Even though the legality of a 'vaccination order' is doubtful, and despite these obligations having been lifted in May 2024, former soldiers are still sent to jail
That's the trouble with military law, and law in general: even if you are in the right against legal authority, you are in the wrong.
Even if the order was illegal, or twisted by the commanding officer into making the soldiers thinking it was mandatory and a legal order, if you refuse that's still insubordination. Disobeying or refusing an order is what it is, and that's military law.
(Small wonder I was cashiered at conscription, when I stated that I would never comply with orders I though ethically or morally wrong. The military psychiatrist doing the evaluation noted "Compulsive anti-authoritarian" in my papers.)
If the police order you out of your car, for no good or even legal reason and you refuse, you are guilty of refusing the orders of a policeman. I can guarantee that there's not a nation of Earth that doesn't function that way - Authority must be absolute and its enforcers must be able to act without fear of repercussions for state-made law to function at all, is the underlying judicial philosophy.
(Which is why most attorneys et c are the leading bleeding edge of compliance with ever-increasing authoritarian politics all over the West; it grants them more and more power and higher and higher income, just by being compliant.)
I hope this soldier is not alone, and I hope he somehow manages to bring suit against the military proper, for its actions. A scandal like that is precisely what the Bundeswehr needs right now, given that they are desperately scrambling for young German men willing to die in Ukraine to ensure a million arabs, africans and the like can continue to move into Germany ever year.
You're of course correct; the main point of the above-related piece, though, is that these soldiers were sentenced for insubordination and could have paid (or gotten jabbed), but they
refused nonetheless. That takes more balls than to execute obviously immoral and/or otherwise wrong orders.
Out of curiosity: did the Swedish military take you in?
Nope, I haven't done any military service/work for the Swedish Armed Forces - people who ask questions or just questions in general weren't and aren't really welcome, now less than ever.
When I was 18, I didn't want to fail (had my own reasons), but even back then there were many who sought to weasel their way out of serving, which I consider an essential civic duty in a constitutional republic (yes, Austria isn't perfect, but still--my country).
I think it was my replies to various hypotheticals and my intelligence-personality test results that sealed the deal, plus the military being just as cheapskate back then as today.
And asking "What exactly would I be fighting /for/?", pointing out one scandal of corruption after another, where the capitalists, civil servants, their bosses, politicians and so on had walked scot free despite evidence.
Olof Palme and other politicians frequenting a brothel in the 1970s f.e. A brothel with underage girls, some as young as 13. Most of it still classified to this day.
I'm supposed to defend that?, I asked. Which marked me as someone who'd cause trouble with unit cohesion, which made me unsuitable.
While I understand you and feel the same, I think at this point it is worth adding a comment.
It can be worth it to fight for a flawed regime run by your own people, then to become subjugated by another people who will not have the bonds of brotherhood with you that you have with your kinsmen.
Absolutely - those are the horns of the dilemma that classical liberalism and pre-Soviet Marxism attempted to adress, how to fight for what is worth fighting for without fighting for just another set of crooks-in-power.
I have a massive empty internment camp up the road from me. Yes, I would say what happened during covid was the same.
The final stages of Stanton’s Ten Stages of Genocide are “preparation, persecution and extermination.” The final stages begin with lists: victims are identified and separated from the group, tortured and displaced and finally killed. Before this begins, however, victims are disarmed and incapable of self-defence to ensure the dominant group has total control.
It is legal in Western Australia to kidnap and forcibly inject people during Emergency government (WA Health Act 2016). I have written about this extensively.
"Now, I’m not saying that the Covid mania is the same as what happened during the Second World War; history doesn’t repeat, it rhymes. "
True that. It's not Naziism, but it is German authoritarianism. These things scare me because I live next door to Germany, and these things rub off on neighbors. I don't think anyone's actually been sent to prison for refusing the gene juice in Czechia. Czechs seem to be a bit less authoritarian than Germans (gods be praised), though it was horrible here, too, at the height of insanity.
But anyway, Germany has definitely succeeded in sending a message: "Don't join the army."
