Nazi Hunters...

[Guest Marty]

Do people do bad things because the environment in form of games, TV, media, books, pressure, makes them? Or is it the opposite, that we, the grassroots are evil individuals and force the government to act on our evil expressions? Not easy puzzle. I think the obvious answer is: all of it. We're not just slaves to pressure, and we're not just free enough to always act the way we wish. There's a stasis point in between, and we might have to consider that point is different between people, and in different contexts.

 

I think it's all in the environment, the odds that is of someone 'doing evil'. If one is a monk, secluded to a monastery, then the odds of them going on a killing spree is about slim to nothing, whereas different environments provide different approaches. Las Vegas, is someone more or less likely to gamble if they live there? Gang areas, schools; is someone more or less likely to be in a gang if they are surrounded by that?

 

 

What about that Amish man that went crazy a few years back and shot up the Amish school house? Was it his environment that caused him to act that way?

[Legion]

Hey I’m still hunting Yankees. They did the South wrong. And if I can do that, then they can hunt for Nazis.

 

Damn Nazis and Yankees.

[Vigile]

It's for this reason that pure democracy is a very bad idea. There has to be a way to protect against a tyrannical majority, otherwise you end up with a situation as bad or worse than any system of despotism.

 

I completely agree, and I think this is a problem in America. Most people think this is a democracy, and that the mob opinion must rule all. Most people are too stupid to govern themselves; isn't that why the Founding Fathers put the electoral college into the voting process? Wasn't it supposed to curb the influence of ignorant, non-educated farmers, etc in elections?

 

I'm not sure the EC does a good job at that. But that is certainly why we have a bill of rights. It limits the government and it limits majorities.

 

Unfortunately we have seen a vast erosion of the BoR in recent years.

[Vigile]

Hey I’m still hunting Yankees. They did the South wrong. And if I can do that, then they can hunt for Nazis.

 

Damn Nazis and Yankees.

 

I think we should go after the Huns too. There's a lot of them in Kazakhstan living it up right now.

[Legion]

I think we should go after the Huns too. There's a lot of them in Kazakhstan living it up right now.

Damn Huns.

[Abiyoyo]

What about that Amish man that went crazy a few years back and shot up the Amish school house? Was it his environment that caused him to act that way?

 

Marty, I'm talking about odds. Odds are a factor in an environment. The odds of this Amish person shooting up that school house was slim to none, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. The odds are just odds, but it wouldn't be odds if it were 100% everywhere. So, I say that a person's abilities to ' do an evil act' has a direct affect on the odds within their environment, and the 'evil acts' wherein.

[Ouroboros]

From what I understood, Hitler's followers, workers didn't think much of him? I thought somewhere it said they all lite cigarettes up when he shot himself, because he was anti cigarettes.

That's what I heard too. Hitler was a health-nut. Anti-smoking, pro-healthy food etc. The same way our government is going here... *shudder*

 

...

Here's a good personal example. Where I came from, if you talk junk to someone, you may get shot. Where I live now, everyone fights, and talks junk; but aren't 'looking' to kill, as where I came from. Make sense?

Yes, it's in the environment, but then of course it's also in the capacity of the person. After all, only 70% of Milgram's subjects would obey, while the 30% refused. So it's not a clear-cut all-or-nothing.

[Vendredie]

I took psychology last semester at school. Killing others to "save yourself" or "follow orders" is wrong, of course. But... humans are very easily manipulated. It's been shown in the Stanford Prison Experiment and in the Milgram study. Human nature is so easily mainpulated. People will do as they're told because 1) there is no polite way to say no 2) people are afraid of the consequences of saying no. No, it's not a justification for killing millions of innocent people. But oftentimes these killers were innocent people themselves, not evil monsters who were born to do something like that.

[woodsmoke]

Plus, y'know, there's the survival instinct. As abhorrent as it is, given the choice between your own life being ended and ending the life of someone you don't know, most people are going to feel a fairly strong inclination in the direction of self-preservation. Which isn't to say they'll necessarily act on that, but the thought will almost certainly be there.

