| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
 |
|
You can always rely on Hatty for the orthodox liberal position (of several decades ago).
| "Intelligence" is largely a result of socio-economic factors, surely... the upper-class kids would've benefited from the advantages offered by the milieu in which they were raised. |
On this argument, the potplant lovingly cared for in the corner of the upperclass drawing room would have a higher IQ than...er...me.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
The Nazis were prepared to lose the war rather than have their programmes interfered with since they routinely gave preference to entraining Jews-to-the-camps over soldiers-for-the-front.
This isn't the right thread but couldn't let the comment pass, it's obvious that the eradication of Jews and other undesirables wasn't for military reasons |
Good grief, who said it was?
| and a sizeable proportion of the German high command were not hell-bent on achieving racial purity in the homeland |
Good grief, who said they were? It may have escaped your notice but the German High Command were an ineffectual bunch of nobodies throughout the Nazi era.
| (which shows that propaganda is less effective among the well-informed, as Stalin knew only too well). |
I love the way people can say things with great certainty about things we cannot possibly know. Or have I missed an actual study of this (from an AE point of view) absolutely vital question? And by the way I would say, since we're giving strictly personal opinions without evidence, that propaganda works far, far better with the well-informed. They just call it other things. Propaganda is one of those things that effects everybody except one.
And don't forget the Nazi state was rather more democratic than the ones we live in. The local populace was right behind them in pretty much everything they did.
Don't confuse compliance with acceptance. The people were too cowed to protest, opponents had been effectively silenced if not in exile long before the start of the Final Solution. |
The evidence is overwhelming that Hitler had mass support -- no, massive support -- right up until...oh...I dunno...April, 1945...or thereabouts. I don't know of any substantial body of 'exiles'...do tell.
| Which is not to say that an atmosphere of hostility, hate even, didn't exist a priori fostered by state propaganda which reiterates the point that genocide can only take place under government-controlled circumstances. |
Genocide has been happening for aeons in Europe (and presumably everywhere else). On the whole the State has rather a good record for protecting minorities but anyway the rest of us have never required state propaganda to go in for pogroms on a fairly regular basis.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AJMorton
|
|
|
|
You are aware, Mr Harper, that most of that is un-analytical tripe?
| I love the way people can say things with great certainty about things we cannot possibly know. |
And I don't love it. I do wish you would stop.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
| the German High Command were an ineffectual bunch of nobodies throughout the Nazi era. |
Is that because politicians decided the majority of military posts? If a high command is politically appointed rather than an independent professional body, it's going to amount to a political party in effect.
| ...propaganda works far, far better with the well-informed. They just call it other things. Propaganda is one of those things that affects everybody except one. |
Surely people choose the propaganda that tallies most closely to their requirements, it's not that the propaganda works better, it's whether it suits people to adopt a stance. The well informed have more access to sources so should, theoretically, have more articulate arguments to muster in defence of their chosen position, in societies where differences of opinion are permitted.
In a closed society there is less opportunity to garner information to counteract propagandist mantras, though the intelligentsia and the rich have more means to do so... but people in a privileged position aren't motivated to upset the status quo
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AJMorton
|
|
|
|
| It may have escaped your notice but the German High Command were an ineffectual bunch of nobodies throughout the Nazi era. |
Since few of us can name more than ten people in the high command, you are probably correct. Yet this view rather clashes with this one:
| The evidence is overwhelming that Hitler had mass support -- no, massive support |
Which is wrong in so many ways. What in your opinion does "eradicate the opposition" mean? What result might such an action have, when the very people who would inform others of the atrocities are dead or missing?
You talk as if Hitler ran everything past the German people before he took the various actions that he did. Germany was in a desperate situation and he gathered support initially by taking on the role of figure-head and promising to lead Germany back to its former greatness. He neglected to mention the extent of the atrocities.
Of course they fell for it hook, line and sinker. You also seem to forget that a HUGE proportion of the population was Jewish. Are you saying they agreed? Ridiculous.
| I don't know of any substantial body of 'exiles'...do tell. |
Less sarcasm and more thought bitte.
| Genocide has been happening for aeons in Europe (and presumably everywhere else). On the whole the State has rather a good record for protecting minorities... |
That looks like a contradiction to me. Genocide "has been happening presumably everywhere" yet the state "has a rather good record of protecting the minorities"?
| but anyway the rest of us have never required state propaganda to go in for pogroms on a fairly regular basis. |
What do you mean by that? Sounds profound but probably isn't.
| Propaganda is one of those things that effects everybody except one. |
Another profound-sounding statement of certainty. But really it's clap-trap of the highest order. Everybody? Perhaps in the sense that many see through it and are shocked and disgusted by it (this is a symptom of being "affected" by it) but this isn't what you meant. Except one? So if a team of people are responsible for designing that propaganda, only the head-honcho is unaffected? The team of devotees who designed the bally stuff are susceptible to its message? Silly. Plain silly.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AJMorton
|
|
|
|
| Applied Epistemology rather hopes that eugenics comes back into fashion one day since it holds that all rational policies are worth constantly re-viewing. |
This is disturbing in all sorts of ways. AE hopes? Is it possible for a semi-scientific system to hope?
It hopes eugenics comes back into fashion? This comment just makes me blink like a rabbit caught in the headlights of a rapidly approaching car.
Is "holding to something" not synonymous with a fixed position?
| ...all rational policies (i.e eugenics) are worth... |
Rational, Mick? Rational? Inside every fat person thread is a huge and quite bizarre manifesto.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think "rational" was probably a favourite word of eugenicists. Of course it has a respectable meaning but it is often used as a weasel word by anoraks who prefer to overlook emotional considerations. Such considerations include families who despite all problems love a disabled member and would never want to kill them.