I'd move to strike the adjective here: it's tyranny/authoritarianism, plain and simple. It comes in as many different shades as there are countries/peoples, and the key here is: today's Germans get judged by what their ancestors did, and that is going on since 1918/45.
Full disclosure (also relevant for my reply to Witzbold's comment): I consider myself a member of that kind of Kulturnation; my mother tongue is German, and it's 'my' history, too.
Different cultures have different characteristics. German culture is high in orderliness (with a hat tip to Jordan Peterson), which is sometimes good and sometimes bad. Can a country become rich without being high in orderliness? Probably not. But the flip side is that "rules are rules," even when the rules in question are patently idiotic, and so Germans are *still* getting prosecuted for corona insubordination. Plenty of other governments cracked down on their populations in a completely idiotic fashion during the corona event, but they're less orderly, and so "rules are rules, sometimes, maybe." That attitude ("rules are rules, sometimes, maybe") introduces a measure of chaos, which is a problem in all sorts of contexts, but the advantage is that it makes it easier to backpedal from idiotic decisions.
"I’m not saying that the Covid mania is the same as what happened during the Second World War; history doesn’t repeat, it rhymes."
Has it always been so, that Nazi Germany cannot be compared (in Germany/Austria?) to anything else for fear of minimizing/relativizing its horrors?
This is a genuine question, not rhetorical. In middle school I recall being taught basics like the difference between drawing a comparison and an equivalence. The first highlights parallels or similarities (rhymes), while the latter claims events are of the same level (repeats). Also, the Nazi period involved more (temporally and politically) than the horrors of the Holocaust alone. Yet time and again, the two are presented as one and the same - I don't get it. German friends (mostly 35~45 years old) reject my criticism and assure me their schooling guaranteed an honest, comprehensive reflection on the NS period, and yet... any comparisons are verboten.
This charge of minimising through comparison has come up again in CJ Hopkins' trial, and I wondered if you could provide some insight on this seemingly very German taboo: thou shallt not compare Nazi Germany with ANYTHING, ever! I confess, my Irish black humour finds me lampooning a subtext of Germany exceptionality: nobody does totalitarian government and genocide like ze Germans.
I'll try in as little space as possible to answer your question, which requires a long-form answer at some point in time.
Full disclosure (see also reply to Irena's comment): I consider myself a member of that kind of Kulturnation; my mother tongue is German, and it's 'my' history, too.
You asked: 'Has it always been so, that Nazi Germany cannot be compared (in Germany/Austria?) to anything else for fear of minimizing/relativizing its horrors?'
Here are my two cents: no, it hasn't, but it has been a, if not the, constant since 8 May 1945. Yes, not everywhere in German-speaking countries to the same tune (e.g., not so much in Austria, which was a 'victim' of Hitler although the events leading up to the 'Anschluss' were initiated by Austrian chancellor Schuschnigg and no other country could care about what happened); in the Cold War, the GDR for instance denied that they had anything to do with the Third Reich, and the Communists even made the ethnically cleansed Germans from the East continue their trek westwards. The Federal Republic, by contrast, is the continuity here, with the Bundestag's research office in 2007 (if memory serves) holding that the Federal Republic is, in fact, 'identical' with every German nation-state since 1867 (forget the founding of the Second Reich by Bismarck, they key moment arrived four years earlier in the guise of the North-German Confederation).
As to the issue I alluded to before--Hans Mommsen, on of post-WW2 West Germany's leading historians once wrote that 1945 was Germany's 'zero hour' (Tom Brady quotes him in his German Histories in the Age of Reformations, Cambridge, 2009).
To understand the 'Nazi bludgeon', I suggest the following line of thought: from May 1945 onwards, West Germans (who later took over their Eastern brethren) were told that Hitler and the Third Reich were the incarnation of Evil™ (I think that the victors did so, in no small part, to gloss over their own war crimes and, in Stalin's case, also the way greater atrocities committed in the name of Socialism/Bolshevism even before WW2), hence Mommsen's 'zero hour' notion. Everything that came afterwards was, is, and, in fact, must be incomparable by definition.
