Movie shows Germans not immune to return of Nazis

There's a law I'm not aware of that you have to wear a helmet when cycling?

The really novel thing was the accompanying paperwork and pics, that they documented it so well. The scale has been done before and since: US, Russia, Cambodia´,...

So what was the point of YOUR comment??? You suppose that Germans are given to following all of the 'rules' and following the herd, doing things 'properly' etc.
The point is, your average German is not so dissimilar to your average anyone else in the world and is not more given to 'group think' than the rest of us.

My point was - there's a written law saying you have to ride with lights in the dark, so everybody does it, even though in many cases (street lights, reflectors, bright clothing) it doesn't serve any real purpose. On the other hand, there's no law about helmets, so even though they are proven life savers, most people don't feel any need to use them because they're not obliged to do so.

You're forgetting your history and I can't be bothered to discuss this with you any more. If you view Germans as so unappealing you can easily find the Ausgang.

[quote name='Uncle Nick' date='Mar 13 2008, 11:26 am' post='1225758']
I watched it too.
[/quoteMe too! Must´ve been around 81-82 I think! It was a standrd film for all Gymnasiums then. I thought it was bollox then as well!

Otto Wels

I would say that the opposite is true, almost everybody seems to wear a helmet and hardly anybody has lights or at least uses them.

Your point is that Germans tend to obey the law? Having never lived anywhere else I can only speak from my own experience but Canadians tend to obey the law too.

Please remind me then - which democracy was turned into dictatorship without military force?


To be honest, I did expect this, even though I never said Germans are unappealing or thought anything to this effect.

@ miwild: You're right. That was the single chirp of resistance, a defiant and proud speech in parliament backed by zero action except a minority vote in a parliament which was about to be stripped of its powers anyway.

The fact remains that the majority of Germans did not vote or agree with what Hitler had on his agenda, but played along anyway without real resistance.

I don't really see how it's relevant though either way.

This is my whole point, if you can't see that then we're really wasting our time here. My whole point is that the way things went down shows that there was no need to force dictatorship down the Germans' throats - they were more than willing to accept it as long as it was brought about within the playing rules of the republic.

The fact that other nations are also capable of atrocities doesn't absolve Germany of its responsibility for examining why it was the driving force behind the Holocaust.

If Hitler had been English or French or Norwegian, and these countries had been in the same condition as Germany in the 1930s, could the same thing have happened?

Oh god, of course not. Is that what it sounds like I'm doing?

ER: Not to me.

Again, I'm not a history buff but did hitler get voted in on the platform that he was going to turn the democracy into a dictatorship? I was under the impression (perhaps wrongly so) that all that came later.

Germany had ceased to be a democracy quite a while before Hitler was appointed chancellor ... not "voted" as you claim

ER: No, he didn't.

Then again, I don't get your point. If they didn't know, then they got duped didn't they?

But played along without resisting even after March 1933, when the con became clear.

If, I don't know, Mel Hurtig (shamelessly ripped this name off wiki for lack of better example) were to be elected PM of Canada and pulled off some kind of Enabling Act trick, what do you think the Canadians would do?

So basically your issue with the German minstream culture is that they didn't revolt?

In Genie's view of history the SA and SS obviously did not use physical force (including concentration camps for SPD, communists and other political opponents) to help bring about totalitarian control for Hitler.

utter bullshit. What you had in the 20's and 30's was a unique set of circumstances that allowed Hitler to gain power, not a particular set of beliefs or mindset. Only in Germany do you have a country whose national pride took a battering after Versailles. Only in Germany did you have an army that felt stabbed in the back by the politicians (after the WWI armistice). Only in Germany did you have crippling reparations payments. Germany was the economy most closely tied with the US because of loans taken out to make the crippling reparations payments. When the US recalled those loans after the crash, the German economy was hit the hardest in Europe. And also, Germany was not the first country to go down the fascist route. Just look at Italy. Mussolini really didn't use military force to come to power either (the march on Rome wasn't force but a show of force, just like Hitler used the SA). Most of Hilter's backers (military, Kaiserists, business leaders etc) believed they could use thelittle man as a puppet for their own less sinsiter aims.

Germany was not the first country to become a dictatorhsip and wasn't the last. The Germans weren't the first to turn on the Jews and they also weren't the last. As already pointed out, Anti-semitism was rife throughout Europe for centuries and was nothing new. Stalin was also responsible for atrocities against Jews but I don't hear you calling the russian inherantly anti-semitic.

