Jump to content

Was Hitler intrinsically evil or psychotic?


Recommended Posts

Was Henry Ford evil? His book was translated in 16 languages, and countries willingly turned on the Jews. I think we tend to make too much out the men of history, because they are only riding a wave. Jews had a terrible bloody conflict with Greeks, when Greeks took control of the region. Jews pissed the Romans off so badly, they were kicked out and the land became Palestine. Christian countries have a terrible history of persecuting Jews, and it was the Muslims who gave them refuge. Zionism really ruined that relationship. Martin Luther who is credited with starting the Protestant Revolution hated Jews! No one could possible hold more responsibility for the mistreatment of Jews than Martin Luther.

 

Hitler took his concentration camp idea from the US native American reservations, and that in times of war, when resources are scarce, prisoners suffer terribly! This was true in US Civil War camps, in Japanese prisoner of war camps, and in Germany. If we were as thoughtful of history as we have become of science, perhaps we could gain better judgment? Maybe someday, international agreements about the decent treatment of war prisoners, will mean laws against torturing them, means torturing them is taboo. Perhaps we need to get out of denial about different from the rest of humanity? The mistreatment of prisoners, or whatever we want to call those held in concentration camps, reservations, or outside the wall, involves many things. Lack of resources is a big factor in the mistreatment. Hitler did not begin with the idea of creating so much suffering, and he was not the sole decision maker. But like Lincoln, he couldn't stop what was in motion.

 

 

He could also have got the idea from the British?

 

http://www.awesomestories.com/assets/boer-war-concentration-camps

 

During the second Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902), when the Boers refused to surrender to the Anglos, the British rounded-up thousands of Afrikaners (Boers) - mostly (but not all) women and children - and placed them in "concentration camps." They did the same with Africans who were displaced because of the fighting.

 

The UK National Archives provides the following description of the camps:

 

'Concentration' camps were established by the British in South Africa for Boer families who had been expelled from areas being swept clear of Boer commandos (or guerillas) by British troops, as well as for Africans who had been displaced by the war. In both black and white camps many died from disease, due in part to insanitary conditions and overcrowding. The Liberal politician Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman openly condemned what he called 'methods of barbarism'.

 

Thousands died from unspeakably bad conditions and disease. As stated in the UK Archives:

 

It has been estimated that between 20,000 and 28,000 white civilians died of disease in these camps. There were also 14,154 recorded deaths of black people from disease in the camps (over one in ten of the black camp population) and such deaths were under recorded. While the policy may have succeeded in military terms [forcing the Boers, it is believed, to surrender - thereby ending the war], it was a political disaster, earning the British a level of unpopularity on an international scale comparable to that of the USA during the Vietnam war. One contemporary critic even used the term 'holocaust'. Public criticism was, however, centred on the white camps; those for Africans, where provision was usually even poorer, were hardly mentioned in the debate.

 

Emily Hobson, a young British woman, reported what she observed at the various concentration camps. In this clip, from a two-part documentary on the Boer War by Welsh actor and documentarian Kenneth Griffith (a Boar-War specialist), we learn more about the appalling situation.

 

The following are excerpts from Emily Hobson's narrative, "Report of a Visit to the Camps of Women and Children in the Cape and Orange River Colonies," which was delivered to the British government during June of 1901:

 

In some camps, two, and even three sets of people, occupy one tent and 10, and even 12, persons are frequently herded together in tents of which the cubic capacity is about 500 c.f. [cubic feet].

 

I call this camp system a wholesale cruelty … To keep these Camps going is murder to the children..

 

It can never be wiped out of the memories of the people. It presses hardest on the children. They droop in the terrible heat, and with the insufficient unsuitable food; whatever you do, whatever the authorities do, and they are, I believe, doing their best with very limited means, it is all only a miserable patch on a great ill.

 

Thousands, physically unfit, are placed in conditions of life which they have not strength to endure. In front of them is blank ruin … If only the British people would try to exercise a little imagination – picture the whole miserable scene. Entire villages rooted up and dumped in a strange bare place.

 

<h3 class="credits"></h3>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Alan! We need to be more realistic about our human nature. I think some people think I point at Germans as examples of terrible people. No, that is not it. We are all pretty much the same. Only our cultures and institutions make us different, and the US adopted German models of education and bureaucracy, so now how different can the US be?