As to the major problem in the present--in the early 1960s, Fritz Fischer published his Griff nach der Weltmacht, which held that Imperial Germany's aims in WW1 were, in fact, identical to Hitler's in WW2. As a consequence, the period before Hitler rose to power in 1933 became similarly 'tainted' by Evil™ (although that's not how history works). By the 1980s, the so-called Historikerstreit erupted over the 'singularity' of Hitler/Third Reich Evil™, and it's still ongoing. A lot of these debates are quite…academic, but with so-called 'Reunification' in 1989/90 and the then-ongoing EU building project, other things soon took precedence.
In the ivory tower of academia, just before Covid hit, Germany's leading modernist historians were proposing that even the founding of the Second Empire by Bismarck were part and parcel of what eventually led to--you guessed it--Hitler/Third Reich Evil™. Right now, with first discussions of 1848 being tied into these notions, too, suggests that this revised Sonderweg (2.0, if you will) may, at some point, extend or even surpass its first version (which commenced, it was held, in the 30 Years' War).
Leaving aside these academic debates, the bottom line is that 'we Germans' (see the disclaimer above) have no more history that we can turn to as everyone and everything has been 'tainted' now. The best example of this trajectory is actually on Youtube:
Behold, exhibit 1: when, on the eve of the Fall of the Berlin Wall in Oct. 1989, the Bundestag was in session in Bonn, and when it's members heard of the Fall of the Berlin Wall, they spontaneously rose and sang the national anthem:
Exhibit 2, well, fast-forward to early 2024 and the fall-out of 'Stupid Watergate': remember when one of the participants suggested to sing the national anthem and was shoed off the stage…
'We Germans' are losing our history, warts and all, and this is perfect, if you're about to run some IngSoc-like WEF-mediated mindfuckery. Mind you, I'm not saying our history is without 'issues', but what I'm saying is that it is in the process of being erased before our eyes.
As always, thank you for answer. A few brief comments in reply...
I still recall my shock at that school teacher being booed off the stage for citing the (admirable) sentiments of the German national anthem earlier this year. And having never seen that footage from the Bundestag in Bonn, I found that video quite touching. The dress and speech of the politicians in 1989 seems almost from another era and yet it is from my own youth, when I was a 10-year old schoolkid. The politicians remind me of my own grandparents and my German in-laws of the same generation...
The talk of year zero with its echoes of French Revolutionary Calendar, Pol Pot, and Mao's Cultural Revolutionand is a little unsettling. From a psychological perspective, I worry about a nation that still apparently needs to define itself in relation to its disowned past, by that which it is not, a shadow. It virtually guarantees history WILL rhyme...
Meanwhile, its politicians openly discuss banning opposition parties in order to protect democracy but could not muster the courage to insist upon constitutional principles during the pandemic panic, nor to condemn Israels current raising of Gaza and the Palestinians...
Anway, yes, your answer does make sense to me. The overt policing of discourse and erasure of history makes me bristle every time I encounter it. Evidently for good reason.
Think I've referenced this essay before, but it chimes with your take, and any who read this comment may also appreciate it: The New German Catechism
"For many, the memory of the Holocaust as a break with civilization is the moral foundation of the Federal Republic. To compare it with other genocides is therefore considered a heresy, an apostasy from the right faith. It is time to abandon this catechism."
Thanks for the link, I have not seen that piece by Mr. Moses--and, yes, he argues in the same direction (as do many so-called 'Holocaust deniers' when they invoke the notion of 'the Holocaust™' being a kind of Ersatzreligion called 'Holocaustianity').
Mind you, I'm not siding with the latter notions, but as you may recall, I consider the lies and fake history of WW2 a kind of post-bourgeois para-ideology:
'As such, post-1945 remembrance may be understood as a form of post-bourgeois ideology, imposed on the devastated continent and its peoples by the propaganda machinery of both Moscow and Washington. With the end of the Cold War and the USSR’s dissolution, there’s but one increasingly shrill version that remains, and we can all see its ugly head rearing today.
