[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [OT] aargh.. the big swirl of offtopicness sucks me in, too. help!

Hash: SHA1

On 03/07/07 05:18, Michael Dominok wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 07.03.2007, 09:43 +0000 schrieb Liam O'Toole:
>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 10:14:38 +0100
>> Michael Dominok <du.lists@dominok.net> wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, den 07.03.2007, 09:02 +0000 schrieb Liam O'Toole:
>> [...]
>>>> I see plenty of linguistic diversity in Europe. Or are you
>>>> referring to this newsgroup?
>>> Well, if you're talking about languages literally you're above
>>> statement is nonsens. There was "plenty of linguistic diversity" in
>>> the USSR or the Third Reich. 
>> Not at all. Both the Nazis and the Soviets went to great lengths to
>> Germanise or Russify the areas they acquired or inherited,
>> brutally suppressing other languages and cultures in the process.
> Puh. Two different approaches. The Nazis wanted "colonies in the east"
> for their masterrace to proliferate so they set up a german
> administration using german terms and names for cities, rivers ...
> They didn't care what their "slavonic slaves" spoke. As long as they
> understood when they had to pull the plow and when to stop.
> I totally agree with you about suppression of culture. But since the
> suppression of the slavonic languages wasn't the prime target i would
> speak of a "walk-by-suppression" (of language).
> Anyway, nothing like this happened in the west, the south or the north.
> Neither Amsterdam, Paris, Tripolis, Copenhagen nor Oslo got germanized
> names.
> So, concerning nazi-germany 3/4 of your statement is wrong.
> My knowledge of soviet-history isn't that good but IMHO there was "only"
> a small period of time, during Stalins earlier years, when the
> relocations of many ethnic groups (That's what i think you're probably
> refering too) took place.
> And looking at how easily the remnants of the USSR regained their
> national identities i doubt that it was official soviet policy to
> suppress their languages and cultures - simply because they would
> probably have succeeded. If you take into account the amount of time
> (about 3 generations) and the means they had it seems a rather easy job.
> Especially if you look at what the Nazis did to Germany in such a few
> years.

Actually, quite a number of the former Socialist Republics *are*
having troubles because so many ethnic Russians were moved in during
the Soviet era.

>> Why do you think the world remembers the horrors of Auschwitz, rather than
>> Oswiecim?
> Because they remember the horrors of a german concentration-camp named
> Auschwitz-Birkenau and not the small polish village Oswiecim nearby
> (Named Auschwitz during Nazi occupation) where (i guess) no horrors took
> place?
> Cheers
> Michael

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: