What Sort of People Commit Genocide?

[SouthernTrendkill]

Yeah I saw a movie about this from the 40s. It was in German, too, called The Murderers Are Among Us where this guy comes back from the war and finds his old colonel who killed thousands of civillians on Christmas day, while they were decorating a Christmas tree.

If you'll allow me a good bit of conjecture, I'm not even remotely suprised that they lived like that in the off-period between mass-murders of women and children. That's the way life works for many people. In society we are often encouraged to seperate our work from our play, our good times from our bad times, and our hearts from our minds. When I question my life or my society, the answer I recieve from people time and time again is the notion that you simply must live life. And therefore you must find a way to live life. In Germany nazism wasn't a fringe, it was the law of the land. It makes complete sense that people would do what was necessary, to follow nazi orders, to rise through the ranks and try to achieve the same security that the majority of people are striving for in their lives. What other choice did they have? I'll only speak for myself, but I live my life that way as well. How many thousands of dying poor kids are there in other countries while I sip my Dr. Pepper with my laptop at a university? We are not made to care for each other, only for what is in front of us. That is how we are conditioned. Whether that is good or bad, you decide.

 

[Norsemaiden]

http://www.holology.com/history.html

Establishing the time frame in this case is a choice between greater accuracy according to the given set of events and providing an intentionally exaggerated allowance to cover every possible act. An exaggerated allowance would use the fall of 1939 until the spring of 1945, the entire length of the war, as the time frame. However, this time frame would be misleading because the killing of the millions in the Holocaust occurred at the Nazi execution camps that only operated from around early 1942 until mid 1944. For greater accuracy I’ll use the time frame from the beginning of 1942 until the middle of 1944, or 30 months. Here’s the math:
Total killed (upper limit): 26,000,000
Time frame: (365*2)+(30*6) = 910 days
Average deaths per day: 26,000,000/910 = 28,571
Bodies cremated per hour: 28,571/24 = 1190

Total killed (lower limit): 11,000,000
Time frame: (365*2)+(30*6) = 910 days
Average deaths per day: 11,000,000/910 = 12,088
Bodies cremated per hour: 12,088/24 = 504


Clearly the Nazis were killing people at a frenetic rate the Khmer Rouge could only have aspired towards, as even on the smallest total number, the Nazis out-killed the KR by eleven times on the daily average! This is especially peculiar because it occurred during the largest and most expensive (and expansive) hot war in human history. So even though the KR had only internal issues to deal with and no external war to fight at the same time, the Nazis managed to fight a two front war against three major enemies and still exterminate several hundred people every day for nearly three years, and that's just an average!

Another aspect of the Nazi liquidation machine that demands further investigation is that of cremation. Complete cremation of bodies is a very energy intensive operation and even so it still leaves a few pounds of ash and bone fragments per person, 5% of the body. [2] So multiply that five pounds minimum (100lb body*.05 = 5 lbs) by the number of people cremated:Upper limit: 5*1190 = 5950 pounds of human ash produced per day * 910 days = 5,414,500 lbs total
Lower limit: 5*504 = 2520 pounds of human ash produced per day * 910 days = 2,293,200 lbs total


That’s a hell of a lot of ash. So where is it all of it? Since the Nazi extermination camps are in Poland, the first place to look for these massive quantities of human ash is, logically, at one of these camps: Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Majdanek, Sobibór, and Treblinka, but more on that in a moment. It should also be mentioned here that these extermination camps were discovered and controlled by the Communist Russian Soviet forces as they rolled west towards Berlin during the final phase of World War II.

Another technical problem also exists, the time limit, for it takes at least two hours to cremate one body in a special, modern oven at a constant temperature between 760 to 1150 °C (1400 to 2100 °F). [2] Old cremation ovens would have taken longer, five to ten hours per body, especially if they were fueled by less efficient means than a gas like propane

etc

 

[b.good]

it just starts out as one powerful and influential person who blames all the problems that are going on, on a specific race or group and everyone goes after them.

 

[DoctorX3]

You really do paint with a very broad brush Doctor. I sincerely question the assertion that a "significant" number of the offspring of white Americans are multiracial. Of course 'significance' is subjective in itself, so perhaps it means something different to each of us.

Well according to the United States Census, just under 2.5 percent of the population registers as multiracial, and most of them are part white. 2.5 percent seems minor, until you consider that the average person wouldn't have self-applied the tag of mixed ancestry until recently, and that said 2.5 percent is enough to populate a large city. "Multiracial" also formerly would have implied the descendant of an illicit love affair or rape between black and white. The influx of Asian and Latino immigration over the last fifty years, combined with the move of those remaining Native American citizens into urban environments have further complicated our society.

Now not ALL of those people are part white, but the vast majority are.

http://www.censusscope.org/us/chart_multi.html

Some of us do indeed frown on miscegenation in general - but not expressly for reasons of political clout or intimidation I can assure you. Some of us simply reason that unique racial/enthic groups of all variety are worth perserving as they are. Admittedly, there is already great diversity within each racial-type and ethnic subgroup - but breeding out ethnic distinctions and peculiarities isn't something some of us choose to support.

Well then, you're largely supporting aesthetic distinctions. Most white ethnicities in the US have been homogenized into an artificial WASP ideal. Immigrants from non-white backgrounds once felt pressure to assimilate in similar fashion, but that has passed. The main differences remain cultural and physical, but not genetic. The actual ACTG codes of an African, an Asian, An Aboriginal Australian, a Native American, and a European are virtually identical.

It is instructive that you note Black political leaders and their open calls for distinctions along racial lines - even among the decidedly "diluted." Such racial consciousness among Whites in America would be dismissed as so much vile "racism" without question. Identity politics is a complex and duplicitous game, is it not?

Yes, but this comes with a note of irony. The "one drop rule" was originally constructed by cynical white politicians in order to stigmatize the offspring of inter-breeding. Now is is used by cynical black politicians who wish to increase their image of power and authority.

And this is the crux of the issue. The whole concept of an inferior race and a superior race is a game played by the ruling class, in order to convince the working class and middle class to oppress each other. The "ubermensch" and "undermensch" are illusions. If you eliminate the factor of race and look at the issues of crime, education, and reproduction in the working class, the statistics are almost indistinguishable.

Marx knew this back in the 19th century, which is what made him one of the most brilliant sociologists of all time (despite the bullshit political and economic theories he also espoused). What he unfortunately did not predict, was the ubiquitous doublethink which led so many Americans to believe they were part of the middle class, even as its ranks shriveled.

 

[DoctorX3]

Yeah I saw a movie about this from the 40s. It was in German, too, called The Murderers Are Among Us where this guy comes back from the war and finds his old colonel who killed thousands of civillians on Christmas day, while they were decorating a Christmas tree.

If you'll allow me a good bit of conjecture, I'm not even remotely suprised that they lived like that in the off-period between mass-murders of women and children. That's the way life works for many people. In society we are often encouraged to seperate our work from our play, our good times from our bad times, and our hearts from our minds. When I question my life or my society, the answer I recieve from people time and time again is the notion that you simply must live life. And therefore you must find a way to live life. In Germany nazism wasn't a fringe, it was the law of the land. It makes complete sense that people would do what was necessary, to follow nazi orders, to rise through the ranks and try to achieve the same security that the majority of people are striving for in their lives. What other choice did they have? I'll only speak for myself, but I live my life that way as well. How many thousands of dying poor kids are there in other countries while I sip my Dr. Pepper with my laptop at a university? We are not made to care for each other, only for what is in front of us. That is how we are conditioned. Whether that is good or bad, you decide.

Power and wealth are powerful motivating factors, and so are fear and ignorance. I know a small number of Germans opposed the Nazis (Marlene Dietrich was one), just as a small number of Americans opposed the Iraq war at its outset. I was one of them.

The Nazi party were the controlling force in German politics in the 1930s, but they did not hold a majority of seats in the Reichstag. People forget this, but they were a minority government. It wasn't until Hitler was given emergency powers after the Reichstag fire that Germany became a one party state and elections were abolished.

Democracy is easily perverted to the totalitarian authority of a dictatorship, or the anarchy of mob rule. An educated populace and functioning rule of law are important pretexts for a functioning democracy. They help maintain the checks and balances which prevent such abuses of power. While Hitler may have voiced support for education, his most fervent supporters were often rural and uneducated Germans, who suffered worst under the depression, and were apt to blame Jews and foreigners for their hardships.

