N/S Jerry Jones did what? (3 Viewers)

ilvdsnts

Pro-Bowler
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
3,274
Reaction score
3,654
Age
52
Location
New Orleans, LA
Offline
“We can’t judge something he did so many years ago”

Really? Then what can we judge? Lol actions tell us who people are and who they aren’t. Too many apologists in this forum for racist morons.
True, except for the fact this was 65 years ago, so it doesn’t tell you who he is, it tells you who he was 65 years ago. He’s had a lifetime since then to show a track record of who he IS.
 

Krodwhodat

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
10,806
Reaction score
21,447
Offline
I was pleasantly surprised to see how rational most responses are on this thread.

What truly makes me shake my head is the absolute conviction that some people have that they would have "done and thought the right thing" as a young person, in the face of indoctrination and example set by every person they loved, admired, went to school with, socialized with, etc., etc. -- all without any consideration for the time and force of will it takes to actually swim upstream against that.

Frankly, the people we need to be most afraid of are the ones with that level of absolute conviction that everything they think is "right" and that anyone who thinks or ever thought otherwise are unredeemable. That's the first step to dehumanizing someone, and I think we all know what comes after that.
Awww SR...never change huh? Racism at any age is bad. The fact he was there on the opposing side is very telling, esp with how he been acting the fool the past years as well...and look who comes being empathic. I wonder if we checked these empathic posters of good ol Jerry Jones, I wonder what we would find......esp with how this board loves attacking injured players as of late.

Smh
King, odds are you would have owned slaves back in the day being from Louisiana like pretty much every one else. Why? Because it was normal. Was it right? No but it doesn’t change the fact that people justified it back then.

Just think we 200 years from now people look back at us as being horrible people because we have clothes, phones, computers and car parts made in slave camps around the world. Is it wrong? Yes but we justify it. See how that works. You and I like everyone else supports slavery and human abuse….
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2021
Messages
241
Reaction score
631
Age
37
Location
Shreveport, LISTERANA
Offline
King, odds are you would have owned slaves back in the day being from Louisiana like pretty much every one else. Why? Because it was normal. Was it right? No but it doesn’t change the fact that people justified it back then.

Just think we 200 years from now people look back at us as being horrible people because we have clothes, phones, computers and car parts made in slave camps around the world. Is it wrong? Yes but we justify it. See how that works. You and I like everyone else supports slavery and human abuse….
No because Im black and my ancestors are from the New Orleans area on my paternal side. I have slave blood pulsing through these veins. So no the hell I would not. What type of statement is that to make?

Wrong is wrong. And the slave owners knew slavery was wrong. Hence the Le Noir Code.

But even if I did own slaves and was a white man, if I was truly upset about my ancestor's past actions, I a white man in 2022 would apologize for my ancestors and try to make things right with the black populace of Louisiana....

I tell ya....lol some of yall show yall hands and get to frothing at the mouth with how stuck on stupid you can be.

"Rape and pillaging was ok and normal during the crusades...you would have done it."

You would agree to that wouldnt you? Lol smh just SMH
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
74,088
Reaction score
129,300
Location
by the cemeteries
Offline
King, odds are you would have owned slaves back in the day being from Louisiana like pretty much every one else. Why? Because it was normal. Was it right? No but it doesn’t change the fact that people justified it back then.

Just think we 200 years from now people look back at us as being horrible people because we have clothes, phones, computers and car parts made in slave camps around the world. Is it wrong? Yes but we justify it. See how that works. You and I like everyone else supports slavery and human abuse….
Very wrong on two counts
The first king already stated
The second is why this history needs to be taught better
About 1% owned multiple persons
Then about 20% might have one a singular person for a period of time
BUT
A majority of non-owning another person whites defended slavery sometimes with their lives - EVEN THOUGH it was financially (and morally, culturally and socially) against their best interests
NOT UNLIKE IT IS TODAY
Where poor people make an enemy of other poor people bc rich people told them to
WHICH IS WHY we should ALWAYS look at history with current context because when we dont
WE KEEP REPEATING THE SAME MISTAKES
 

cpg

Catacomb the desert
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
8,235
Reaction score
11,610
Location
The Gallows
Offline
I really don’t want this to go off topic, so this is all I have to say.
“Different time, different era” isn’t an excuse.
That’s a ridiculously shortsighted statement. When this picture was taken lobotomies were still performed regularly for what are treatable diagnoses today. And where would you draw the line? If you don’t understand different generational zeitgeist’s, your mind is going to really be blown when someone tells you what we did to Neanderthals.
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
74,088
Reaction score
129,300
Location
by the cemeteries
Offline
Wow, talk about irony.