 

The conditions in civil war camps were horrific. The Civil War in the US was humanity at its worst, and we don't discuss if Lincoln was intrinsically evil. These things get out of hand, and terrible things happen, but I don't think that is anyone's intent at the beginning.

 

The US citizens surely did not want years of war with Iraq and Afghanistan, and for the rest of the mid east to enter violent conflicts, and to spend trillions of dollars that eventually tax payers must pay.

 

Sometimes it appears our opinion of human intelligence is greatly over estimated.

Edited by Athena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The comparisons made between abortion/hitler and Bush/hitler are absurd, the differences are night and day.

 

 

I really didn't like the pictures, but killing humans is justified in different ways. We dehumanize the human. The word "enemy" is used to dehumanize the human, and make the human easier to kill. How we think of the life in the womb influences the decision we make about the life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really didn't like the pictures, but killing humans is justified in different ways. We dehumanize the human. The word "enemy" is used to dehumanize the human, and make the human easier to kill. How we think of the life in the womb influences the decision we make about the life.

 

If you re-read post #20 in this very thread, I posted evidence suggesting that outlawing abortion does not reduce the rate of abortion.

 

Jews do not march themselves into gas chambers en masse on their own, but abortions happen whether or not they are condemned or permitted. Ergo, it is a false comparison.

Edited by Arete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you re-read post #20 in this very thread, I posted evidence suggesting that outlawing abortion does not reduce the rate of abortion.

 

Jews do not march themselves into gas chambers en masse on their own, but abortions happen whether or not they are condemned or permitted. Ergo, it is a false comparison.

 

Of course there is a difference, but if all we see is the difference, we fail to see a truth. The truth is, we kill each other and disrespect life. The concern is a matter of our awareness. Under what condition do we exterminate other human beings, and under what condition is this taboo?

 

I am reflecting on Socrates and his purpose of raising awareness and developing conscience. As he saw the most important purpose of education it is to develop good human judgment, and truly this is essential to democracy. The US had education for this purpose until 1958. I will stop discussing this, when I believe everyone is aware of the social and political ramifications of that change.

 

The Germans were not by nature bad people. Hitler did not begin as any more of a monster than Martin Luther and Henry Ford, both men who hated Jews and were very influential in what happened in Germany.

 

As for abortion, when the USSR destroyed traditional values and "liberated women", the divorce and abortion rates began to rise. There are similarities between killing unborn babies and killing Jews. One of them is a matter of resources and another is responsibility for the life another.

What is a mother without resources to do if she can not take responsibility for another life that is dependent on her? What were those responsible for the lives of native Americans, war prisoners, and Jews to do when they had responsibility for the lives of others but not the resources needed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Athena, are you pro-life, or just pro-human life? There is also similarities between animals that we put down and insects we exterminate and (according to your statements) the holocaust.

 

Life began over 3500 million years ago, not in the womb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Athena, are you pro-life, or just pro-human life? There is also similarities between animals that we put down and insects we exterminate and (according to your statements) the holocaust.

 

Life began over 3500 million years ago, not in the womb.

 

I know you addressed this to Athena, we use antibiotics (Anti-life) so I can not claim to be absolutely pro-life.

 

I am however against animal dissection especially in this modern age where we can simulate dissection via computers etc.

 

I despise late stage abortion where a viable baby is torn to pieces to get it out of the mother. This is murder of the innocence!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you addressed this to Athena, we use antibiotics (Anti-life) so I can not claim to be absolutely pro-life.

 

I am however against animal dissection especially in this modern age where we can simulate dissection via computers etc.

 

I despise late stage abortion where a viable baby is torn to pieces to get it out of the mother. This is murder of the innocence!

 

 

!

Moderator Note

 

It's also off topic. Please feel free to start your own thread on abortion, etc. if you wish to discus it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Athena, are you pro-life, or just pro-human life? There is also similarities between animals that we put down and insects we exterminate and (according to your statements) the holocaust.

 

Life began over 3500 million years ago, not in the womb.

 

Whoops, I replied to post before seeing the mod's message. I hope I managed this okay. Please note, I am not the one who brought up the abortion issue. I am accused of many things, and don't want this one added to them.

 

I do not understand your question, and this thread might not be the place to discuss our opinions about abortion. Also rereading what I wrote, I can see how someone could take me very wrong! :o

 

This thread questions if Hitler was evil or psychotic? Then we have to ask what is normal? I think everyone is compelled by nature to believe s/he is doing the right thing, or is at least justified in taking the action that was taken. Normal is justifying the rightness of wrong. That does not make the wrong right. It is just what we do.

 

Secondly, war situations get out of hand. Has there ever been a sane war? Recently someone wrote what sounds like an excellent book about the difficulty of coming from a culture where it is taboo to kill another, into a war situation, and then back into the culture where it is once again taboo to kill. He was interviewed on TV. People adjust to doing terrible things when they are in a war situation. What happened to the Jews was not all about Hitler, and we should not think of NAZI Germany as a one man show.

 

People loved hated Jews and loved Hitler and this was not just in Germany. Plenty of the evil began in the US. Eugenics began in the US and goes with unrealistic expectations of technology. Concentration camps, were created by the British and US long before Jews were put in them. Henry Ford, the man to started the Ford auto industry, hated Jews and his book was translated in 16 languages, spreading this hate around the world. The Bush family was very involved in the banking that backed NAZI Germany. Many in the US thought fascism was the answer to our economic troubles, and as I keep pointing out we adopted Germany models of education and bureaucracy.

 

Focusing too tightly on Hitler seems to lead us away from truth. Focusing too tightly on NAZI Germany, also prevents us from seeing the bigger picture.

Edited by Athena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we should ask could we so called normal people be moved to do the evil Hitler did?

 

 

Was he just a person with skewed beliefs that did bad evil things In my opinion there were many worse despots in history than Hitler, they directly participated in the appalling depraved acts of their time. Vlad the Impaler is just one of them.

 

What if we compare him to the worst of serial killers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we should ask could we so called normal people be moved to do the evil Hitler did?

 

 

Was he just a person with skewed beliefs that did bad evil things In my opinion there were many worse despots in history than Hitler, they directly participated in the appalling depraved acts of their time. Vlad the Impaler is just one of them.

 

What if we compare him to the worst of serial killers?

 

I love your question! Who did the doing, Hitler or those who followed him? If you can watch the movie "The Reader". It is a tragic movie because the woman punished for war crimes was only following orders, and could not comprehend not following orders, even though innocent people would die. She could not allow them to escape the burning church, because it was her duty to keep the Jewish prisoners under control, and this meant not letting run out of a burning building. This is why I speak of the change in education and culture change. Education for technology does not prepare individuals to think for themselves, but to rely on authority. This is wonderful for the rapid advancement of technology, but it does not manifest a society with good moral judgment.

 

In the 1970's the US announced a youth crisis. We did not suddenly have a mass of mutant parents uninterested in raising their children. We had a major change in public education, and stopped transmitting our culture. We stopped educating for good moral judgment and left moral training to the church. Big mistake.

 

If you can, watch the original Star Trek with Captain Kirk and then watch the Next Generation with Picard and compare the two. The Next Generation expressed the "group think" generation. Captain Kirk is from the generations that talked of virtues and honor and were educated for independent thinking. Kirk was the John Wayne of outer space. Now with the "group think" generation it seems being popular is more important than anything else. We have young people willing to kill, to prove they can be good gang members. We have bullying and suicide. My concern is, how many of them will follow orders without question? There were Germans who risked their lives to protect Jews, at a time when family and neighbors would report them to authority. When I experience how people react to what I am saying, I wonder how different are things today? If we don't like someone's post, we are not to deal with this person directly but are to report this person to authority. Gone are the days when we would chant "tattle tale tattle tale hanging from a bulls tail" when someone reported on someone else.

