You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: If Hitler Had Won

in #politics • 8 years ago

I didn't read them either.
But the people today do the same as then, they obey they listen to words.

I don't really get your last sentence maybe because English is not my native language.
Can you tell me if this is what you mean?
And as someone once said, civil disobedience was never a problem, it was THE LACK OF civil obedience that gave evil the right of way...

I.m.o. anyone that follows orders a command or law, has no excuse by saying I was just following "the will of the people" or Hillary or Trump or whoever, there will always be someone who is persuasive or playing the feelings of the masses. Every individual is responsible for the evil stuff they do.

Well I have one last thing...you say: They all deserve the same sentence, but for different crimes.
let's make that; Hitler deserves the same sentence but for a different crime.
What would the accusation be, what crime did he do?

This is the dilemma he did not do something, but saying he is not guilty of anything is to hard for most of us, or me, to admit. Cause I can understand why people got caught up, why people did what they did, and why they wanna shift the blame for allowing the evil that's in all of us manifests in reality.
"You" wanna make "the leaders" responsible for leading you/me in the wrong direction, but it's always you/me that choose to follow words and do the deeds.

8 years ago in #politics by
$0.00
    Reply 1
    Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     8 years ago 

    English is not my native language either, so... Please let me explain: civil obedience, as opposed to civil disobedience, is what allows evil to exist, especially if it is evil of the state, dressed as good. Hitler was elected and civil obedience allowed him to still have power after he started doing really bad things. Civil disobedience is when humans think for themselves and don't let government order them to go to war, kill other people, etc. Civil obedience is saying "our leaders decided to kill those other guys, so I shall obey".
    Now, what is Hitler guilty of? He did not press the trigger after all. And I'm not shifting responsibility, I'm saying that responsibility is... shared, for the lack of better word. There are different things here to consider:

    1. Soldier is 100% guilty of pressing the trigger and killing another person.
    2. His leader is guilty of giving the kill order. This goes up to the very top, in this case Hitler himself. His (or rather theirs, plural) crime is creating circumstances under which killing a person is a good thing. Is it not a crime? On one hand I understand your argument that ultimately the person executing the evil order (pressing the trigger) is guilty - this is of course true. But someone who used words to convince the soldier I also consider guilty. Process of training soldiers, as we can see in so many movies, is like brainwashing. Not even "like", it is brainwashing, it is mind control. Are the people brainwashing other people not to be blamed for what they are doing? Leader, officer, superior by giving an order is pressing metaphorical trigger. In this chain of command the only innocent being is the gun, because the gun is not capable of thinking for itself. And about people outside the chain of command... People producing bombs, people in governments buying bombs, simple hard working men paying taxes, thus providing money for the bombs... To a (very) varying degree we're (almost) all guilty.
    $0.00
      Reply