And other countries have had their genocides before and since.

I don't know what the Canadians in general would do, I think we're a pretty peaceful people, we'd probably wait for the US to come in and save us. I certainly wouldn't go standing up to an army, if you tell me to obey or get killed, I'm gonna obey. I guess that must be the German in me.

There wasn't really any need to go all French and jump to the barricades. Even passive resistance at the level of state officials would have rendered Hitler harmless, as soon as he had no governing apparatus to use to enforce his rule.

Yes well hindight is 20/20.

In topcat 1's view of history, there were concentration camps in Germany before the Nazis came to power.

As for physical force - the SA used force to terrorize the other parties, i.e. to try and win the election campaigns by cheating, but they didn't use force to overturn the regime.

To be honest, I actually see your thinking is quite dangerous.

If people think this couldn't happen anywhere else they leave themselves pretty open to making the same mistakes.

OK, I'll say this one third and last time: I don't think this can't happen anywhere else, just that German culture is more susceptible to it. Need me to repeat?

"... Even passive resistance at the level of state officials would have rendered Hitler harmless ...

Hahaha ... like passive resistance at the level of the Department of Homeland Security officials have rendered Bush/Cheney harmless

No, no need to be beligerent about it.

Let me see if I've got it straight then. Germans are more prone to obeying the law than other countries which is what made them more susceptible.

I guess in conclusion people breaking the law is actually good for society. An interesting stance for sure.

OG, this is actually good, but I think you've missed some of the points I've made.

First, As pointed out before, many countries suffered military defeats before and after WWI, with the resulting economic hardships, loss of honor, loss of land, etc. I named France 1871 as an example, but there are more. Second, Mussolini used force to take power - the fact that he just had to threaten because his opposition didn't want to fight is beside the point - he wasn't legitimately appointed dictator.

The later genocide and its roots in Nazi doctrine is irrelevant to the question - how did Hitler get to absolute power in Germany without a military coup, and would this, or rather - had this ever happened anywhere else in the world?

If I dig deep enough, I can find a George Washington quote that says the exact same thing (albeit a bit more refined).

you can repeat it as many times as you like but it won't make it any truer. You haven't given a shred of plausible evidence as to why Germans are more likely to be nazis and anti-semites than anyone else. Stalin was killing Jews long before Hitler. Mussolini was dictator of Italy long before Hitler came to power in Germany. In many countries, when the German Wehrmacht invaded many people jumped at the opportunity to become Nazis (three quarters of France became a Nazi puppet state full of nazi collaborators and the resistance in the rest of France was pretty pathetic).

Extremist politics, whether they are fascist/nazi/extreme right wing or communist etc, and dictatorships only become viable main stream alternatives to traditional political parties and forms of government when these fail and the populace is desperate.

What you had a population in desperation in a unique set of circumstances. If we were to see economic collapse on the scale of the great depression again coupled with a weak government failing miserably at coping with it, then you can bet your bottom Shegel that such a situation could happen again. Anywhere.

you didn't have complete economic callapse after the 1871 war with mass unemployment making even sensible people desperate.


so no different to Hitler then? May I remind you of the NSDAP's standing army, the SA?

I do wonder if there is any evidence to support that Germans are any more law abiding than other nationalities. Perhaps you can provide some? It would be interesting to see and then we'd also know who our top 5 contenders for the next holocaust would be.

certainly no evidence that they are more law abiding when it comes to smoking.

The first was a successor in a dictatorship established by military force, the second established his dictatorship by military force.


Yes, these are shameful examples of opportunists trying to make the best for themselves out of a situation brought about by invasion and occupation by a foreign military. Hardly a case of a democracy appointing a dictator and nullifying its own self.


So why didn't it happen in France after 1871?

The first concentration camps were opened in early 1933, which coincided with Hitler becoming Chancellor, (but prior to the Nazi gaining total power) to incarcerate real and perceived opponents of Nazi policy. This was before the Enabling Act and one of the reasons that there was such muted opposition to the act was that most of the communists were already imprisoned and the party banned. Indeed at the vote for the Enabling Act the Reichstag was surrounded by SA troops.

If as you say the SA used force to terrorise other parties, then I believe they played a substantial role in destroying the Weimar Republic.

The first Nazi CC was Dachau, opened June 1933, long after the Enabling Act and when Hitler was already at absolute power.


Indeed it did, but absolute power wasn't taken by force - force was what Hitler used to destroy the other parties' campaigns. A bit different.