Wars are often driven by cynical competition over territory resources but reframed for the public as matters of great national crises. In the words of Herman Goering:

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

 

[SouthernTrendkill]

Power and wealth are powerful motivating factors, and so are fear and ignorance. I know a small number of Germans opposed the Nazis (Marlene Dietrich was one), just as a small number of Americans opposed the Iraq war at its outset. I was one of them.

The Nazi party were the controlling force in German politics in the 1930s, but they did not hold a majority of seats in the Reichstag. People forget this, but they were a minority government. It wasn't until Hitler was given emergency powers after the Reichstag fire that Germany became a one party state and elections were abolished.

Democracy is easily perverted to the totalitarian authority of a dictatorship, or the anarchy of mob rule. An educated populace and functioning rule of law are important pretexts for a functioning democracy. They help maintain the checks and balances which prevent such abuses of power. While Hitler may have voiced support for education, his most fervent supporters were often rural and uneducated Germans, who suffered worst under the depression, and were apt to blame Jews and foreigners for their hardships.

Wars are often driven by cynical competition over territory resources but reframed for the public as matters of great national crises. In the words of Herman Goering:

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

That's all well and agreeable. But I can't say I agree that such is the reason why people were so able to kill childern and then have Christmas parties. I think it has more to do with the social issues I explained rather than political ones.

 

[OldScratch]

1)Well then, you're largely supporting aesthetic distinctions. Most white ethnicities in the US have been homogenized into an artificial WASP ideal. Immigrants from non-white backgrounds once felt pressure to assimilate in similar fashion, but that has passed. The main differences remain cultural and physical, but not genetic. The actual ACTG codes of an African, an Asian, An Aboriginal Australian, a Native American, and a European are virtually identical.



2)If you eliminate the factor of race and look at the issues of crime, education, and reproduction in the working class, the statistics are almost indistinguishable.

1) Are you actually suggesting there are no legitimate genetic distinctions between racial-types or ethnic groups in America(or elsewhere)but the superficially aesthetic? Moreover, physical differences ARE genetic are they not? Would I grow an afro if I moved into the ghetto?

2) This second point is patently false! What statistics are you refering to exactly? Black Americans lag well behind working class Whites in education and well above the same on a per capita basis, in criminal activity. This is why the endless lamentations over the so-called "acedemic achievement gap" between Black and White students - in all economic categories - continues to vex school administrators, political leaders, etc. If the results were really the same, regardless of race as you suggest, there would be no confounding "mystery" here. Yet it is here and remains one of the biggest hot-button issues in public acedemia.

*Edit(added later) The following gives a glimpse into the educational situation with regard to race and socio-economic status, though it is long on speculative wishy-wash and such:

http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/1075396/a_hard_look_at_achievement_gap/index.html



As for crime, one need only open their eyes to see the realities of this. Again, in all categories Blacks outpace Whites on a per capita basis with regard to crime - particularly with regard to violent crime.

You seem, in general, to be suggesting that race either doesn't exist at all, or simply doesn't matter in determining the behavioral, educational or economic successes of peoples, but that it is all a matter of socio-politial manipulation, etc.
How do you explain the stubborn persistence of many or most of these major issues between races, considering the herculean efforts made to turn society inside-out in order to make "equal" what has historically not been so?

 

[Justin S.]

1. Ethic difference is certainly more than "aesthetic". Whether it be heat distribution (limb and torso proportions), lactose intolerance, propensity of genetic defects, accommodation of the eyes, vitamin retention by the skin, etc., etc., there are many very real differences that have a big impact on day to day life (even more so prior to industrialization). It is largely modern technology which makes it seem that these differences do not exist. For example, over 90% of "European" ethnicities can absorb lactose. In stark contrast over 90% of non-Europeans (especially west Africans and Asians) cannot, due primarily to selection over time within societies having large-scale husbandry. This means that most non-whites could not be drinking milk, shakes, or eating ice cream and dairy-heavy and rich European cuisine without modern chemistry and p-harmaceutical(spaced to avoid sensor) industry. A relatively "minor" deal to some, but skin tone is not.