I think you know that I respect you and your points of view but sometimes it seems that you're completely unwilling to even try to share the real-life point of view of someone else if that pov is distasteful or repugnant to your own current worldview. I'm sure that you believe in the effect of the Stockholm Syndrome on the human mind. Are you suggesting that its impact is limited only to those in the human race that you empathize with?

What about a person of color who grows up in abject poverty, in a community horribly impacted by systemic racism, with terrible parental influences (who themselves were so impacted), who gets in trouble with the law at 17? I know you don't support putting that kid in jail and throwing away the key. Why? And how, purely as a function of the working of the human mind, is that so different than a young person indoctrinated in racism with no external influence providing a different view?

And then making the leap that everyone who upvoted a particular post would also have been blocking the entrance to a school advancing through desegregation in 1957? For myself, I don't know how I would have reacted because I didn't live that life. Looking back on my own life in racial terms, there are some moments at which I shake my head thinking that I should have known better -- and others of which I am proud that I was ahead of the curve and took the right stance at some personal cost. But those decisions, good and bad, were the cumulative result of the events of every day that I lived before that. No one else lived that life but me, and so no one else really can know the amount of blame or credit I deserve for those decisions. Others can certainly make a judgment on the actions themselves, but the level of my true culpability is unknowable to others who didn't live my life. Hell, it's difficult enough for me to get a good gauge on how much I should excoriate my younger self.

And can we please stop with the misleading posts suggesting that anyone is "excusing" Jerry Jones' repugnant actions? I think I've read every post in this thread and I haven't seen anyone doing that. What's (largely) being objected to is the holier-than-thou rush to judgment by those who are so convinced that no amount of racial indoctrination, quite literally from birth, would have stopped them from doing the right thing. If you haven't actually lived it, you really don't know what you would have done.

So you tell me: what's the universal age at which each and every human, regardless of experience and personal makeup, doesn't deserve context to be understood for making repugnant decisions that negatively impact others? And, more frighteningly, who gets to decide that? You? The mob? While you're at it, you can also tell me the universal age at which every kid is an idiotic moron for still believing in Santa Claus. Not a perfect analogy for sure, but not a really bad one either.

With that, and perhaps also somewhat ironically, it's off to Thanksgiving so I won't be ignoring responses...just not having time to deal with them.
Not an age but a date
August 6, 1965 - that when the voting rights act was passed
So I’m giving a pass to ignoring all of the abolitionists during slavery
- going dormant during reconstruction
- refloweriing for Jim Crow (and attending all those minstrel shows)
- being a participant or bystander for race riots in dozens of cities as well as 1000s of lynchings in late 19th/early 20th century
- noticing all the whites only signs post-Plessy
- doubling down on segregation after WW1
- signing whites only mortgages with federal loan money after WW2
- fighting integration with rocks and milkshakes and the foulest of language
- ignore Rosa parks
- Ignore medgar Evers
- ignore mlk
But there has to be a limit, right?
There has to be some time in there where we can finally say, ‘they had enough information to know better’
That the choices are willful ignorance or active hate
So the voting rights act is my line
No one after the voting rights act gets to put ignorance over humanity
The burden of context falls on the people trying to ‘explain’ Jones in the picture to demonstrate that we have progressed to the point where the picture is actually history - but it’s not history is it?
How tortured to non-existent was the NFL’s response to ‘BLM’?
‘BLM’ which is saying the same dang thing abolitionists have been saying for centuries

We can’t do ‘boys will be boys’ every time sexual assault gets discussed
We can’t talk about ‘groomers’ after an assault on the lgbtq community

We can’t keep contextualizing hate - it’s just cloaking it
We keep making the same hateful mistakes and it’s NOT because of holier than thou people
 

