To: Neocon who wrote (48948 ) 8/4/1999 10:14:00 AM From: MNI Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
Thanks for the chance. I think nothing should be criticized. But does it really help you if I say I could have said the very same after my school lessons ? Is history to be so uniformly taught ? Is it objective, factual enough to be taught in a uniform view ? And anyway, do you believe there are non-interpretive narratives anywhere in natural (i.e. non-synthetic) language? On another level, I could make very little scratches to the surface. For once I always get a little strange feeling about the mentioning of socialist roots of the Nazis. It can lead to too easy equations, exemplified by Darrell Youngblood. One thing is sure, during their time the Nazis weren't anti-capitalist. (And only very few industrialists were anti-Nazi). Most probably you were aware of that problem and went the best way by using "quasi-". I do not know what you want to say with National Socialist Workers' Party, as it was originally called , to my knowledge "Workers' " was never dropped from the name. When you blame Hitler, you may be right that the rise of the NSDAP and a Germany-caused second world war might have been avoided without his existence, but otoh it is not sure what would have happened. A radicalisation of the social democrats? A landslide win of the communist party? Another unstable 'buergerlich-demokratisch' Weimar government ? What merits in the change the general starving population's situation could such a government have had ? Starvation was also a reality in our neighboring countries and Britain in the 1929 crisis, as I understood, but a with a certain amplification factor for Germany by the Versailles-aftermath. I think nothing is changed by my comments and only the excellence of your narrative is approved, given we would accept that similarity of our views is a standard of excellence. Regards MNI.