High degrees of melanin block certain UV rays which have effects on vitamin synthesis. For many African ethnicities, living in the northern latitudes of many American and European cities would result in problematic deficiencies (such as increased rates of birth defects, rickets, bone malformation, liver/kidney disorders, depressed immune system, etc.) were it not for the modern diet, which is heavily (and industrially) "fortified" with vitamins they would not receive through exposure to light alone.

Also, American blacks have a very high proportion of European genetics, thanks to the ugliness of slavery. Someone should tell Jesse Jackson Sr.(a nice British name, by the way) that he doesn't look much like my Nigerian acquaintances. What a doozy for identity politics, that drop in the bucket "taint".

2. DoctorX3's comments on crime are way off.

 

[SouthernTrendkill]

1) Are you actually suggesting there are no legitimate genetic distinctions between racial-types or ethnic groups in America(or elsewhere)but the superficially aesthetic? Moreover, physical differences ARE genetic are they not? Would I grow an afro if I moved into the ghetto?

This is true. Two black people in Africa actually have more diverse DNA in comparison to each other than a white American and a black American.

 

[JColtrane]

@Norse Maiden

4 Words:

Gas Showers + Mass Graves

Oh and this:

"The “gas chambers” in the “extermination camps” were exactly what they looked like and were originally designed for: to fumigate and sterilize clothing and other articles to prevent the spread of insects and disease, always a problem in any cramped quarters but especially so in a concentration camp."

I find to be incredibly stupid. What is the source for this conjecture out of the air?
Why were the gas chambers so large? I think the most plausible historical answer is that they were built to house people, not clothing. This web page you listed is faulty history at its worse.

 

[Norsemaiden]

@Norse Maiden

4 Words:

Gas Showers + Mass Graves

Oh and this:

"The “gas chambers” in the “extermination camps” were exactly what they looked like and were originally designed for: to fumigate and sterilize clothing and other articles to prevent the spread of insects and disease, always a problem in any cramped quarters but especially so in a concentration camp."

I find to be incredibly stupid. What is the source for this conjecture out of the air?
Why were the gas chambers so large? I think the most plausible historical answer is that they were built to house people, not clothing. This web page you listed is faulty history at its worse.

http://www.zundelsite.org/faurisson/articles/the_crematories_of_auschwitz_review.html

Nothing About Execution Gas Chambers

But as I pointed out, there is nothing in this 564-page book about the alleged execution gas chambers, except what Pressac himself called, instead of "proofs," only "beginnings of proofs" or "criminal traces." The mountain had given birth to a mouse and, as a matter of fact, the mouse was Revisionist, because many of Pressac's statements were revisionist.
My Unanswered Challenge

Since 1978, I have repeated a challenge:

Show me or draw me a Nazi gas chamber! Stop giving me words. Stop showing me a building, a door, a wall or, sometimes, only hair or shoes. I need a full picture of one of those fantastic chemical slaughterhouses. I need a physical representation of the extraordinary weapon of an unprecedented crime. If you dare to say that what tourists are shown in some camps is, or was, such a gas chamber, come on and say it ...

This challenge has never been answered. In Washington, DC, the "Holocaust" memorial museum shows visitors the door of something that Pressac himself describes in his 1989 book (pp. 555-557) as a non-homicidal disinfestation gas chamber in Majdanek. Pressac did not answer my challenge in 1989. Does he answer it in his new book, Les Crématoires d'Auschwitz: La machinerie du meurtre de masse ("The Crematoria of Auschwitz: The Machinery of Mass Killing")? The answer is definitely No.

What sort of people falsely accuse others of genocide?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39788

Egypt's leading newspaper has published a series of articles that deny the Holocaust, and claim Jews invented "lies of genocide" to extort the West and make possible the establishment of the Jewish state

,

 

[10293847]

Newsflash: Genocides weren't invented in the 1940's. Genocide IS A PART OF HUMANITY.

For how long are we going to cry for the Jews?

 

[Cythraul]

Genocide IS A PART OF HUMANITY.

What's your point?

 

[death metal black metal]

It's the 21st century, not the 19th.

Ah, the progressive fallacy. Unwise, especially since the destiny of this century remains unproven, and uncertain.