Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Ketza

So should I read about this guy or not?

[:D]

Don't read any book unless you get anonymous approval from all the psoters here. None of them has any biases whatsoever. All are rational, reasonable, and thoughtful.

ORIGINAL: Ketza

So should I read about this guy or not?

[:D]

LOL, I would now just because...[:D]

Though actually I have only read 50% of the book, now I'll finish it this week I guess[X(]

I see the "thought police" have been busy here.

ORIGINAL: Whyalterhistory?

I see the "thought police" have been busy here.

Well if you admire the man in the photograph to the left of your comments you certainly will have no problem with "thought police".

ORIGINAL: Whyalterhistory?

I see the "thought police" have been busy here.

something tells me your going to add some serious insight into this discourse. i just can't quite put my finger on why that is.

If more people had read Mein Kampf as a blueprint for the future{which it was}instead of some form of autobiography the world might be a far different maybe better place.

ORIGINAL: barkorn45

If more people had read Mein Kampf as a blueprint for the future{which it was}instead of some form of autobiography the world might be a far different maybe better place.

Probably one of the more difficult books to finish that I've read! So much is so boring! However a must read for anyone that desires to have a clue about the mind set of the man and as you stated the blueprint of his desired future, etc.

ORIGINAL: Bamilus

I think the equivocation between a fanatical SS officer who denied a well proven historical fact (the Holocaust) to a British Prime Minister who may have taken a few liberties with nuances in his books is intellectually laughable.

I do not think that word means what you think it means...[;)]

It highly important to understand the thought processes behind great evil so that one may recognize it in the future. That doesn't necessarily mean one has to read books that are very disturbing to do so, but sometimes it can be clarifying.

That's the real purpose I see in preserving such books. Human malevolence and rationalization of it is a huge part of history, and such writings help us understand it and it's many varied manifestations better.

ORIGINAL: Mynok
It highly important to understand the thought processes behind great evil so that one may recognize it in the future. That doesn't necessarily mean one has to read books that are very disturbing to do so, but sometimes it can be clarifying.

That's the real purpose I see in preserving such books. Human malevolence and rationalization of it is a huge part of history, and such writings help us understand it and it's many varied manifestations better.

Have to agree, we all know what book burning leads to. [:)]

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

ORIGINAL: Mynok
It highly important to understand the thought processes behind great evil so that one may recognize it in the future. That doesn't necessarily mean one has to read books that are very disturbing to do so, but sometimes it can be clarifying.

That's the real purpose I see in preserving such books. Human malevolence and rationalization of it is a huge part of history, and such writings help us understand it and it's many varied manifestations better.

Have to agree, we all know what book burning leads to. [:)]

Smores?

It is fundamental to understand the material processes which give rise to all thought. If you begin and end your investigation at the level of thought and ideas, you will never grasp their cause in the material world and the circumsrtances in which humans find themselves.

People do the same things for quite different reasons and different things for almost identical reasons. How is one to determine the meaning of a thought or event, then? By relating it to the environment and processes in which it occured.

You don't have to grasp cause. Indeed that's impossible. Even the perpretrator often doesn't know why he did what he did.

What you will find are patterns of thinking, and those can be discernable and recognizable elsewhere.

ORIGINAL: barkorn45

If more people had read Mein Kampf as a blueprint for the future{which it was}instead of some form of autobiography the world might be a far different maybe better place.

No it wasn't. Read Richard Evans' THE COMING OF THE THIRD REICH, in which he basically debunks that viewpoint.

On the issue of war crimes/atrocities, there needs to be some distinctions made. Isolated instances of military units or personnel massacring POWs or burning homes, etc, are obviously wrong and need to be prosecuted. However there is a difference between isolated instances AND the systemic-wide state directed atrocities and policies of the 3rd Reich, Japan and the Soviet Union. I am sure you can find historical evidence of a Brit or American or Canadian soldier killing a POW, etc, but I am not aware of any directive by the western allies ordering the wholesale murder of POWs, civilians, etc.

Wasn't there a rumour that Bradley at some point ordered that snipers not be taken prisoner?

Or was that the German soldiers who were nailing US tanks from ambush with panzerfausts and then immediately surrendering?

Note: My comment about Bradley is NOT at all intended as an example of a directive by the Western Allies ordering war crimes...

ORIGINAL: Berkut

Wasn't there a rumour that Bradley at some point ordered that snipers not be taken prisoner?

Or was that the German soldiers who were nailing US tanks from ambush with panzerfausts and then immediately surrendering?

I belief it was not an order. I think he said something along the lines that he "saw no point in capturing" snipers. As for the tank story, I think they 2nd tank in line would take them out after their "surrender."

ORIGINAL: Mynok
It highly important to understand the thought processes behind great evil so that one may recognize it in the future. That doesn't necessarily mean one has to read books that are very disturbing to do so, but sometimes it can be clarifying.

That's the real purpose I see in preserving such books. Human malevolence and rationalization of it is a huge part of history, and such writings help us understand it and it's many varied manifestations better.

The real danger of some "books" lies in simple minds reading them without a wiser voice putting them in a context and pointing out darker aspects of their lecture. For example how - in this case - nazi ideology tried and still tries to lead humanity down the path to barbarism.

Simple minds reading, watching and listening to dangerous stuff are too easily seduced and exploited by clever manipulation. No wonder why ill-educated jobless kids are prime targets for neo-nazi agitators. That's why no uncommented editions of "Mein Kampf" and other hate brainware should be allowed to circulate. I definitly am no fan of limitless freedom of expression, it's one aspect of US legislation I can't admire.

By the way I hope this thread gets locked rather sooner than later. WitE was bound to attract neo-nazi elements (barkorn45 at the very least scratches the limits there, whyalterhistory with his hitler portrait is a clear case), but this forum should offer no platform for them. Let's discuss the game here, not politics...

ORIGINAL: barkorn45

If more people had read Mein Kampf as a blueprint for the future{which it was}instead of some form of autobiography the world might be a far different maybe better place.

Just read this. No, you're not scratching the limits, you're a clear neo too. Go spread your brain dysentery elsewhere...

ORIGINAL: Mynok


You don't have to grasp cause. Indeed that's impossible. Even the perpretrator often doesn't know why he did what he did.

What you will find are patterns of thinking, and those can be discernable and recognizable elsewhere.

What you are saying is that the world is not knowable, but we may know our perceptions of it. And you are saying this whether you know it or not. Similarly, because someone may not know what motivates them in no way rules out someone else knowing it. It's a very common occurence, however peevish that might be for whoever understands themself less than someone else does.

People see patterns everywhere, including where none exist by design or intent. Da Vinci was the first to comment on this I believe. What you are then saying, is that you can impose a meaning on phenomena of your own fancy and call it truth. But the pattern may exist only in your perception or have a completely different content from the one you imagine.

Your view is anti-science and anti-knowledge and is refuted by the entire passage of history.