Make no mistake, this is a tremendous achievement: the establishment of a new creed, engendered by the victorious American elites and gladly picked up, disseminated, and adapted by their servile satraps in Western capitals, constitutes without question the ultimate victory of WW2.
No discussion is permitted, and no matter how egregious the West’s own actions, they must never be mentioned in polite conversation, let alone in public discourse.'
One other piece I found quite illuminating is Kevin Cramer's The Thirty Years' War and German Memory in the 19th Century (2007) in which the authors posits a kind of 'morbid fascination with death and destruction' as being one of the keys to understanding German sentiment.
P.S.: I have a piece on the Thirty Years' War, memory, and remembrance accepted for publication in German History; it's coming out next year, I've been told, and if you'd like to read it beforehand, drop me an email.
For a country with such a massive guilt complex over their fascist past, leading to pathological altruism and self-abnegation, it is odd to witness a recurrence of state enforced violations of bodily autonomy.
Thanks, it would nice to see the German elite reaction when they realize that their mandated Covid jabs have killed or permanently injured many more than the Holocaust did. This reality is now slowly dawning in the medical literature. The dissonance with Germany's official post-WW2 doctrine will be huge.
That's the trouble with military law, and law in general: even if you are in the right against legal authority, you are in the wrong.
Even if the order was illegal, or twisted by the commanding officer into making the soldiers thinking it was mandatory and a legal order, if you refuse that's still insubordination. Disobeying or refusing an order is what it is, and that's military law.
(Small wonder I was cashiered at conscription, when I stated that I would never comply with orders I though ethically or morally wrong. The military psychiatrist doing the evaluation noted "Compulsive anti-authoritarian" in my papers.)
If the police order you out of your car, for no good or even legal reason and you refuse, you are guilty of refusing the orders of a policeman. I can guarantee that there's not a nation of Earth that doesn't function that way - Authority must be absolute and its enforcers must be able to act without fear of repercussions for state-made law to function at all, is the underlying judicial philosophy.
(Which is why most attorneys et c are the leading bleeding edge of compliance with ever-increasing authoritarian politics all over the West; it grants them more and more power and higher and higher income, just by being compliant.)
I hope this soldier is not alone, and I hope he somehow manages to bring suit against the military proper, for its actions. A scandal like that is precisely what the Bundeswehr needs right now, given that they are desperately scrambling for young German men willing to die in Ukraine to ensure a million arabs, africans and the like can continue to move into Germany ever year.
You're of course correct; the main point of the above-related piece, though, is that these soldiers were sentenced for insubordination and could have paid (or gotten jabbed), but they
refused nonetheless. That takes more balls than to execute obviously immoral and/or otherwise wrong orders.
Out of curiosity: did the Swedish military take you in?
Nope, I haven't done any military service/work for the Swedish Armed Forces - people who ask questions or just questions in general weren't and aren't really welcome, now less than ever.
Sounds about right.
When I was 18, I didn't want to fail (had my own reasons), but even back then there were many who sought to weasel their way out of serving, which I consider an essential civic duty in a constitutional republic (yes, Austria isn't perfect, but still--my country).
I think it was my replies to various hypotheticals and my intelligence-personality test results that sealed the deal, plus the military being just as cheapskate back then as today.
And asking "What exactly would I be fighting /for/?", pointing out one scandal of corruption after another, where the capitalists, civil servants, their bosses, politicians and so on had walked scot free despite evidence.
Olof Palme and other politicians frequenting a brothel in the 1970s f.e. A brothel with underage girls, some as young as 13. Most of it still classified to this day.
I'm supposed to defend that?, I asked. Which marked me as someone who'd cause trouble with unit cohesion, which made me unsuitable.
Well put, sir.
I’d be rank-ordering my family and my convictions well before the country; politicians are the last on that list.
While I understand you and feel the same, I think at this point it is worth adding a comment.
