Hitler, the arians, and the schwasticka

[tenchi_no_kashaku]

Lately I've noticed that something weird, maybe it's just me. But, the way we have developed and formed today, seems to have been in some way influenced by (even though it was a long time ago) hitler. What makes the whole subject contraversial? Was it the killing, the burnings, the supposed "Arian Race", or the Schwasticka? Or was it more than that. Possibly the ideals of the whole event. I thought of this as I was watching, on the history channel many documentaries of hitler and WWI and so on. What makes someone or something that interesting and contraversial. Maybe it was something new and drastic or maybe the fact that the world wasn't ready for this kind of suddel change.

One of the programs focused on the Nazi views. Having pure arian blood (Blue eyes, blond hair, somewhat tall, etc.). They were trying, and if at all costs, to retrieve as much of this blood as possible. What if they succeeded an had taken over and spread?

Many predicted situations have been forseen. And, even vaguely, Nostradomus supposedly predicted this and it's failure. But he predicted yet one more occurence of this/these event(s). And that that time it would succeed in some way.

What do you think?  

[AbrAbraxas]

wow, there are a lot of questions packed in there, i will respond best i can.

first, you speak of the Aryan blood.. i have long found it interesting that the traits that they valued were recessive traits, this is going on what i learned in freshman biology nine years ago, if you have studied the basics of genetics you would know what i am talking about. anyways i can see how in some twisted way that one might think that these recessive traits are pure and that the dominant traits of dark hair and dark eyes are somehow polluting these pure traits. however in my opinion it is necessary to have a diverse gene pool for various reasons.

what makes it so controversial? well if you look up the statistics, im not sure but i think something like 20,000,000 people were killed for superficial reasons or no reason at all in the course of ten years, and i dont think that even considers military casualties. it is a matter of highly developed technology, that of weaponry, training methods, persuasion, and more, in the hands of low moral development, example, killing is not considered wrong, as a motto is is the means to an end, but in action it was often simply just the end itself. i think the biggest controversy is in the fact that it took so long to stop what was happening and if it had not been stopped it would have taken over the world. every country and culture would have been pillaged and destroyed and made a fascist military state, where one could be killed at anytime in any way.
also it is not a long time ago, it is very recent as far as history goes, and it still effects us even more strongly because we have developed technology to preserve memories, recordings, detailed books, videos all of this makes that tragedy available to every generation.  

[Stallin]

the moral standards of societies of 1st world countries like america and brittain place high value on a human life. Someone who takes a life is though of as wrong or evil for doing so. Instinct makes us want to protect ourselves from threats be they foriegn or domestic, and this is not limited to human beings, animals, OR internal threats like viruses. If you ask anyone now they can tell you humans fear what they dont understand, it might be wise because it IS survival instinct and common sense that whatever it is, it is possible it could bring you at the least harm, if not kill you. Hitler, was despised by all who wherent his ally because he was a very serious threat to anyone he was not allied with. Whatever you've heard of hitler is probably through the view of one of his enemies, hitlers goal could have been to rule the world, but more then that i think his goal was to purify the world. Hitler feared everything different. By killing anything that was not pure the world would, even though it would mean the death of massive numbers of lives, be a better place for the arians. It's possible that hitler killed the jews as revenge for how they wronged him in the past, but then why would he kill the insane, blacks, and the homosexuals as well? hitler had an ideal, to reach a greater plane even if it meant going against moral standards of both of the world he was going to kill whoever he had to to achieve his goals. Maybe thats very selfish of him, but in the end what does selflessness achieve for YOU. when your dead, none of the selfless deeds you've done can take death away from you. Hitler is hated for being a domestic threat. just like terrorists, and even life threatening illnesses.  

[tenchi_no_kashaku]

That is a good point. I do, of course, understand your view point. I'm glad you brought up the point of 1st world countries. What if there are hidden motives inside Hitlers actions. Instead of it being a claim, what if it was a signal of some sort. What would it be signifying, if anything? What is your opinion?  

[MegaTherion777]

i agree with most of what has been said here, and have little to add except this:

going back to abraxas' remark about genetics... isn't it also odd that, not only did they value recessive traits, but they called themselves Aryans and considered these to be Aryan characteristics, when in reality, the Aryans that came out of the indian subcontinent thousands of years ago were short, dark haired, and dark skinned - the OPPOSITE of hitler's master race?  

[AbrAbraxas]

that is on thing that has long puzzled me. it is also curious that they attempted to draw out recessive genes, while many incurable diseases are due to recessive genes.