Re: [OT] aargh.. the big swirl of offtopicness sucks me in, too. help!
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 15:49:15 +0100
Michael Dominok <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 07.03.2007, 13:44 +0000 schrieb Liam O'Toole:
> > The Nazis had no long-term interest in Amsterdam, Paris, etc.
> Huh? Interesting. What makes you think that?
> Of course were they interested in (exploiting) these countries. Not as
> farmland, as in the east. Do you really think that the Nazis would
> have "released" those countries somewhen "after the war"? Why should
> they let go of some of the richest economies/countries which they
> succesfully exploited with the help of well established
> administrations of collaborators? The "best" western, northern and
> southern Europe + parts of Africa could expect was some kind of
We weren't discussing political and economic designs, but linguistic
and cultural ones.
> > My point
> > about the regions they intended to control permanently (well, for a
> > thousand years, anyway) still stands.
> Maybe you're speculation about the Nazis intentions is better guessed
> than mine but fact is that they (with mentioned exceptions to the
> east) _did_ not do what you claimed, when they had the opportunity to
> do so.
> If you have to rank the "mad assholes" of human history i doubt that
> Franko would make it anywhere near Hitler and Stalin. Not that this
> makes him any less disgusting but looking a the means the Nazis and
> Soviets used to achieve their goals Franko just didn't "play in the
> same league".
Yes, in terms of raw numbers of people murdered or terrorised, Franco
wasn't in the same league as the gruesome twosome. But he was just as
determined in his efforts to establish linguistic and cultural
> That's not my point. I mentioned Auschwitz-Birkenau because it's the
> "official" name of the camp. If the Nazis had decided to use an other
> naming scheme the camp would maybe be known as KZ-IG-Farben or KZAmF.
> The camp itself was certainly aimed at exterminating some languages
> and cultures - its name not.
On the contrary, it's name and purpose were inextricably linked.