It can be worth it to fight for a flawed regime run by your own people, then to become subjugated by another people who will not have the bonds of brotherhood with you that you have with your kinsmen.
Absolutely - those are the horns of the dilemma that classical liberalism and pre-Soviet Marxism attempted to adress, how to fight for what is worth fighting for without fighting for just another set of crooks-in-power.
Still no solution to that one.
"Compulsive anti-authoritarian"
Bwahahahaha! Good one, Rikard.
I have a massive empty internment camp up the road from me. Yes, I would say what happened during covid was the same.
The final stages of Stanton’s Ten Stages of Genocide are “preparation, persecution and extermination.” The final stages begin with lists: victims are identified and separated from the group, tortured and displaced and finally killed. Before this begins, however, victims are disarmed and incapable of self-defence to ensure the dominant group has total control.
We were one step away from 'finally killed.'
Please refer to my above-reply to Witzbold's question.
The erasure of history also means that these things will happen again.
If the “Never Again” outcome of Nuremberg has been breached-then the extermination camps are imminent.
I really felt this buildup of mob spirit in Canada-like ExcessDeathAU alludes to.
It was really frightening.
It is legal in Western Australia to kidnap and forcibly inject people during Emergency government (WA Health Act 2016). I have written about this extensively.
Yes, the 'mob spirit' to which you refer allowed this to happen: https://vicparkpetition.substack.com/p/memory-holed-what-we-endured
The more you scroll, the worse it gets, and you will find a lot of this very familiar being in Canada.
The general public absolutely loved what was happening and very much enjoyed terrorising the unvaccinated.
"Now, I’m not saying that the Covid mania is the same as what happened during the Second World War; history doesn’t repeat, it rhymes. "
True that. It's not Naziism, but it is German authoritarianism. These things scare me because I live next door to Germany, and these things rub off on neighbors. I don't think anyone's actually been sent to prison for refusing the gene juice in Czechia. Czechs seem to be a bit less authoritarian than Germans (gods be praised), though it was horrible here, too, at the height of insanity.
But anyway, Germany has definitely succeeded in sending a message: "Don't join the army."
I'd move to strike the adjective here: it's tyranny/authoritarianism, plain and simple. It comes in as many different shades as there are countries/peoples, and the key here is: today's Germans get judged by what their ancestors did, and that is going on since 1918/45.
Full disclosure (also relevant for my reply to Witzbold's comment): I consider myself a member of that kind of Kulturnation; my mother tongue is German, and it's 'my' history, too.
Different cultures have different characteristics. German culture is high in orderliness (with a hat tip to Jordan Peterson), which is sometimes good and sometimes bad. Can a country become rich without being high in orderliness? Probably not. But the flip side is that "rules are rules," even when the rules in question are patently idiotic, and so Germans are *still* getting prosecuted for corona insubordination. Plenty of other governments cracked down on their populations in a completely idiotic fashion during the corona event, but they're less orderly, and so "rules are rules, sometimes, maybe." That attitude ("rules are rules, sometimes, maybe") introduces a measure of chaos, which is a problem in all sorts of contexts, but the advantage is that it makes it easier to backpedal from idiotic decisions.
Like your analysis, that's our style in Germany
You made your point well, explaining the distinction you wanted to make with the use of German as an adjective.
It will take a new generation to adapt to the chaos we leave behind.
"I’m not saying that the Covid mania is the same as what happened during the Second World War; history doesn’t repeat, it rhymes."
Has it always been so, that Nazi Germany cannot be compared (in Germany/Austria?) to anything else for fear of minimizing/relativizing its horrors?
This is a genuine question, not rhetorical. In middle school I recall being taught basics like the difference between drawing a comparison and an equivalence. The first highlights parallels or similarities (rhymes), while the latter claims events are of the same level (repeats). Also, the Nazi period involved more (temporally and politically) than the horrors of the Holocaust alone. Yet time and again, the two are presented as one and the same - I don't get it. German friends (mostly 35~45 years old) reject my criticism and assure me their schooling guaranteed an honest, comprehensive reflection on the NS period, and yet... any comparisons are verboten.
This charge of minimising through comparison has come up again in CJ Hopkins' trial, and I wondered if you could provide some insight on this seemingly very German taboo: thou shallt not compare Nazi Germany with ANYTHING, ever! I confess, my Irish black humour finds me lampooning a subtext of Germany exceptionality: nobody does totalitarian government and genocide like ze Germans.
I'll try in as little space as possible to answer your question, which requires a long-form answer at some point in time.
Full disclosure (see also reply to Irena's comment): I consider myself a member of that kind of Kulturnation; my mother tongue is German, and it's 'my' history, too.
You asked: 'Has it always been so, that Nazi Germany cannot be compared (in Germany/Austria?) to anything else for fear of minimizing/relativizing its horrors?'
Here are my two cents: no, it hasn't, but it has been a, if not the, constant since 8 May 1945. Yes, not everywhere in German-speaking countries to the same tune (e.g., not so much in Austria, which was a 'victim' of Hitler although the events leading up to the 'Anschluss' were initiated by Austrian chancellor Schuschnigg and no other country could care about what happened); in the Cold War, the GDR for instance denied that they had anything to do with the Third Reich, and the Communists even made the ethnically cleansed Germans from the East continue their trek westwards. The Federal Republic, by contrast, is the continuity here, with the Bundestag's research office in 2007 (if memory serves) holding that the Federal Republic is, in fact, 'identical' with every German nation-state since 1867 (forget the founding of the Second Reich by Bismarck, they key moment arrived four years earlier in the guise of the North-German Confederation).
As to the issue I alluded to before--Hans Mommsen, on of post-WW2 West Germany's leading historians once wrote that 1945 was Germany's 'zero hour' (Tom Brady quotes him in his German Histories in the Age of Reformations, Cambridge, 2009).
To understand the 'Nazi bludgeon', I suggest the following line of thought: from May 1945 onwards, West Germans (who later took over their Eastern brethren) were told that Hitler and the Third Reich were the incarnation of Evil™ (I think that the victors did so, in no small part, to gloss over their own war crimes and, in Stalin's case, also the way greater atrocities committed in the name of Socialism/Bolshevism even before WW2), hence Mommsen's 'zero hour' notion. Everything that came afterwards was, is, and, in fact, must be incomparable by definition.
As to the major problem in the present--in the early 1960s, Fritz Fischer published his Griff nach der Weltmacht, which held that Imperial Germany's aims in WW1 were, in fact, identical to Hitler's in WW2. As a consequence, the period before Hitler rose to power in 1933 became similarly 'tainted' by Evil™ (although that's not how history works). By the 1980s, the so-called Historikerstreit erupted over the 'singularity' of Hitler/Third Reich Evil™, and it's still ongoing. A lot of these debates are quite…academic, but with so-called 'Reunification' in 1989/90 and the then-ongoing EU building project, other things soon took precedence.
In the ivory tower of academia, just before Covid hit, Germany's leading modernist historians were proposing that even the founding of the Second Empire by Bismarck were part and parcel of what eventually led to--you guessed it--Hitler/Third Reich Evil™. Right now, with first discussions of 1848 being tied into these notions, too, suggests that this revised Sonderweg (2.0, if you will) may, at some point, extend or even surpass its first version (which commenced, it was held, in the 30 Years' War).
Leaving aside these academic debates, the bottom line is that 'we Germans' (see the disclaimer above) have no more history that we can turn to as everyone and everything has been 'tainted' now. The best example of this trajectory is actually on Youtube:
Behold, exhibit 1: when, on the eve of the Fall of the Berlin Wall in Oct. 1989, the Bundestag was in session in Bonn, and when it's members heard of the Fall of the Berlin Wall, they spontaneously rose and sang the national anthem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf5ACAKBq-Y
Exhibit 2, well, fast-forward to early 2024 and the fall-out of 'Stupid Watergate': remember when one of the participants suggested to sing the national anthem and was shoed off the stage…
https://fackel.substack.com/p/german-govt-ordered-protests-against
'We Germans' are losing our history, warts and all, and this is perfect, if you're about to run some IngSoc-like WEF-mediated mindfuckery. Mind you, I'm not saying our history is without 'issues', but what I'm saying is that it is in the process of being erased before our eyes.
