1267: Crimes Against Humanity

[punk'n]

Originally Posted by Sphincterrific

At, around 13:15 Chemda tries to bolster a commenter's argument that there is some kind of moral-equivalency between slavery in the US and Germany under Nazi rule, stating that the "world war happened before slavery." Precisely which world war preceded the US civil war and the abolition of slavery? More importantly, how did Jesse let that pass without his head exploding, covering the studio in icky gooey brain-fold mess?

I just hit that part! I think we misheard her.

[-John-]

The Fake news clip they play is from a show in the U.K. called the Newswipe usually doug stanhope does a little segment on the show too.

[Cretaceous Bob]

Anybody who tries to say the Holocaust was due to a particular fault of the German race is a living demonstration of why race-based ideologies will never die.

Americans wouldn't lift a finger against a government as brutal and ruthless as Hitler's. Fuck, Americans won't lift a finger now.

[Blitzgal]

Also, American companies did business with the Nazi's during WWII, including IBM, who provided tabulators that were used to organize data about their victims. Keith and Jesse can make whatever claims they like about how they would've fought back, but remember that even people in our own country were complicit in this.

IBM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[cmar618]

Seems Fitting:


Put this guy in jail.

Micheal Bolton too

[Grapist]

The purpose of the Emancipation Proclamation was political in nature, Lincoln could have given a shit if people owned slaves. It's the difference between grade school "Unicorns and rainbows" version of history and the college "Holy shit that is fucked up" version of history, which really does put things into perspective.

[Cretaceous Bob]

Originally Posted by Grapist

The purpose of the Emancipation Proclamation was political in nature, Lincoln could have given a shit if people owned slaves. It's the difference between grade school "Unicorns and rainbows" version of history and the college "Holy shit that is fucked up" version of history, which really does put things into perspective.

That's pretty dumb to say. There's no question what Lincoln's position and feelings on slavery were. There is a bevy of speeches and writings from him that illustrate that.

Much of Lincoln's actions were politically motivated because keeping the political side in order was what kept the war going. The Emancipation Proclamation didn't free slaves in Union states for several reasons: 1) as he stated, he did not have the legal authority to do that, and 2) if he tried to push for that, he would alienate Union states that were contributing to the war effort.

People now like to bitch and moan about Lincoln's careful navigation of political battles, but none of them ever remember that it was because of him that America doesn't have a slave-holding sister along its southern border, and it was precisely that careful navigation that kept the war going.

Had Lincoln been as radical as people today want to imagine he was, rather than be willing to concede things to Northern Democrats, he never would have been able to keep America in the war. There were many times during that war that the North and South called for peace, and many times the Northern press slammed Lincoln for being unwilling to make peace. The Emancipation Proclamation was not Lincoln's definitive opinion on slavery; in fact, it has very little to do with slavery. It was a political action made to keep the war going.

Which would you rather have? An Emancipation Proclamation that angered the border states and Northern Democrats and isolated Lincoln as a radical abolitionist and would have potentially caused peace? Or an Emancipation Proclamation that was a political action to further a just war that left the question of slavery up to a Republican Congress in the wake of victory?

Dressing up the issue of the Emancipation Proclamation like that really just stinks of conclusions coloured by the shock of exiting the "Unicorns and rainbows" version of history, rather than an accurate view of it. Saying that Lincoln wouldn't have given a shit is disingenuous at best. You thought the Emancipation Proclamation was a sweeping motion of liberation, and when you learned it wasn't and wasn't intended to be, you flipped to an opposite conclusion, but the facts show neither one is correct. Maybe you should actually do some reading rather than adopt different versions of shit people tell you.

[Grapist]

The onion video Jesse was talking about.

[beerchick]

Crap - I accidentally clicked I agree with Keith when I meant to say Chemda. Please disregard one Keith vote - I'm a REtard!

[Junkenstein]

Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob

Anybody who tries to say the Holocaust was due to a particular fault of the German race is a living demonstration of why race-based ideologies will never die.

Americans wouldn't lift a finger against a government as brutal and ruthless as Hitler's. Fuck, Americans won't lift a finger now.

God Bless, Bob.

Plus, there's no such thing as a "German Race". Nazism raised using Teuronic Mythology as a crutch, but the main reason for its popularity was that, like any dictatorship, it used people's despair and crisis to drive them insane and blaming a "common enemy".

Doesnt condone the population from anything, of course but all civilizations have a share of atrocities and crimes against humanity that were condoned by the poppulation, after a good manipulatory speech or two.