HoustonSaint68

Subscribing Member
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 21, 2001
Messages
7,029
Reaction score
8,066
Offline
Not an age but a date
August 6, 1965 - that when the voting rights act was passed
So I’m giving a pass to ignoring all of the abolitionists during slavery
- going dormant during reconstruction
- refloweriing for Jim Crow (and attending all those minstrel shows)
- being a participant or bystander for race riots in dozens of cities as well as 1000s of lynchings in late 19th/early 20th century
- noticing all the whites only signs post-Plessy
- doubling down on segregation after WW1
- signing whites only mortgages with federal loan money after WW2
- fighting integration with rocks and milkshakes and the foulest of language
- ignore Rosa parks
- Ignore medgar Evers
- ignore mlk
But there has to be a limit, right?
There has to be some time in there where we can finally say, ‘they had enough information to know better’
That the choices are willful ignorance or active hate
So the voting rights act is my line
No one after the voting rights act gets to put ignorance over humanity
The burden of context falls on the people trying to ‘explain’ Jones in the picture to demonstrate that we have progressed to the point where the picture is actually history - but it’s not history is it?
How tortured to non-existent was the NFL’s response to ‘BLM’?
‘BLM’ which is saying the same dang thing abolitionists have been saying for centuries

We can’t do ‘boys will be boys’ every time sexual assault gets discussed
We can’t talk about ‘groomers’ after an assault on the lgbtq community

We can’t keep contextualizing hate - it’s just cloaking it
We keep making the same hateful mistakes and it’s NOT because of holier than thou people
Ok, so a 13 year old, raised post-1965 but pre-internet by racist parents, surrounded by racist (or silent) friends, relatives and, yes, teachers, should know better, and figure out moral enlightenment all on their own. Right. With that, and given your previous posting history, it seems clear that you vary your expectations/judgment of imperfect humans based purely on the identity group that you place them in.

I'll just let it go at this point, because for whatever reason you're willfully avoiding addressing my actual point of view and trying with your response to imply I have a different one.

Sincerely, I hope that you and yours had a peaceful and enjoyable Thanksgiving.
 

HoustonSaint68

Subscribing Member
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 21, 2001
Messages
7,029
Reaction score
8,066
Offline
RACISM IS A LEARNED behavior and that was proven.
So we're actually in agreement then. Anything learned, needs to be unlearned. And that is a process of time, education and experience. It doesn't drop into a young person's mind in a short time like manna from heaven.

I've made (and will continue in the process of making) that journey. That kind of poison injected often and at an early age is very difficult to completely extract, regardless of the repugnance the conscious mind may have for it.
 

HoustonSaint68

Subscribing Member
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 21, 2001
Messages
7,029
Reaction score
8,066
Offline
Hey guys, I'm moving this thread to the EE. If anyone has any strenuous objections to that, speak up with a reason and I'll consider moving it back.
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
15,701
Reaction score
3,448
Offline
I was pleasantly surprised to see how rational most responses are on this thread.

What truly makes me shake my head is the absolute conviction that some people have that they would have "done and thought the right thing" as a young person, in the face of indoctrination and example set by every person they loved, admired, went to school with, socialized with, etc., etc. -- all without any consideration for the time and force of will it takes to actually swim upstream against that.

Frankly, the people we need to be most afraid of are the ones with that level of absolute conviction that everything they think is "right" and that anyone who thinks or ever thought otherwise are unredeemable. That's the first step to dehumanizing someone, and I think we all know what comes after that.
Very few Southerners openly defied segregation openly or avidly when the first "legal process" really began after Brown v. Board of Education, those that did for many decades prior were subject to severe harassment, labeled "scalawags", " carpetbaggers", "traitors to the South", or even worse racial epithets I can't repeat in a NFL fan site forum, threatened with lynching, moat times they were just beaten up, tarred and feathered like Freedmen's Bureau agents were during the Reconstruction period or Northern " carpet baggers". By the 1940's, Federal government had passed some pretty stringent anti-lynching laws via FDR so some hate groups like the KKK tended to stray away from doing it to prevent FBI law enforcement possibly taking any interest if too much sheet hit the fan.

Typically, in Jim Crow South, most of the most systemic racism, discrimination or crimes tended to happen in major cities like Atlanta, Birmingham, even New Orleans and less so in the rural, countryside areas. Not necessarily everywhere, but in some states like Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, and the Carolinas it was the case.