[Deva]

I think it's all in the environment, the odds that is of someone 'doing evil'. If one is a monk, secluded to a monastery, then the odds of them going on a killing spree is about slim to nothing, whereas different environments provide different approaches. Las Vegas, is someone more or less likely to gamble if they live there? Gang areas, schools; is someone more or less likely to be in a gang if they are surrounded by that?

 

I think you should be more cautious about making sweeping a statement such as its "all in the environment" when it comes to violent behavior. Genetics probably plays a greater role in human behavior than most people understand. I am pretty sure its a complicated combination of genetic makeup/brain chemistry interacting with environment. It is the result of a developmental process. I recommend reading "The Biology of Violence" by Debra Niehoff, Ph.D.

 

Does media violence and video game violence have an effect? Yes, but that in combination with many other factors (woops, wrong thread, oh well).. Its obvious that people who live in violent, crime prone environments have more of a chance for a bent toward violence, but others have come out of these type places and not become violent. People raised in relatively "normal" middle class homes with two parents present have become serial killers. You just cannot generalize on this question.

 

We all have a powerful survival instinct and tests have shown your average everyday person will inflict pain on others far beyond what they would consider themselves capable of. When its a life or death issue, most will opt for self-protection. Civilization is at best a thin veneer.

 

Monks have engaged in war. They have used rifles and guns. Serial killing I have not heard of, but don't doubt it might have happened some time in history.

 

As far as the Nazi Hunter question goes, I agree with those who say its pointless at this time and ought to be abandoned. Nature will soon enough take care of it.

[pitchu]

1) In the American justice system, at least, there's no time limit on bringing someone to trial for murder.

 

2) The Nazis being hunted are murder suspects.

 

3) Cold case detectives may keep involved with a case for decades because of a personal meaning the case has for them.

 

4) Nazi murderers certainly have personal meaning for holocaust survivors (and their offspring) who are the primary Nazi-hunters.

 

5) If one recommends that Nazi murderers not be tracked down, but that age and nature should instead take care of them, at what specific age should that time limit -- a time limit never imposed on other murder cases as per point 1), above -- be instituted?

 

6) There was rampant anti-Semitism already existent in Germany for decades prior to WWII. Should Nazi murderers of Jews be "understood" because they were affected by living in a climate, society, environment of anti-Semitism?

[Abiyoyo]

1) In the American justice system, at least, there's no time limit on bringing someone to trial for murder.

 

2) The Nazis being hunted are murder suspects.

 

3) Cold case detectives may keep involved with a case for decades because of a personal meaning the case has for them.

 

4) Nazi murderers certainly have personal meaning for holocaust survivors (and their offspring) who are the primary Nazi-hunters.

 

5) If one recommends that Nazi murderers not be tracked down, but that age and nature should instead take care of them, at what specific age should that time limit -- a time limit never imposed on other murder cases as per point 1), above -- be instituted?

 

6) There was rampant anti-Semitism already existent in Germany for decades prior to WWII. Should Nazi murderers of Jews be "understood" because they were affected by living in a climate, society, environment of anti-Semitism?

 

 

Good point Pitchu

[Ouroboros]

Marty,

 

Maybe it was this one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7497078.stm

 

Dr. Death was definitely a very bad guy, and deserves to be caught and tried.

[Guest Marty]

Marty,

 

Maybe it was this one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7497078.stm

 

Dr. Death was definitely a very bad guy, and deserves to be caught and tried.

 

Yup, that's the one. I don't remember if he even mentioned the Nazis name, but he did mention they are looking in Chile, so I'm sure that's it. I personally never read the article, cause the discussion was interrupted by the need for us to go work...

 

Pitchu, that was a great post!

[pitchu]

Thanks, YoYo and Marty.