 

A popular Star Trek theme was societies run by computers. These shows were not just entertainment. Like ancient Greek tragedies they were plays written to make us think about what we think and what we are doing. They go with "1984" and "The Brave New World", novels of excessively controlled societies. One of my favorite quotes is Aldous Huxley, "In the past, personal and political liberty depended to a considerable extent upon government inefficiency. The spirit of tyranny was always more than willing; but its organization and material equipment were generally weak. Progressive science and technology have changed all this completely." The US government did not have the organization for power that it has today. It made laws, but it did not rule with policies. Today, everything is subject to rule by policies made by committees that are disbanded after the policy is written, leaving no one to address when things go wrong. This is an impersonal, headless rule over the people, who have nothing to do but obey. Just like Tocqueville feared would happen to us when he wrote "Democracy in America", in 1830. It is what we defended our democracy against, but like the people in Star Trek shows, no one can imagine things being different, and like a Star Trek show, they will do all they can to prevent the Star Trek crew from disabling the computer.

 

Fortunately for us, we have a different history than Germany, and there is hope we will continue to question a president and vice president who stand behind torturing war prisoners, and a war based on false information. But what happens to the memory of the past, when us old folks die? It really kills when the people I do business with have a policy change, and the young person I am speaking with, is sure things have always been as they are today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love your question! Who did the doing, Hitler or those who followed him? If you can watch the movie "The Reader". It is a tragic movie because the woman punished for war crimes was only following orders, and could not comprehend not following orders, even though innocent people would die. She could not allow them to escape the burning church, because it was her duty to keep the Jewish prisoners under control, and this meant not letting run out of a burning building. This is why I speak of the change in education and culture change. Education for technology does not prepare individuals to think for themselves, but to rely on authority. This is wonderful for the rapid advancement of technology, but it does not manifest a society with good moral judgment.

 

In the 1970's the US announced a youth crisis. We did not suddenly have a mass of mutant parents uninterested in raising their children. We had a major change in public education, and stopped transmitting our culture. We stopped educating for good moral judgment and left moral training to the church. Big mistake.

 

If you can, watch the original Star Trek with Captain Kirk and then watch the Next Generation with Picard and compare the two. The Next Generation expressed the "group think" generation. Captain Kirk is from the generations that talked of virtues and honor and were educated for independent thinking. Kirk was the John Wayne of outer space. Now with the "group think" generation it seems being popular is more important than anything else. We have young people willing to kill, to prove they can be good gang members. We have bullying and suicide. My concern is, how many of them will follow orders without question? There were Germans who risked their lives to protect Jews, at a time when family and neighbors would report them to authority. When I experience how people react to what I am saying, I wonder how different are things today? If we don't like someone's post, we are not to deal with this person directly but are to report this person to authority. Gone are the days when we would chant "tattle tale tattle tale hanging from a bulls tail" when someone reported on someone else.

 

A popular Star Trek theme was societies run by computers. These shows were not just entertainment. Like ancient Greek tragedies they were plays written to make us think about what we think and what we are doing. They go with "1984" and "The Brave New World", novels of excessively controlled societies. One of my favorite quotes is Aldous Huxley, "In the past, personal and political liberty depended to a considerable extent upon government inefficiency. The spirit of tyranny was always more than willing; but its organization and material equipment were generally weak. Progressive science and technology have changed all this completely." The US government did not have the organization for power that it has today. It made laws, but it did not rule with policies. Today, everything is subject to rule by policies made by committees that are disbanded after the policy is written, leaving no one to address when things go wrong. This is an impersonal, headless rule over the people, who have nothing to do but obey. Just like Tocqueville feared would happen to us when he wrote "Democracy in America", in 1830. It is what we defended our democracy against, but like the people in Star Trek shows, no one can imagine things being different, and like a Star Trek show, they will do all they can to prevent the Star Trek crew from disabling the computer.

 

Fortunately for us, we have a different history than Germany, and there is hope we will continue to question a president and vice president who stand behind torturing war prisoners, and a war based on false information. But what happens to the memory of the past, when us old folks die? It really kills when the people I do business with have a policy change, and the young person I am speaking with, is sure things have always been as they are today.

