like I knew that already but it becomes routine, like a trope, until you sit down and really read about it and it's like yeah these people were doing something beyond the realm of what is acceptable or tolerated and they needed to be destroyed. Like the complete antithesis of Christian values.I don't know how else to put it. I know we're all supposed to be relativists nowadays but they experimented early on with putting crippled downie kids to death in gas vans. You're just like what the fuck. It's like, "Is the sadistic murderer from the Saw movies really that bad?" Part of it might also be German autism coupled with the authoritarian culture of the country. People were indoctrinated to follow orders. Then you put them in those knee-high killing boots. You tell Germans to raise their arms at the same time, they do it on command.>>18665074They did believe in social darwinism however.
>>18664518>deliberate slaughter of unarmed civilians>something which Germany never did.
Apparently the number of disabled people slaughtered by the end of the war was between 250,000 to 350,000 in a program called Aktion T4. It was bound up in theories of improving the race by selecting the "weak" out and culling the herd. This is galling even compared to ethnic genocides which can occur in the context of a war and where there's enmity and hatred involved. But this wasn't that, it was just murdering the most helpless people based on some mad scientific theory. https://youtu.be/PF88psyCipg
>>18664074>The only special thing about the Nazis seems to be that they were better and more efficient at it.They did it across a whole continent, after having signed and ratified international treaties that explicitly forbid those actions, in many foreign countries instead of their own (unlike e.g. Balkan Turks or Ottoman Armenians), to people who had nothing to do with Germany and were in no position to ever become a threat to the German people (e.g. Hungarian Jews or Greek leftists), turning technology that was used to help people into technology that was used to kill people, brought back slavery into Europe after a long time without it, and most of their victims were literate Europeans i.e. more valuable than random Asian peasants or African jungle dwellers. Like it or not, Nazi crimes were special.
>>18665509>They did believe in social darwinism howeverUhh yeah... do you think I dispute this? It had little to do with the killing of 6 million though.
>>18665792Why does it receive so much attention compared to United Statians putting people in death camps or infecting blacks with syphillis as an experiment.
>>18665509Fascism would probably have been looked upon far differently today if Italy had stayed out of the war, or even preserved the Stresa Front and joined the allies from the start.Germany showed traces of genocidal behaviour already before ww2. The mass killing in German east Africa is sometimes refered to as the worlds first genocide, and the Germans were the ones most aware of the Turkish genocide on Armenias but showed complete indifference, and already during ww1 they started to have hostile feelings towards their jewish population and started to 'register' them.The NSDAP took it to the next step, but things had been brewing.
