Re: [OT] aargh.. the big swirl of offtopicness sucks me in, too. help!
Am Mittwoch, den 07.03.2007, 18:47 +0000 schrieb Liam O'Toole:
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 15:49:15 +0100
> Michael Dominok <du.lists@dominok.net> 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
> > vichyazation.
>
> We weren't discussing political and economic designs, but linguistic
> and cultural ones.
Yes. Just to remind you how we got here:
You claimed that:
Am Mittwoch, den 07.03.2007, 09:43 +0000 schrieb Liam O'Toole:
> 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.
I tried to point out that - in Nazi-Germanys case - this was true for
the east (for parts of it) but completely untrue for the west, north and
south.
Michael Dominok <du.lists@dominok.net> wrote:
> So, concerning nazi-germany 3/4 of your statement is wrong.
To which you didn't object but tried to play down the importance of the
"areas they acquired" in the north, west and south.
Am Mittwoch, den 07.03.2007, 13:44 +0000 schrieb Liam O'Toole:
> The Nazis had no long-term interest in Amsterdam, Paris, etc.
A rather, aehm, daring theory. I dropped some clues to why Amsterdam,
Paris, etc. _were_ of interest to the Nazis and now you're accusing me
of avoiding/losing the topic _you_ tossed the focus off?
I hope your OT-skill can improve...
> > 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
> supremacy.
Well, i'm determined in winning the lotteries. For years. Guess how many
hits my determination got me?
Determination without "means" is worth nothing. So is your comparison.
> > 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.
I'm sorry, but this is utter and stupid nonsense. The Camps were named
after the cities/villages they were next to. This was not to "propagate"
the germanized names of the cities (When or how should this have
happened, anyway? The Nazis didn't go around "bragging" with their
Conzentration Camps) to have some 8th or 123th grade effect on the local
culture.
And what about the Camps in Germany, named after their neighboring
german Towns? Were their "name[s] and purpose[s]" also "inextricably
linked" ?
Unless you manage to annoy me with some new twists this is EOT for me.
Cheers
Michael
Reply to: