Why did gandhi ask britain to seek peace with nazi germany?
-
This post did not contain any content.
It's important to remember: few outside of Germany knew that concentration camps existed, certainly not the scale of them or how appalling the conditions were. Consider the amount of information that Gandhi could reasonably have about activity in Germany and Europe. As far as he was concerned, the evil empire dominating his country was just having a costly spat with the evil empire dominating another country, sacrificing the welfare of his people for those of their neighbours in Europe.
-
It's important to remember: few outside of Germany knew that concentration camps existed, certainly not the scale of them or how appalling the conditions were. Consider the amount of information that Gandhi could reasonably have about activity in Germany and Europe. As far as he was concerned, the evil empire dominating his country was just having a costly spat with the evil empire dominating another country, sacrificing the welfare of his people for those of their neighbours in Europe.
good point
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
I would like you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession of your beautiful island, with your many beautiful buildings. You will give all these but neither your souls, nor your minds. If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourself man, woman and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them.
If one Jew or all the Jews were to accept the prescription here offered, he or they cannot be worse off than now. And suffering voluntarily undergone will bring them an inner strength and joy which no number of resolutions of sympathy passed in the world outside Germany can. Indeed, even if Britain, France and America were to declare hostilities against Germany, they can bring no inner joy, no inner strength. The calculated violence of Hitler may even result in a general massacre of the Jews by way of his first answer to the declaration of such hostilities. But if the Jewish mind could be prepared for voluntary suffering, even the massacre I have imagined could be turned into a day of thanksgiving and joy that Jehovah had wrought deliverance of the race even at the hands of the tyrant. For to the godfearing, death has no terror. It is a joyful sleep to be followed by a waking that would be all the more refreshing for the long sleep.
Religious fanatics rarely deserve the adulation their beliefs receive.
-
It's important to remember: few outside of Germany knew that concentration camps existed, certainly not the scale of them or how appalling the conditions were. Consider the amount of information that Gandhi could reasonably have about activity in Germany and Europe. As far as he was concerned, the evil empire dominating his country was just having a costly spat with the evil empire dominating another country, sacrificing the welfare of his people for those of their neighbours in Europe.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]few outside of Germany knew that concentration camps existed
The creation of concentration camps was widely advertised in Nazi propaganda, as a show of force to intimidate dissidents. It was the later death camps that were secret: the ones that were designed for no purpose but to do murder at industrial scale.
-
The dude was a pedo, so who knows what really went on inside his noggin.
the dude was a pedo
How is that related to his opinions on international politics? Just because someone is terrible in one aspect of their life, doesn't mean the rest of their ideas have to be thrown out.
-
the dude was a pedo
How is that related to his opinions on international politics? Just because someone is terrible in one aspect of their life, doesn't mean the rest of their ideas have to be thrown out.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Well let me stop you there. His opinion on anything was shit that didn't deserve a moment of time, due to the fact he was a pedo. Better Mr Fish?
Edit: Mr Fish: "I'm just saying I wouldn't mind hearing what Jeffery Epstien would say over the Clean Air Act."
-
This post did not contain any content.
I mean, it feels like the tweet explained it well (I know nothing of the subject, but if the tweet is accurate I don't feel it needs any more explaining).
-
Well let me stop you there. His opinion on anything was shit that didn't deserve a moment of time, due to the fact he was a pedo. Better Mr Fish?
Edit: Mr Fish: "I'm just saying I wouldn't mind hearing what Jeffery Epstien would say over the Clean Air Act."
If it turned out that Newton had a thing for kids, would you advocate for throwing out his laws?
-
few outside of Germany knew that concentration camps existed
The creation of concentration camps was widely advertised in Nazi propaganda, as a show of force to intimidate dissidents. It was the later death camps that were secret: the ones that were designed for no purpose but to do murder at industrial scale.
It wasn't an actual secret. All the Wehrmacht officers knew, all the people in the towns nearby knew, all the cops knew, all the Ally leadership knew.
-
It wasn't an actual secret. All the Wehrmacht officers knew, all the people in the towns nearby knew, all the cops knew, all the Ally leadership knew.
If the Ally leadership knew, why didn't they use that information as propoganda for their war efforts?
-
If it turned out that Newton had a thing for kids, would you advocate for throwing out his laws?
Probably wouldn't hold him up as a moral role model
-
If the Ally leadership knew, why didn't they use that information as propoganda for their war efforts?
I don't think it was confirmed until they were starting to get liberated, was it? Like it was probably predicted they were there, but that's a pretty tough allegation to put out there and then be wrong on, victors or not.
-
If it turned out that Newton had a thing for kids, would you advocate for throwing out his laws?
Apples and battleships here.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Ah yes, the pre-emptive starving several years before the war
-
If the Ally leadership knew, why didn't they use that information as propoganda for their war efforts?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz_bombing_debate
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Abandonment_of_the_Jews
For whatever reason, they didn't even think it was worth bombing the rail systems that fed the camps.
Roosevelt didn't care. Churchill in particular publicly endorsed Aryan race theory before the war so "not caring" is the most charitable interpretation.
-
Probably wouldn't hold him up as a moral role model
That's a different question.
-
That's a different question.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]If you want to admit your chosen comparison was disingenuous I don't mind.
Personally I'd have gone with Aristotelian ethics, as he was a noted slavery defender.
-
If you want to admit your chosen comparison was disingenuous I don't mind.
Personally I'd have gone with Aristotelian ethics, as he was a noted slavery defender.
Are we having the same conversation?
-
If it turned out that Newton had a thing for kids, would you advocate for throwing out his laws?
Well, I'd certainly want someone else to check his work first!
But even that is beside the point. Gandhi's achievements aren't in an inherently rational and objective field. No matter who you are, gravity works the same.
But instead Gandhi's field is morals, ethics and politics. Those are inherently subjective and about opinions. If you have a really shitty opinion, then yeah, I'll question your other opinions.
-
Well let me stop you there. His opinion on anything was shit that didn't deserve a moment of time, due to the fact he was a pedo. Better Mr Fish?
Edit: Mr Fish: "I'm just saying I wouldn't mind hearing what Jeffery Epstien would say over the Clean Air Act."
I'm just saying I wouldn't mind hearing what Jeffery epstien would say over the clean air act
Not what I'm saying. My point is that one flaw, even one as terrible as pedophilia, doesn't influence all of a person's opinions. Sure, I wouldn't ask Gandhi for his views on healthy relationships, and having learned about this I have lost pretty much all respect for him as a person. But his opinions on international politics should be reasonable because of his role as a leader of a protest movement, and likely aren't impacted by him being a pedo.
With your Epstien example, is there reason to think his opinions on climate science are more well informed than the average person's? Do you think his role of running his pedo island would impact his views on topics like the clean air act?
The trouble with your line of thinking is that we'd run out of acceptable people's opinions really quickly. No one is perfect, and it will usually be possible to frame someone's flaws in a way that makes them a horrible person in all aspects and never worth hearing out. When it gets to "Bob is a racist, Jim is a pedo, Fred is a domestic abuser" (to be clear, in not saying these are equally bad or anything, just some examples of 'this person is inherently bad because of one thing') and so on about everyone, who's left to be worth discussing things with?