[Vomit Comet]

The Nazis are going after nasty characters who were in the SS, willfully and in many cases gleefully participating in the Holocaust.

 

They aren't going after the average Fritz who was a mere farm boy that got drafted into the Wermacht, was stationed in France, fell back to Germany during the Allied push, and then went home to his family when the war was over.

[OpheliaGinger]

From what I understood, Hitler's followers, workers didn't think much of him? I thought somewhere it said they all lite cigarettes up when he shot himself, because he was anti cigarettes.

That's what I heard too. Hitler was a health-nut. Anti-smoking, pro-healthy food etc. The same way our government is going here... *shudder*

 

There was an article recently (as of late last year or early this year) of a woman who used to be one of the many maids at a building he would frequently reside at. She recalled him being quite congenial and pleasant; he even urged her to attend mass more often.

 

He was a health nut and he also had atrocious table manners and was a drug addict, but to be fair, he may not have realized he was on drugs since he entrusted his doctor to administer drugs that would help him.

[Vixentrox]

The Nazis are going after nasty characters who were in the SS, willfully and in many cases gleefully participating in the Holocaust.

 

They aren't going after the average Fritz who was a mere farm boy that got drafted into the Wermacht, was stationed in France, fell back to Germany during the Allied push, and then went home to his family when the war was over.

A lot of the average fritzes in police battalions were gleefully taking part and they were not SS and most were not even members of the Nazi party apperntly. Also one most not forget that not all the people involved were even German. Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Estonians, and other were also used in the hunting down and extermination of Jews.

[Casey]

One thing shouldn't be forgotten. The Nazis had a law known as Sippenhaft. That translates roughly as "tribal punishment" and it meant that if you disobeyed orders it wasn't just you who was liable to be killed, it was your wife, your kids, and your relations. A case in point was that of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel. The Nazi propaganda in 1944 said he had died of his wounds after his car was shot up by an Allied fighter-bomber; the reality was that he was forced to commit suicide lest his family be "Taken into Protective Custody". That didn't exactly mean what it did in the US, y'know.

 

Whilst I'd certainly agree many of them did what they did quite willingly, I'd respectfully ask that the above be taken into consideration, especially when considering the Stanford and Milgram experiments.

Casey

 

PS

 

Yes, Hitler was a health nut, and the Nazis were pioneers of much anti-smoking legislation, believe it or not. I believe the official cigarette ration for the Wehrmacht was something on the order of "Six per man per day perhaps". However they had access to any amount of Pervitin (their name for Methamphetamine) and lashings of booze to wash that down. Funny old world we live in, eh?

[Vixentrox]

One thing shouldn't be forgotten. The Nazis had a law known as Sippenhaft. That translates roughly as "tribal punishment" and it meant that if you disobeyed orders it wasn't just you who was liable to be killed, it was your wife, your kids, and your relations. A case in point was that of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel. The Nazi propaganda in 1944 said he had died of his wounds after his car was shot up by an Allied fighter-bomber; the reality was that he was forced to commit suicide lest his family be "Taken into Protective Custody". That didn't exactly mean what it did in the US, y'know.

 

Whilst I'd certainly agree many of them did what they did quite willingly, I'd respectfully ask that the above be taken into consideration, especially when considering the Stanford and Milgram experiments.

Casey

 

PS

 

Yes, Hitler was a health nut, and the Nazis were pioneers of much anti-smoking legislation, believe it or not. I believe the official cigarette ration for the Wehrmacht was something on the order of "Six per man per day perhaps". However they had access to any amount of Pervitin (their name for Methamphetamine) and lashings of booze to wash that down. Funny old world we live in, eh?

The thing is Casey, many people did refuse to obey will no ill effects. Many were even promoted after. There were ways to escape this duty because there was no shortage of people who actually WANTED to do it. Now there may have been some cases where the soldiers felt they had no choice but from all the things I have read, that was not the norm. And as far as obeying orders, there are tons of cases where these people went the extra mile, above and beyond thier orders to carry out this final solution. For example, in the waning days of the war when camps were evacuated, Himmler gave an order for the remaining Jews NOT to be killed. But the ordinary German willfully disobeyed those orders to kill more Jews and inflict added misery.

[Vigile]

1) In the American justice system, at least, there's no time limit on bringing someone to trial for murder.

 

2) The Nazis being hunted are murder suspects.

 

3) Cold case detectives may keep involved with a case for decades because of a personal meaning the case has for them.

 

4) Nazi murderers certainly have personal meaning for holocaust survivors (and their offspring) who are the primary Nazi-hunters.

 

5) If one recommends that Nazi murderers not be tracked down, but that age and nature should instead take care of them, at what specific age should that time limit -- a time limit never imposed on other murder cases as per point 1), above -- be instituted?

 

6) There was rampant anti-Semitism already existent in Germany for decades prior to WWII. Should Nazi murderers of Jews be "understood" because they were affected by living in a climate, society, environment of anti-Semitism?

 

Yes, it's an emotional subject for some and as such very easy to raise money to send out hunters on a fool's errand. If they want to do it that's fine. I still think it's silly. How many of them could possibly still be alive?

 

If they were 20 yo in 1945 they would be 83 today. What did a 20 yo do in Nazi Germany at the end of the war? Wash dishes for Hitler? Anyone who had anything to do with gas chamber nonsense must have been at least 30 yo in 1945 and probably older. That means at a minimum anyone who did anything would be 93. How many people live to be 93? So maybe there are 2-3 93 yo men escaping justice and Jews in NYC are probably paying millions to send Nazi hunters to bring these 3 men to justice so that they will face a trial before they die one year later.

 

Yes, to me that's silly.

[Guest Marty]

Like Vomit Comet said above, I'm pretty sure they are only hunting the top guys, and guards at the camps that had done horrendous killing and/or torture. I really don't think they are trying to round up each and every Nazi down to the guy who would shine Hitler's shoes. That would be pretty silly.

[Ouroboros]

The Nazis are going after nasty characters who were in the SS, willfully and in many cases gleefully participating in the Holocaust.

 

They aren't going after the average Fritz who was a mere farm boy that got drafted into the Wermacht, was stationed in France, fell back to Germany during the Allied push, and then went home to his family when the war was over.

I think you meant Nazi Hunters.

 

And it's good to hear. That was my concern. If they were going after every person who was part of the Nazi party, then it would seem like they were out for blood and revenge rather than justice. Because they've been going on with this for so long, that it gives the impression they take every single one ever involved in any way. But if they're just going after the worst ones, it makes sense.

[florduh]

I'm pretty sure they are only hunting the top guys, and guards at the camps that had done horrendous killing and/or torture. I really don't think they are trying to round up each and every Nazi down to the guy who would shine Hitler's shoes. That would be pretty silly.

 

I had a friend whose uncle was deported for being a former Nazi.

 

His story was no secret - he thought he had nothing to fear. But somebody had a beef with him and turned him in.

 

This guy was a chef in Lithuania, and the Nazi's took over in his area and conscripted him into their service to cook for the soldiers. He had the choice of cooking for them or dying, along with his family. So technically, he was in the German army, but in reality he was their prisoner.

 

Is it still too soon to never forget, but finally get over WWII? We had no problem forgiving and forgetting about Japan's atrocities, so what is it with the vengeance sought against a few 85 - 90 year old Nazi veterans?

[Abiyoyo]

There was an article recently (as of late last year or early this year) of a woman who used to be one of the many maids at a building he would frequently reside at. She recalled him being quite congenial and pleasant; he even urged her to attend mass more often.

 

He was a health nut and he also had atrocious table manners and was a drug addict, but to be fair, he may not have realized he was on drugs since he entrusted his doctor to administer drugs that would help him.

 

That brought up another point about Hitler, I heard he liked methamphetamine's?