Austria to tear down Hitler birth house

[Zap]

In America it was white men who had black slaves. So in America that is the focus. But you have a point. Because in Africa Black tribes enslaved other black tribes

[warspite1]

...and it was often their fellow Africans that sold them into slavery

[Orm]

Most slaves transported to America, I think, went to Brazil.

The 'arab' slave trade was huge as well.

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: charlie0311

Re slavery, why only white men vilified?

warspite1

And this plays nicely to my earlier question - who decides? Uncomfortable truths face us all from time to time. It is a very uncomfortable truth that African and Asians assisted the white man pursue his policy of slavery...... plus of course it is not only white people that have adopted slavery either.

Valid point. I think what the world needs is more civil dialogue on issues like this. We humans are complex beings and labeling each other just seems to shut down discussion.

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Zap

In America it was white men who had black slaves. So in America that is the focus. But you have a point. Because in Africa Black tribes enslaved other black tribes

Slavery existed with Native Americans before and after whites arrived.

Many freed blacks owned slaves. Women of both colors had slaves.

It was a black man who sued to keep his slaves thus establishing a legal precedent for owning slaves.


If Europeans went to Africa, got off the boats with just hugs and kisses, guess what they would have become.

[RichG]

ORIGINAL: charlie0311

Re slavery, why only white men vilified?

Re morality, good v evil, etc. Why the same crowd vigorously chasing slave owners, fascists, etc, but not communists and especially not abortionists?

In the case of fascist / communist, I'd suggest it is due to concerns that there is a rise in fascist movements across Europe where as communism has for the large part been side lined.

I for one, find the rise of extreme right wing groups very worrying and feel it's important to look on history and see where that kind of thinking can take us. I currently don't have the same immediate concerns over left wing movements (I don't think we can paint Russia into that particular corner any more). If Stalinist were taking over Europe I would be equally worried.

[z1812]

ORIGINAL: Orm

How do we decide if a object is to be destroyed or saved for future generations?

- Does a majority in a country have the right to decide?
- Does the world have anything to say about it?
- Or is it a vocal minority who makes the call?

We can't. Each country and each group will express their own self interest. A person can work locally to encourage historical preservation. One can also encourage a respect for history amongst friends and Family.

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: z1812

ORIGINAL: Orm

How do we decide if a object is to be destroyed or saved for future generations?

- Does a majority in a country have the right to decide?
- Does the world have anything to say about it?
- Or is it a vocal minority who makes the call?

We can't. Each country and each group will express their own self interest. A person can work locally to encourage historical preservation. One can also encourage a respect for history amongst friends and Family.

Going back to the topic of Hitler's birth place, I think there are many who "respect history" who might think tearing down the house is a good idea. Not everything can be preserved. Otherwise there would be no place to build shopping malls. [:)]

[z1812]

I wonder what others think of the destruction of Soviet era monuments and statues in the ex Soviet block countries of Eastern Europe.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: z1812

ORIGINAL: Orm

How do we decide if a object is to be destroyed or saved for future generations?

- Does a majority in a country have the right to decide?
- Does the world have anything to say about it?
- Or is it a vocal minority who makes the call?

We can't. Each country and each group will express their own self interest. A person can work locally to encourage historical preservation. One can also encourage a respect for history amongst friends and Family.

Recently some has voiced opinions that the world does have a responsibility. I even heard 'war crime' mentioned here.

This is fairly close to what is not allowed here. So please be polite in any responses and please do try and leave the political side out of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destructi ... L#Response

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: z1812

I wonder what others think of the destruction of Soviet era monuments and statues in the ex Soviet block countries of Eastern Europe.

Speaking for myself, I wouldn't shed tears if they were torn down, though obviously it's up to the local people of those places to make the call.

[RichG]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: RichG

ORIGINAL: warspite1
...
By the way there was a superb documentary on the slave trade last year - I will see if I can dig out a link and post it. On the basis of that documentary, the numbers 'involved' in the slave trade were considerably more than we would otherwise imagine.

That is something I'd be interested in seeing.

I live close to the city of Bristol which, as you may well know, had a strong connection with the slave trade and this was the key to much of its historic wealth.

There has been much discussion locally about how Bristol should approach this. For instance, the Colston Hall is often suggested for having it's name changed. I'm not sure about this myself. Like others have said we can use history to educate. By removing the links we can miss the opportunity to inform the future generations as to what made things wrong in the past.

The idea of replacing Hitlers house with a Holocaust museum hits the mark very well.

warspite1

Reading about Colston Hall just makes me so angry. Here is a perfect example of why this is not an easy subject - and that life is not just black and white - no pun intended.

Yes Edward Colston was linked to the slave trade - but he also founded a school to educate the poor. He died in 1721. Times were different. Nowadays there is no excuse for discrimination but how many people had even seen a black man back then? Any dislike of black people was likely to be out of ignorance, or fear, or what they were told by their elders and betters - even the church.

I strongly agree that this is a very complex moral issue, dilemma even.

To bring back Savile, no one would in there right minds exonerate him because of all the charitable work he did. Yet Colston we can forgive because he built schools, etc? I find it difficult to decide.

It seems the crux of the mater is whether the individual being considered and those around them, understood what they were doing as wrong. But I find it hard to imagine that those trading slaves could ever have really thought it was anything but an injustice. They may have had many ways to justify it to themselves (such as some who quoted passages from the bible) but I still think they would have known it was wrong.

[z1812]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: z1812

ORIGINAL: Orm

How do we decide if a object is to be destroyed or saved for future generations?

- Does a majority in a country have the right to decide?
- Does the world have anything to say about it?
- Or is it a vocal minority who makes the call?

We can't. Each country and each group will express their own self interest. A person can work locally to encourage historical preservation. One can also encourage a respect for history amongst friends and Family.

Going back to the topic of Hitler's birth place, I think there are many who "respect history" who might think tearing down the house is a good idea. Not everything can be preserved. Otherwise there would be no place to build shopping malls. [:)]

Visual cues are very important in generating curiosity that may lead to knowledge. I would say that those who respect history but who favour destroying certain objects that inform a curiosity about history have not thought their position through. The logic in destroying the house is to deprive neo-nazis of a shrine. Really, do you think that will stop people from becoming facists. Austria and Germany have done a pretty thorough job of trying to eliminate Nazism, racism and anti-semitism. Yet it still persists and is growing. Destroying this house will have no effect.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: RichG

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: RichG




That is something I'd be interested in seeing.

I live close to the city of Bristol which, as you may well know, had a strong connection with the slave trade and this was the key to much of its historic wealth.

There has been much discussion locally about how Bristol should approach this. For instance, the Colston Hall is often suggested for having it's name changed. I'm not sure about this myself. Like others have said we can use history to educate. By removing the links we can miss the opportunity to inform the future generations as to what made things wrong in the past.

The idea of replacing Hitlers house with a Holocaust museum hits the mark very well.

warspite1

Reading about Colston Hall just makes me so angry. Here is a perfect example of why this is not an easy subject - and that life is not just black and white - no pun intended.

Yes Edward Colston was linked to the slave trade - but he also founded a school to educate the poor. He died in 1721. Times were different. Nowadays there is no excuse for discrimination but how many people had even seen a black man back then? Any dislike of black people was likely to be out of ignorance, or fear, or what they were told by their elders and betters - even the church.

It seems the crux of the mater is whether the individual being considered and those around them, understood what they were doing as wrong. But I find it hard to imagine that those trading slaves could ever have really thought it was anything but an injustice. They may have had many ways to justify it to themselves (such as some who quoted passages from the bible) but I still think they would have known it was wrong.

warspite1

But I think that it is not that easy as saying 'they must have understood'. Take this example. I was born in London in the sixties. In the schools I went to there was no minority issue. Even in the seventies there was probably almost as many non-whites as whites where I lived. So from an early age I have mixed with other races, other nationalities. That has continued in work, still living in London as I do, there is no escaping the multi-cultural society in which I live. If I were a racist I would have no excuse for being so given my upbringing and my personal experience.