I suspect that ethnic cleansing began long ago when the first gangs of Homo sapiens encountered Neanderthals. Nevertheless it took a long time to eliminate the Neanderthals from Europe. When peoples' survival is under threat they easily turn on each other unless society and leaders work hard to prevent it. There was immense insecurity in Germany between the wars with all that inflation in the Weimat Republic......
_________________
Oliver
|
|
 |
|
|
|
AJMorton
|
|
|
|
| Oliver Gillie wrote: | | I think "rational" was probably a favourite word of eugenicists. Of course it has a respectable meaning but it is often used as a weasel word by anoraks who prefer to overlook emotional considerations. |
I am sure "rational" was a favourite word among the eugenicists. Which is why I am shocked to find the same word used here.
Problem is, even if the cold and clinical meaning is bereft of negative and racist connotation, the fact remains that it is not in the power of humanity to decide such things.
The human brain is by far the worst tool to study the human brain. And allowing it to come up with far reaching decisions such as cleaning up the genes of a species is an easily abused and quite disgusting process.
Who's to say that dyslexic people aren't the next stage in evolution?
Eugenics would also practise the old "table leg" routine. Chop one leg a bit and the rest is wonky. Chop another and it becomes wonkier. Keep going until you are eating off the floor.
I call it the chip metaphor. In a bag of chips, we instinctively pick up the most appealing chips first. When they are all gone, we take the best of the worst. When the best of the worst are all gone, we look at those that we previously thought were all bad and we see some gems.
Before you know it, through the process of elimination, the chips are all gone. Destroyed in your teeth and gut.
So it is with eugenics. Without all the colourful metaphor, some folk prefer to ask "where would we draw the line?"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
I think I ought to point out something. Nobody here has spoken a word in support of eugenics. I did make a coupla AE points about eugenics. The first is that Eugenics is a rational policy. That does not mean it is a good policy, nor does it mean that I personally support it. Merely that the people who propose it seem rational and that they state it in a rational way ie that they claim it has a desirable outcome and that outcome can be encompassed in a practical and proportionate way.
It is important that this 'rationality' be recognised because one's own personal distaste (or even mild objection) might lead one to think it 'irrational or 'wicked' or some other label that means it can never be re-viewed. That's why AE has a second dictum: that all rational policies come up for re-view at regular intervals. When passions have dimmed and circumstances have changed, what was wicked might easily have become a necessity. You'll just never know unless you look, and you'll never look unless you've got a system that overcomes distaste. You can always say, 'Nah, still wicked,' if you wish.
Which reminds me, gassing Jews was a rational policy and it may be time for us to re-view this matter.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| Applied Epistemology rather hopes that eugenics comes back into fashion one day since it holds that all rational policies are worth constantly re-viewing. |
Yes. Here Mick has over-stepped himself. He's never quite allowed for the fact that his system is larger than the shifting opinions of its originator. Moreover, I cannot see Mick even sustaining this bit of contrariness under self-scrutiny.
(I see now he has added an addendum that should ahh....clear this up ...yeah....)
As for Eugenics: It is indeed certainly a rational policy.
Like all rational policies, it is perfectly correct given certain premises and certain aims. If breeding works for race-horses, it most certainly will work for humans. Maybe it already did.
(But do remember that modern breeding has never improved a genetic line -- all pure-breds are genetically fragile by comparison with the mongrelized species. Note however that selective pressures, in traditional neo-Darwinism, are supposed to produce at least equally-resilient specimens over time.)
One has to wonder if a species that somehow learned to create domesticated corn and the family dog ever gave a thought to what they might do with fellow human beings -- especially given the extreme hierarchical conditions under which we presume our ancestors to have lived.
That is certainly not to say it ever happened or, if it did, that it was effective. There are all sorts of arguments one might advance as to why humans might prove failures at self-domestication -- and yet quite a lot of evidence one might cite in support of the notion that they succeeded.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
| Maybe the cause of obesity is psychological. ....People with anorexia nervosa aren't thin because there isn't enough food. They're thin because they want to be thin. |
If you take the view that anorexics want to be thin rather than that they're unable to recover from a psychological condition, why should NHS money be spent on curing these sufferers any more than on smokers or obese people? Anorexia nervosa is most common among middle class, intelligent women, traditionally three of the least popular criteria, but maybe the government has (rationally) reviewed its policy vis-a-vis the middle class, intelligentsia and women.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| Hatty wrote: | | ...maybe the government has (rationally) reviewed its policy vis-a-vis the middle class, intelligentsia and women. |
Exactly Hatty! Good thinking!
This is precisely why there is no such thing as a government program that benefits the poor. On the other hand, there are uncountable programs of government of benefit to the middle class marketed as being of benefit to the poor.
This way, voters get all the material benefits of theft and all the psychological benefits of charity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
TelMiles
In: London
|
|
|
|
At university I did a presentation on Germany in the 1920's and 30's, and pointed out that the liberal and tolerant Weimar Republic pursued a eugenics program, and that the Nazi's merely continued this on. Some of the class called me a liar, and the tutor tried to get me to leave it out of my written work. Needless to say, it stayed in. The reaction of the liberals amazes me every time.
_________________
Against all Gods.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it's quite interesting adding up in some neutral way the actions of Nazis and anti-Nazis. One of my favourites is: "Count the number of neutral countries invaded by a) Hitler and b) Churchill."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