Dachau was opened in March 1933 and was one of the first official camps to be opened. Reports in the American press in January 1933 report of camps being opened to detain "political prisoners" and others denouncing Nazi policy, from memory the first camp was Oranienberg.

What is indisputable is that Hitler, much like Stalin and Mussolini, used political and military terror to gain power, and opposition was squashed and purged. If you wish to ignore that to score political brownie points against the "German mainstream" both now and then, it is a rather twisted ideology.

The fact is that in many countries today a totalitarian state is acceptable, where the faces change but the policy and those who rule never do.

Yes, you're right about the March date.

About the opposition squashed and purged? Maybe the communists. The SPD wasn't purged, just intimidated, then absolved themselves without putting up a fight at Hitler's decree. The centrists played ball all along.

Because the helmets (Helmuts?) look silly but the lights are used so that when they are pissed off their heads trying to ride home after the Biergarten, they have a more than average chance of seeing where they are riding?

Actually, one thing I've noticed is the number of people without lights riding in the dark. But keep on digging, at some stage we won't be able to hear you any more.

see my post above. There was no world-wide economic collapse in 1871 with unprecedented mass unemployment and certanly not in France. There was no recent history of hyper-inflation causing scepticicm of liberal economic policy.

I am German and I am speaking specifically for my generation. Which was not really directly impacted by WWII (except for the family's historical baggage) just like any other kid nowadays. We (my generation) cannot learn from our mistake, as it was not our mistake. It was the mistake of two or three generations before us (my grandmother was actually a child when WWII ended). Maybe we have learned more than some other countries because we are still permanently confronted with our country's past and still deal with it very often.

Agreed.

Again agreed. I also think as soon as a person of another nationality thinks they are less prone to this, by thinking this they make themselves more prone to it.

No, but guess what, my bike has no light either. I am German too. And I cross the street on red all the time. What a shocker, huh?

No one is saying that.
And yes, I do believe this could have happened anywhere given the 'right' circumstances.

Indeed. I would even go as far as saying that most Germans before the Third Reich would have agreed with you, Genie.

It's very nice that some German people are using themselves as counter examples to a trend I described, but I hardly consider people active on a board like this typical Germans. Besides, that there are exceptions, even lots and lots of exceptions, doesn't make the trend cease from existing.

I was utterly shocked to see people in my work place spring to attention for all kinds of "Begehungen" that were pulled off by officials of some sort, quickly making everything ridiculous by insisting that all doors should be closed at all times, that no plates or glasses should be found out of the kitchen (indeed, insisted on cleaning the dishwasher from all dirty dishes!), that people wear ridiculous white cloaks at all times. When I tried to ask someone why are we supposed to do all these stupid things, I got answers like "I don't know", "don't ask questions, just do it", "well, that's what we're told to do" etc.

I had had it when I was supposed to go to some "Untersuchung" by the Arbeitsartzt, including all kinds of test I would never agree to in my life and that serve no purpose whatsoever. Everyone goes to have them done, and horrible stories about the hematomas they get from her trying to take blood samples (what on earth for???). I said fuck off, I'm not having that done to me, wrote a letter to the doctor asking why I should have these things done to me and what is the purpose of the tests, to which no answer came. She simply went directly to my boss to try and force me to the test. Everybody thought I was out of my mind, but I didn't do the tests and I'm (still) healthy as a coal miner.

Somewhat absurd discussion. The murderous frenzy in Germany was not caused by German culture, but rather it was modern industry that enabled a genocide on such a scale. Stalin's Russia and Mao' China have also managed quite impressive death tolls, though we do not have the advantage of having foreigner invaders documenting all the atrocities.
Yes, anti-semitism and general intolerence was (and still is to some extent) a problem in Germany, but these problems exist in most countries under one guise or another. The fear and hatred of "the other", that is unfortunetely all too human.

Just as long as you are not actually providing any proof of that trend you made up described, I think even anecdotal evidence is more valid than no evidence.

Mariposa: "I am German too. And I cross the street on red all the time. What a shocker, huh?"
yeah, you also live in Barcelona. Here in Germany it is not OK to cross on a red light. There is such a thing as peer pressue, and as a foreigner you notice it. Also, having a couple of nice old ladies inform me that the fine is 40 marks made me realize that this is not Spain.

sorry but I really don't get the point of your post. Are you saying all Germans have the in-bred tendency to become Nazis because you were asked to go to the company doctor for a blood test?

Genie, slap yourself in the face and get a dose of reality, for god's sake.