In the first decade of Third Reich's existence, which was when the regime was most popular and successful, very few Germans, even ardent left-wing SPD social Democrats didnt actively oppose Nazis rise to power simply because most of the party's leadership prevented armed conflict and because many Germans reasoned that Hitler was democratically elected, sure he cleverly or cynically manipulated the mechanism of democracy so he could destroy it but then again, the Nazis themselves, if one reads the pamphlets, articles, hate-filled rants in speeches from Hitler, Georbbels, Georing, and Hess, they explicitly told their audiences if they voted them in, they were voting for totalitarians, they were amazingly up front and candid in interviews what their initial plans were once they got into power and what they planned to do. The plan to eliminate Germany's (and European) Jews was an long-term, kind of "gradualist" process where industrialized slaughter in death camps didnt come along until Wannasee Conference in 1942 and after Hitler had already done a trial run in the T-4 euthanasia experiments on mentally ill, infirmed, psychological issues or serious mental disorders, essentially a more widespread, extreme interpretation of eugenics programs being used. If one tried to seriously protest Hitler's policies, more then likely they'd be denounced, ratted on by a co-worker, possibly a friend maybe even a "concerned" family member or relative who thought you were insane and reporting you to the Gestapo was for "your own good".

Most ordinary Germans supported Hitler's policies initially in the 1930's eliminating unemployment, poverty, economic situation, Germany's geopolitical standing being improved after the punitive, harsh IMHO, unfair reperations clause/payments in the Versailles Treaty(Germany wasnt solely to blame for starting WWI), the fact that German Jews lost their civil rights, homes, jobs, self-respect and pride, was unfortunate to them and maybe objectionable to some, but not worth rioting and protesting in the streets over for. And again, before WWII began, most German Jews werent even living in or hadnt been deported to foreign Polish ghettos, yet. And also, keep in mind antisemitism had existed in even respectable parts of German society and culture going back nearly a century before to Wagner's tims (mid 19th century) when German philosophers, intellectuals and politicians had periodically called for Jews to be removed from German cultural life. So, while overt antisemitism in Germany in the late 19th century wasnt as bad or overt as France or Russia, there was still a permanent undercurrent of these sentiments that existed, sort of dormant, waiting for some evil, charismatic idealogue to malevolently exploit skillfully.
 

HoustonSaint68

Subscribing Member
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 21, 2001
Messages
7,029
Reaction score
8,066
Offline
Very few Southerners openly defied segregation openly or avidly when the first "legal process" really began after Brown v. Board of Education, those that did for many decades prior were subject to severe harassment, labeled "scalawags", " carpetbaggers", "traitors to the South", or even worse racial epithets I can't repeat in a NFL fan site forum, threatened with lynching, moat times they were just beaten up, tarred and feathered like Freedmen's Bureau agents were during the Reconstruction period or Northern " carpet baggers". By the 1940's, Federal government had passed some pretty stringent anti-lynching laws via FDR so some hate groups like the KKK tended to stray away from doing it to prevent FBI law enforcement possibly taking any interest if too much sheet hit the fan.

Typically, in Jim Crow South, most of the most systemic racism, discrimination or crimes tended to happen in major cities like Atlanta, Birmingham, even New Orleans and less so in the rural, countryside areas. Not necessarily everywhere, but in some states like Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, and the Carolinas it was the case.

In the first decade of Third Reich's existence, which was when the regime was most popular and successful, very few Germans, even ardent left-wing SPD social Democrats didnt actively oppose Nazis rise to power simply because most of the party's leadership prevented armed conflict and because many Germans reasoned that Hitler was democratically elected, sure he cleverly or cynically manipulated the mechanism of democracy so he could destroy it but then again, the Nazis themselves, if one reads the pamphlets, articles, hate-filled rants in speeches from Hitler, Georbbels, Georing, and Hess, they explicitly told their audiences if they voted them in, they were voting for totalitarians, they were amazingly up front and candid in interviews what their initial plans were once they got into power and what they planned to do. The plan to eliminate Germany's (and European) Jews was an long-term, kind of "gradualist" process where industrialized slaughter in death camps didnt come along until Wannasee Conference in 1942 and after Hitler had already done a trial run in the T-4 euthanasia experiments on mentally ill, infirmed, psychological issues or serious mental disorders, essentially a more widespread, extreme interpretation of eugenics programs being used. If one tried to seriously protest Hitler's policies, more then likely they'd be denounced, ratted on by a co-worker, possibly a friend maybe even a "concerned" family member or relative who thought you were insane and reporting you to the Gestapo was for "your own good".