 

Athena, those are some great ideas you have there. Particularly, the one about the dehumanization of human life in order to justify killing, and the one about the policies written by committees that are disbanded after the policy is written. Moral training should be taught in schools because, unfortunately, most moral values and ethics are learned, and are neither innate nor instinctive. If you ever write a book about this I would be glad to read it. And I am relatively young, so hopefully, people with principles and moral values will never be extinct. As parents or future parents, we have an unshakable responsibility to pass on our values and principles as a nation to our sons and daughters, albeit while giving them the chance to think for themselves. Kind of like this: "My dear Son/Daughter here are my values, I will explain them to you and tell you the consequences of ignoring them or not abiding by them, however, now that I have given you the whole story, feel free to modify or alter them in however way you deem fit for your future, but always be wary of the consequences of such changes. Mainly, how they would affect society as you know it, and wether you would want to live in a world where this set of changes to the moral system apply." Nevertheless, what with responsible parents decreasing in number by the day, such principles would be much better applied and taught through the educational system...

 

In short, Athena, write that book and I will be sure to read it, and if it is as good as the ideas you mentioned, I'll endorse and promote it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this posed as an either/ or question?

Is it not possible that he was both evil (whatever that means) and psychotic?

 

If he was psychotic, then he shouldn't be held accountable for his actions. It would simply mean he was not in a right frame of mind. But reality would make it so he was in a right frame of mind, thus not psychotic.

 

Judging by his actions of malice, torture, and the slaughter of millions of civilians under his reasoning and judgement, he was an evil man.

 

I love your question! Who did the doing, Hitler or those who followed him? If you can watch the movie "The Reader". It is a tragic movie because the woman punished for war crimes was only following orders, and could not comprehend not following orders, even though innocent people would die. She could not allow them to escape the burning church, because it was her duty to keep the Jewish prisoners under control, and this meant not letting run out of a burning building. This is why I speak of the change in education and culture change. Education for technology does not prepare individuals to think for themselves, but to rely on authority. This is wonderful for the rapid advancement of technology, but it does not manifest a society with good moral judgment.

 

Hm, was she not an automaton at that time? She followed orders without a thought as to why she was actually doing so; that to me, seems she characterized herself more as a 'thing' than a human. Should she be punished though? A bit too complicated for me to answer right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good and evil are pretty much subjective in my opinion so I suppose there really is no such a thing as intrinsically evil.

 

That's right - especially when it comes to war. Wars kill lots of innocent people on both sides. The question is though - which side wins the war?

 

The winning side will not be asked to justify its actions. Even if those actions include the mass slaughter of civilians. Like in WWII. The British and American leaders ordered the "Strategic Bombing" of German cities in WWII. This resulted in the deaths of millions of civilians. But we won the war, so our "good" leaders got away with it.

 

The German leaders also ordered the killing of millions of civilians. But the Germans lost the war - so their "bad" leaders got put on trial at Nuremberg, found guilty of evil war-crimes, and hanged. Tough on them for losing!

 

If the war had gone the other way, and the Germans had won - wouldn't the "evil" (possibly psychotic) Churchill and Roosevelt, have been tried, and convicted of war-crimes, for ordering the callous mass "terror-bombing" of German cities?

 

In matters of "good" and "evil", the winner defines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's right - especially when it comes to war. Wars kill lots of innocent people on both sides. The question is though - which side wins the war?

 

The winning side will not be asked to justify its actions. Even if those actions include the mass slaughter of civilians. Like in WWII. The British and American leaders ordered the "Strategic Bombing" of German cities in WWII. This resulted in the deaths of millions of civilians. But we won the war, so our "good" leaders got away with it.

 

The German leaders also ordered the killing of millions of civilians. But the Germans lost the war - so their "bad" leaders got put on trial at Nuremberg, found guilty of evil war-crimes, and hanged. Tough on them for losing!

 

If the war had gone the other way, and the Germans had won - wouldn't the "evil" (possibly psychotic) Churchill and Roosevelt, have been tried, and convicted of war-crimes, for ordering the callous mass "terror-bombing" of German cities?

 

In matters of "good" and "evil", the winner defines.

 

I agree with your idea in most cases. However, there are cases when it is tyrant vs people such as what is happening in Syria right now, and what has happened and still happens in some countries in Africa repeatedly. Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that popular revolutions often lose their pure "for the people"-essence slowly as they progress towards impeaching or discarding the tyrannical government, with the post-revolutionary authorities sometimes even becoming as "bad" as the dismantled government or even worse.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Adolf Hitler is often referred to as a madman, in part because most people are loath to accept such enormity of evil as anything other than the by product of psychosis. Yet just how ''mad'' Hitler was, and how much of the evil he perpetrated can be attributed to illness, either physical or mental.?

