Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 14:04:02 +0100
Subject: Re: ontical history


At 03:41 21-3-03 +0000, Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>Rene de Bakker wrote:
>
>>Now simple history: the comparison with Germany and Hitler
>>
>>America got a blow 9/11, Germany in 1918.
>>Although, as the first one received at home,
>>it was quite a blow, it was one on the nose
>>but of course did not bring them down.
>>Germany, in 1918, was deadly injured, all
>>its organs damaged. It were above all the French that wanted to hold 
>>Germany in
>>that lethal state.
>
>Yes and for damn good reason after Germany practically started WWI for 
>reasons that had nothing to do with the assasination of Franz Ferdinand

Germany made important mistakes, but, as I said lately, historians now
tend to point to Russia, when a culprit must be.
Did you miss that somehow?, that would be quite worrying. A week ago
I quoted the Goering statement at Nuremberg, that Jud now brings as if
nothing happened.
If one cannot even recognize, remember texts - and this is no
exception - , then the gates are open for the most idiotic nonsense, 
defended by the most rational, rigid of logics and morals. As you prove
with this mail.  As an intelligent man, you ought to be ashamed.
Nietzsche foresaw the next centuries, because he diagnosed the
Widerwille in what he called the interim-character of the nationalistic
wars. This is all a bit more hidden than resolutions and the dates of
wars, and one needs the capacity of patience to take into view the
free space wherein people are together and which you think you can
occupy with categories like 'mitsein' and 'ground for every possible
ethics', showing the doggedness of reason in the name of him that
forged this formula.

nd 
>had everything to do with weakening France, and ultimately Russia, by having 
>Austro-Hungary as an ally. Germany was so obviously instigating war, by 
>pressuring Austro-Hungary to make their ultimatum to Serbia impossibly 
>demanding (definitely not the 12 years that Iraq has had!), and by 
>consistently undermining all attempts by Great Britain at mediation with 
>Serbia. Germany unabashedly WANTED war. Luckily, something happened that 
>Germany did not expect: Great Britain did not remain neutral and came to the 
>aid of France, resulting in a stalemate until the US finally joined them. As 
>in almost every war, there's blame to spread around, but the preponderance 
>definitely lands on Germany for this one.
>
>>America now considers Iraq and others as dangerous, and launches preemptive 
>>strikes.
>>
>>Germany, if one takes a look at the map,
>>lies in between France and Russia, both
>>opponents in ww1. 1917: revolution in
>>Russia, helped by the Germans.
>>Millions of citizens, peasants, aristocracy
>>murdered. With today's standards Germany
>>had a right to attack Russia at any time.
>>With today's standards Germany had the right
>>to attack anybody anywhere any time.
>
>If you are referring to the massive crimes 
against humanity that were 
>occurring in Russia following the 1917 revolution, then I fully agree. That 
>dwarfed what Milosevic did by millions. Problem was, so did the crimes 
>against humanity that were occurring in Germany under the Nazis. So by 
>today's standards, both Russia AND Germany at the time should have gotten 
>the same treatment that Milosevic received in the 90s.
>
>Anthony Crifasi

You may satisfy your own needs this way - black&white true/false,
good/bad, but then you will never be able to say something that concerns
history, it's only fantasy this way. This stupid blaming of yours leads
nowhere. You just go on as if nothing is said. You just neglect the
recently here quoted words of Heidegger on the fatal mechanism of this
blaming, which is the sure way never to get out of trouble. But you feel
safer in this trouble and your real fear is its being removed.









-----------------------------------
drs. Rene de Bakker
Universiteitsbibliotheek Amsterdam
Afdeling Catalogisering 
tel. 020-5252368              


     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---