Most ordinary Germans supported Hitler's policies initially in the 1930's eliminating unemployment, poverty, economic situation, Germany's geopolitical standing being improved after the punitive, harsh IMHO, unfair reperations clause/payments in the Versailles Treaty(Germany wasnt solely to blame for starting WWI), the fact that German Jews lost their civil rights, homes, jobs, self-respect and pride, was unfortunate to them and maybe objectionable to some, but not worth rioting and protesting in the streets over for. And again, before WWII began, most German Jews werent even living in or hadnt been deported to foreign Polish ghettos, yet. And also, keep in mind antisemitism had existed in even respectable parts of German society and culture going back nearly a century before to Wagner's tims (mid 19th century) when German philosophers, intellectuals and politicians had periodically called for Jews to be removed from German cultural life. So, while overt antisemitism in Germany in the late 19th century wasnt as bad or overt as France or Russia, there was still a permanent undercurrent of these sentiments that existed, sort of dormant, waiting for some evil, charismatic idealogue to malevolently exploit skillfully.
And this is why I get sucked into posting on these knee-jerk demonization topics. It sets the subject matter up as intrinsically deficient morally as compared to most people and, thus, as an "other".

The reality is that this slide into horror is very much a part of the broader human condition and needs to be addressed by patiently educating and socializing people out of ignorance. Personal attacks tend to make people defensive, and the reaction is often to double-down on repugnant views and restrict socialization to the like-minded. That's dangerous and not worth the sugar-rush of righteousness when calling them out.
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
74,088
Reaction score
129,300
Location
by the cemeteries
Offline
Very few Southerners openly defied segregation openly or avidly when the first "legal process" really began after Brown v. Board of Education, those that did for many decades prior were subject to severe harassment, labeled "scalawags", " carpetbaggers", "traitors to the South", or even worse racial epithets I can't repeat in a NFL fan site forum, threatened with lynching, moat times they were just beaten up, tarred and feathered like Freedmen's Bureau agents were during the Reconstruction period or Northern " carpet baggers". By the 1940's, Federal government had passed some pretty stringent anti-lynching laws via FDR so some hate groups like the KKK tended to stray away from doing it to prevent FBI law enforcement possibly taking any interest if too much sheet hit the fan.

Typically, in Jim Crow South, most of the most systemic racism, discrimination or crimes tended to happen in major cities like Atlanta, Birmingham, even New Orleans and less so in the rural, countryside areas. Not necessarily everywhere, but in some states like Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, and the Carolinas it was the case.

In the first decade of Third Reich's existence, which was when the regime was most popular and successful, very few Germans, even ardent left-wing SPD social Democrats didnt actively oppose Nazis rise to power simply because most of the party's leadership prevented armed conflict and because many Germans reasoned that Hitler was democratically elected, sure he cleverly or cynically manipulated the mechanism of democracy so he could destroy it but then again, the Nazis themselves, if one reads the pamphlets, articles, hate-filled rants in speeches from Hitler, Georbbels, Georing, and Hess, they explicitly told their audiences if they voted them in, they were voting for totalitarians, they were amazingly up front and candid in interviews what their initial plans were once they got into power and what they planned to do. The plan to eliminate Germany's (and European) Jews was an long-term, kind of "gradualist" process where industrialized slaughter in death camps didnt come along until Wannasee Conference in 1942 and after Hitler had already done a trial run in the T-4 euthanasia experiments on mentally ill, infirmed, psychological issues or serious mental disorders, essentially a more widespread, extreme interpretation of eugenics programs being used. If one tried to seriously protest Hitler's policies, more then likely they'd be denounced, ratted on by a co-worker, possibly a friend maybe even a "concerned" family member or relative who thought you were insane and reporting you to the Gestapo was for "your own good".