 

Did Hitler, know what he was doing was wrong but nevetheless, chose to do it with pride and enthusiasm?

 

What do you think? He was an abused child by a brutal drunkard of a father, but countless people with abusing fathers do not grow up to do unspeakable evil, but a few do?

 

Or was he like I suppose just intrinsically evil?

 

 

 

 

 

 

hitler is bread of self hatered and and the desire to rid all things like him i think suicide was always what he wanted but he wanted to get rid of all like him cause he didnt want anythin like him to be possible he knew he was evil but he thought the massicar was his repentence and judgement on his kind trying to delete himself permentized him the ultimate turture for such a mind but most people forget he was atleast half jew and that he had a thing for blond haired blue eyed MEN its the same conclusion that drives pyscoscymatic behavure that leads people to killing there whole family hitler tryed it on a massive scale there you go friday the 13th

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

hitler is bread of self hatered and and the desire to rid all things like him i think suicide was always what he wanted but he wanted to get rid of all like him cause he didnt want anythin like him to be possible he knew he was evil but he thought the massicar was his repentence and judgement on his kind trying to delete himself permentized him the ultimate turture for such a mind but most people forget he was atleast half jew and that he had a thing for blond haired blue eyed MEN its the same conclusion that drives pyscoscymatic behavure that leads people to killing there whole family hitler tryed it on a massive scale there you go friday the 13th

 

 

This is not true, Hitler was not half Jew, plese get your facts right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

do not be naive.hitler is a monster because he lose the war and wars are always generated by many facts so no man by himself can do nothing and the evil is in the soul of man.hitler just was there and if hitler were not,another man would have start the war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hitler was human. He had emotional all around the spectrum. I think he saw a chance and it escalated. And with all his emotional problems he probably felt on top of the world with an army and all. He probably felt he had to erase his past, and on top had to be the ultimate super race as they always say. It's just like, what? I think he got the power and got mad with it, like with a dog that catches a bird. Doesn't know what to do with it, but you know it isn't going to end well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Hitler, and a good many other significantly powerful figures among the German fascistic political factions of the time, was central Austrian by family and culture of birth. This region has over the centuries resisted the Reformation as well as the Enlightenment, fought public education, installed Catholic priests as heads of State, and compiled a long history of pogroms, Inquisitions, anti-Protestant as well as anti-Jewish violence and persecution - his mother, with whom he was close all hsi life until her death, was devoutly Catholic, his father nominally so.

 

Unless we postulate an entire geographic region suffering from a particular biological mental illness, the observation that outside of his long and carefully practiced propaganda skills Hitler was common, a frequently met type in central Austrian political and social life for generations, tends to indict nurture rather than nature for his political views and bigotries. The monumental evils of the Third Reich are not, after all, much different in personal level origin or rhetorical and political support from many another pogrom in Austria's dark history - the upgrading to modern industrial scale tends to startle the onlooker, but Germans have long been famous for efficient engineering.

 

When Hitler's tanks rolled into Austria, and he returned his mother's homeland to the Germanic union it had been split from by the punitive and vindictive and misery-inflicting Treaty of Versailles, the government they removed was a fascist one (rightwing corporate authoritarian) that had attained power in large part via such efforts as the Heimwehr and had been attempting to ally itself with Mussolini's Italy. Hitler's army was greeted with flowers and waving flags and celebration in the street, by the large fraction of Austrians who considered that their fascistic government was too liberal and insufficiently ambitious.

 

It's not Hitler we need to explain, but his following. Granted they were subjected to the first of the truly modern propaganda barrages, after many years of life in a humiliating and imposed poverty - but they succumbed more easily and in greater numbers, threw themselves into it more completely and sincerely, than one might expect merely from watching (say) Fox News operate in the US.

 

Central Europe is littered with monuments to the doings of "family values", "traditional values", "Kinder, Kuche, Kirche", and similar political movements. Here's one from Austria, near Hitler's mother's home town, of a late14th Century event focused on Waldensians that would have been immediately recognized by the Jews of the early 20th Century in that same part of the world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Steyrer_Waldenserdenkmal.jpg

Edited by overtone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.