Would that make sense to you?
As always, thank you for answer. A few brief comments in reply...
I still recall my shock at that school teacher being booed off the stage for citing the (admirable) sentiments of the German national anthem earlier this year. And having never seen that footage from the Bundestag in Bonn, I found that video quite touching. The dress and speech of the politicians in 1989 seems almost from another era and yet it is from my own youth, when I was a 10-year old schoolkid. The politicians remind me of my own grandparents and my German in-laws of the same generation...
The talk of year zero with its echoes of French Revolutionary Calendar, Pol Pot, and Mao's Cultural Revolutionand is a little unsettling. From a psychological perspective, I worry about a nation that still apparently needs to define itself in relation to its disowned past, by that which it is not, a shadow. It virtually guarantees history WILL rhyme...
Meanwhile, its politicians openly discuss banning opposition parties in order to protect democracy but could not muster the courage to insist upon constitutional principles during the pandemic panic, nor to condemn Israels current raising of Gaza and the Palestinians...
Anway, yes, your answer does make sense to me. The overt policing of discourse and erasure of history makes me bristle every time I encounter it. Evidently for good reason.
Think I've referenced this essay before, but it chimes with your take, and any who read this comment may also appreciate it: The New German Catechism
https://geschichtedergegenwart.ch/the-german-catechism/
"For many, the memory of the Holocaust as a break with civilization is the moral foundation of the Federal Republic. To compare it with other genocides is therefore considered a heresy, an apostasy from the right faith. It is time to abandon this catechism."
Thanks for the link, I have not seen that piece by Mr. Moses--and, yes, he argues in the same direction (as do many so-called 'Holocaust deniers' when they invoke the notion of 'the Holocaust™' being a kind of Ersatzreligion called 'Holocaustianity').
Mind you, I'm not siding with the latter notions, but as you may recall, I consider the lies and fake history of WW2 a kind of post-bourgeois para-ideology:
'As such, post-1945 remembrance may be understood as a form of post-bourgeois ideology, imposed on the devastated continent and its peoples by the propaganda machinery of both Moscow and Washington. With the end of the Cold War and the USSR’s dissolution, there’s but one increasingly shrill version that remains, and we can all see its ugly head rearing today.
Make no mistake, this is a tremendous achievement: the establishment of a new creed, engendered by the victorious American elites and gladly picked up, disseminated, and adapted by their servile satraps in Western capitals, constitutes without question the ultimate victory of WW2.
No discussion is permitted, and no matter how egregious the West’s own actions, they must never be mentioned in polite conversation, let alone in public discourse.'
https://fackel.substack.com/p/in-these-times-a-8-9-may-2022-column
One other piece I found quite illuminating is Kevin Cramer's The Thirty Years' War and German Memory in the 19th Century (2007) in which the authors posits a kind of 'morbid fascination with death and destruction' as being one of the keys to understanding German sentiment.
P.S.: I have a piece on the Thirty Years' War, memory, and remembrance accepted for publication in German History; it's coming out next year, I've been told, and if you'd like to read it beforehand, drop me an email.
It is good to erase false history. It is bad to erase true history.
For a country with such a massive guilt complex over their fascist past, leading to pathological altruism and self-abnegation, it is odd to witness a recurrence of state enforced violations of bodily autonomy.
Please refer to my above-reply to Witzbold's question for some musings as to why that may be.
Thanks, it would nice to see the German elite reaction when they realize that their mandated Covid jabs have killed or permanently injured many more than the Holocaust did. This reality is now slowly dawning in the medical literature. The dissonance with Germany's official post-WW2 doctrine will be huge.
Once you unlearn the false narrative, the mysteries dissolve.
Really? Self-harm is a common symptom of mental illness.
Twisted world, everything seems upside down...