Most ordinary Germans supported Hitler's policies initially in the 1930's eliminating unemployment, poverty, economic situation, Germany's geopolitical standing being improved after the punitive, harsh IMHO, unfair reperations clause/payments in the Versailles Treaty(Germany wasnt solely to blame for starting WWI), the fact that German Jews lost their civil rights, homes, jobs, self-respect and pride, was unfortunate to them and maybe objectionable to some, but not worth rioting and protesting in the streets over for. And again, before WWII began, most German Jews werent even living in or hadnt been deported to foreign Polish ghettos, yet. And also, keep in mind antisemitism had existed in even respectable parts of German society and culture going back nearly a century before to Wagner's tims (mid 19th century) when German philosophers, intellectuals and politicians had periodically called for Jews to be removed from German cultural life. So, while overt antisemitism in Germany in the late 19th century wasnt as bad or overt as France or Russia, there was still a permanent undercurrent of these sentiments that existed, sort of dormant, waiting for some evil, charismatic idealogue to malevolently exploit skillfully.
Now compare how postwar Germans handled their prewar antisemitism vs how we’re ‘contextualizing’ pictures of well-to-do whites fighting integration
THAT’S the point
 

Buickman

Super Forum Fanatic
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
7,891
Reaction score
9,697
Age
57
Location
Chester Gap, Va
Offline
Not trying to defend him at all, but that's just one photo and he could have been a passerby. I'm curious if there's more photos of him at other events. That would be telling.
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
15,701
Reaction score
3,448
Offline
Now compare how postwar Germans handled their prewar antisemitism vs how we’re ‘contextualizing’ pictures of well-to-do whites fighting integration
THAT’S the point
Lets not get too far ahead of the narrative and argue that most Germans, or Austrians for that matter, automatically became wholesale ashamed or at least privately/publicly admit or own up to their own collective involvement in Nazi atrocities. During the 1950's, anti-Jewish sentiments remained alarmingly high in German-speaking areas of central Europe, many individual Jews were stating a decade or so after the end of WWII that Nazism "was a good idea, but poorly, terribly executed". It wasnt until the late 60's, especially 1968 with the rise of far-left, anti-consumerist student groups like RZ, Beider-Meinhof Gang, the Red Guards that the first serious, blunt often violent discussions about their parents' involvement or culpability in Nazi war crimes or intentional aloofness began in earnest, and during the scope of the Cold War in a place like West Germany, people and groups like Red Guards, Beider-Meinhof members were considered East German GDR communist Fifth Columnists and ignored even by many on the " New Left". You had a wave of domestic terrorist attacks in summer and autumn 1977 called the "Deutschen Aubend"---German Autumn. In many respects, ordinary German culpability in how they were willing or reticent accomplices to the Holocaust didnt hit hard in contemporary German society, intellectual and social cultural discussions until the late 90's and thats 55 years after the end of WWII. One constant discussion in immediate post-WWII German society was this metaphorical, figurative search for the " good :Nazi"---this example of a high-ranking Nazi Gauleiter who like most Germans of the time, kept his head down, did his job and wasnt singularly involved in actually killing anyone himself directly and after the war and war trials, his reputation was mostly impeccable and not too insidious.

After WWII, many Germans viewed Albert Speer, one of Hitler'a few close friends, architect, and his armaments minister, as maybe embodying that "Good Nazi" because he didn't look like a war criminal, particularly evil or sinister like Himmler, Goerring, or Georbels, and expressed at Nuremberg that he was sorry for the death camps, atrocities, etc. Of course, Speer at Nuremberg knew Allied prosecutors and judges didn't have or know all of what he really had done during WWII, his presence at a October 1943 Himmler SS speech privately acknowledging the true scale and horror of the mass-scale killings in the camps, he personally visited Auschwitz, Treblinka, Chelmno, Madjanek, and Sorbibor. If we'd known in 1946 what we would find out in the 1980's after Speer's death, he wouldve rightly condemned to death along with the other high-ranking Nazi bureaucrats. But, for a long time, many individual West Germans saw Speer as a believable, moral/ethical acceptable baseline they could follow or emulate until the inconvenient truth came out.

But, dont assume or believe that it didn't take most Germans decades to come to this realization and in some respects, its a process thats still working itself out. One can't compare post-WWII Germany to Reconstruction-era South or former Confederacy. The immediate political efforts to reconstruct, rebuild Southern cities, states under Pres. Andrew Johnson and Radical Republicans was a abysmal failure, endemic corruption, terrible communication, corrupt military governors, politicians, and oh BTW, many Southern major cities werent being rebuilt, many Southern states local and regional economies were neglected and not modernized, so many Southerners viewed the Union armies as an occupation force then a force trying to rebuild farms, homes, businesses, ease tensions, build a larger industrialized base in the Deep South. That power vacuum allowed for radical, white vigilante groups like the KKK, White League, Yellow Jackets to come to prominence and disrupt the pace of socio-political, economic progress.


I would argue we did a far better, efficient job rebuilding Germany and western Europe after WWII then we did the former Confederacy after the Civil War simply due to better socio-political and economic policies and planning, intertwined with the fact that unlike former Confederacy, most Germans realized explicitly they'd lost the war that caused the dire situations they were living under.
 

HoustonSaint68

Subscribing Member
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 21, 2001
Messages
7,029
Reaction score
8,066
Offline
Lets not get too far ahead of the narrative and argue that most Germans, or Austrians for that matter, automatically became wholesale ashamed or at least privately/publicly admit or own up to their own collective involvement in Nazi atrocities. During the 1950's, anti-Jewish sentiments remained alarmingly high in German-speaking areas of central Europe, many individual Jews were stating a decade or so after the end of WWII that Nazism "was a good idea, but poorly, terribly executed". It wasnt until the late 60's, especially 1968 with the rise of far-left, anti-consumerist student groups like RZ, Beider-Meinhof Gang, the Red Guards that the first serious, blunt often violent discussions about their parents' involvement or culpability in Nazi war crimes or intentional aloofness began in earnest, and during the scope of the Cold War in a place like West Germany, people and groups like Red Guards, Beider-Meinhof members were considered East German GDR communist Fifth Columnists and ignored even by many on the " New Left". You had a wave of domestic terrorist attacks in summer and autumn 1977 called the "Deutschen Aubend"---German Autumn. In many respects, ordinary German culpability in how they were willing or reticent accomplices to the Holocaust didnt hit hard in contemporary German society, intellectual and social cultural discussions until the late 90's and thats 55 years after the end of WWII. One constant discussion in immediate post-WWII German society was this metaphorical, figurative search for the " good :Nazi"---this example of a high-ranking Nazi Gauleiter who like most Germans of the time, kept his head down, did his job and wasnt singularly involved in actually killing anyone himself directly and after the war and war trials, his reputation was mostly impeccable and not too insidious.

After WWII, many Germans viewed Albert Speer, one of Hitler'a few close friends, architect, and his armaments minister, as maybe embodying that "Good Nazi" because he didn't look like a war criminal, particularly evil or sinister like Himmler, Goerring, or Georbels, and expressed at Nuremberg that he was sorry for the death camps, atrocities, etc. Of course, Speer at Nuremberg knew Allied prosecutors and judges didn't have or know all of what he really had done during WWII, his presence at a October 1943 Himmler SS speech privately acknowledging the true scale and horror of the mass-scale killings in the camps, he personally visited Auschwitz, Treblinka, Chelmno, Madjanek, and Sorbibor. If we'd known in 1946 what we would find out in the 1980's after Speer's death, he wouldve rightly condemned to death along with the other high-ranking Nazi bureaucrats. But, for a long time, many individual West Germans saw Speer as a believable, moral/ethical acceptable baseline they could follow or emulate until the inconvenient truth came out.

But, dont assume or believe that it didn't take most Germans decades to come to this realization and in some respects, its a process thats still working itself out. One can't compare post-WWII Germany to Reconstruction-era South or former Confederacy. The immediate political efforts to reconstruct, rebuild Southern cities, states under Pres. Andrew Johnson and Radical Republicans was a abysmal failure, endemic corruption, terrible communication, corrupt military governors, politicians, and oh BTW, many Southern major cities werent being rebuilt, many Southern states local and regional economies were neglected and not modernized, so many Southerners viewed the Union armies as an occupation force then a force trying to rebuild farms, homes, businesses, ease tensions, build a larger industrialized base in the Deep South. That power vacuum allowed for radical, white vigilante groups like the KKK, White League, Yellow Jackets to come to prominence and disrupt the pace of socio-political, economic progress.


I would argue we did a far better, efficient job rebuilding Germany and western Europe after WWII then we did the former Confederacy after the Civil War simply due to better socio-political and economic policies and planning, intertwined with the fact that unlike former Confederacy, most Germans realized explicitly they'd lost the war that caused the dire situations they were living under.
Thanks.

I started to respond and then realized I had peaced out on this thread. As always though, your historically substantial post is infinitely better than whatever poor effort I would have offered.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom