From: abkevich@husc3.harvard.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.german,soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Let's hit Nazis?
Date: 22 Jan 93 19:49:51 GMT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <46312@unlisys.in-berlin.de>, stingray@unlisys.in-berlin.de 
(Christian Lampl) writes:
> abkevich@husc3.harvard.edu writes:
> 
> Well, I think that there were many people who knew (hmm.. maybe 
> it is better to say who were quite sure) that cruel things 
> were happening. I think most of them were just afraid.
> I won't condemn them for being afraid, because I don't know
> how I would have had reacted. 

Did you understand me right? I didn't mean judge. I meant that you are saying
that they did bad thing.  

> 
> 
>>I agree. Persons who made a crime (and we should prove it) should not be a 
>>concern of newsgroups, they should be taken to court. What I am talking about
>>is a moral guilt of people who were old enough by 1945 and didn't rise their
>>voice against crimes, about which they knew. Because of many reasons that makes
>>almost all nation. That is why I am talking about "Germans", not about list of
>>names. All people who were born after let's say 1927 are not guilty at all.
>>Most of them have nothing to do with Nazis (at least I hope so). They made no 
>>crime. Nobody should accuse them. However I am not forgetting that they were
>>*influenced* by their parents and grandparents who are bearing moral guilt. 
>>That's why I am trying lets say "suspicious" when somebody is saying: "I am
>>German. But I was born after 1945 and so 'de facto' I have as much in common
>>with Nazis as you." That is what you are doing. You are not hiting Nazis. For
>>example I think that I am influenced by communists much stronger then you and
>>so have much more in common with them (or you are from East Germany? Then you
>>are really in trouble... :-)).   
> No, I'm not from East Germany.

Congratulations!

> But I don't agree with you in the points you mentioned above
> (at least not in all of them).
> The point I mean is the moral guilt of all people who didn't rise
> their voice. It's easy to say this little sentence.

If it would not be easy I would say that it is a matter of a court.
 
> There were many reasons why some people are able to stand up and
> fight and some not. I'm not (and I think nobody is) the one 
> who can condemn the fear of other people.

We should condemn the fear. We could find a lot of excuses and understand it.
But we have to condemn it.

> The ones who knew were afraid (at least most of them)
> and the ones who not know .. yeah, they didn't know.
> I'm not here to condemn fear or unknowledge.

I thought we came to the conclusion that majority did know? But yes, there were
people who didn't see things, which they had to see. We could not condemn
idiots, we could only hope that their number will decrease (:-)).

> Then I would have to condemn everybody (doesn't matter if
> German or not) who didn't fight against the Nazis.
> Because I don't know the reasons of every single person
> for his/her deeds I'm just not even able to judge somebody.
> If ya think you can judge a whole nation or the whole
> world it's OK.

Chris are we going to discuss US Marine raping again? Germans did it. Not the
whole world. For example if it will be new strong Neo-Nazi movement in Germany
would you say that it is yours obligation to fight with it in Berlin, or mine
from Boston? (Don't worry, I would help you). And again I never used word
"judge"

 
 Bye,
   Victor Abkevich