But what about someone living in 1700? I think you are not giving enough credit for what the world was like then. Think about it? You've never seen an African, you've never heard an African speak. You have no idea why they are black, but compared to you that can't be normal can it? You may have been told 'horror' stories about them by others that feed your ignorance - about sub human savages and you may have heard things from people who 'know' like the local slave-owning vicar! In such a world, where many people rarely stepped out of their own community, no I don't see why someone should definitely 'know' slavery was wrong or that the black man was not simply a savage. This is why education is so important - education that wasn't available to most in the past.

Now clearly, the more you know, the less excuse you have for being a mindless racist ****, but lets face it - then as now - some neanderthals are just wired that way. But that is not everybody.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: z1812

I wonder what others think of the destruction of Soviet era monuments and statues in the ex Soviet block countries of Eastern Europe.

.... though obviously it's up to the local people of those places to make the call.

warspite1

I agree. For example the Soviet people lived and suffered (but also defeated the Nazi's) under Stalin. It is for them to pass judgement on how he is remembered or not.

[RichG]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

But I think that it is not that easy as saying 'they must have understood'. Take this example. I was born in London in the sixties. In the schools I went to there was no minority issue. Even in the seventies there was probably almost as many non-whites as whites where I lived. So from an early age I have mixed with other races, other nationalities. That has continued in work, still living in London as I do, there is no escaping the multi-cultural society in which I live. If I were a racist I would have no excuse for being so given my upbringing and my personal experience.

But what about someone living in 1700? I think you are not giving enough credit for what the world was like then. Think about it? You've never seen an African, you've never heard an African speak. You have no idea why they are black, but compared to you that can't be normal can it? You may have been told 'horror' stories about them by others that feed your ignorance - about sub human savages and you may have heard things from people who 'know' like the local slave-owning vicar! In such a world, where many people rarely stepped out of their own community, no I don't see why someone should definitely 'know' slavery was wrong or that the black man was not simply a savage. This is why education is so important - education that wasn't available to most in the past.

Now clearly, the more you know, the less excuse you have for being a mindless racist ****, but lets face it - then as now - some neanderthals are just wired that way. But that is not everybody.

I'm not so sure I'm not giving enough credit for what the times were like back then. In Britain slavery was illegal and largely condemned.

And also, from my understanding people of colour where not such an unusual occurrence, particularly in London where Colston spent the majority of his life. Colston would almost certainly have met African immigrants in the course of his work and travels. And he must have spent some time observing what his fleet of, at one time, 40 slave ships was doing. He cannot have been ignorant to the horrors. Yet Colston chose to ignore this and proceeded to transport what some estimate was in excess of 100,000 slaves to a miserable existence.

How many schools make this justifiable. If he only funded one would we condemn him, but three schools means he is OK?

This is why education is so important

I couldn't agree more - and this is one reason why truthful history is so important. We have to learn from our past wrong doings.

[pmelheck1]

Something somewhat on point with your comment is when you mention folks who speak ill of slave races you have them do so from a position of them knowing it is wrong. One consideration you must face is to some folks of their times they were not oppressing their slaves but did honestly believe they were aiding them or that indeed they were not human. While it may offend our sensibilities it may not have been such at another time and place. I know of folks who think owning a pet is slavery and all animals must be freed right now. If in 100 years this becomes the societal norm do you think you should be labeled the most evil human alive during this century for owning a dog? While a slave and a dog are very different things they are very different things to us today then to folks back then. I Have been a scientist in the past and have seen similar issues with scientific theory where folks are mocked and derided for beliefs that today we know are wrong but then were accepted theory and to accept anything else including the correct theory would have been unthinkable. Unfortunately any discussion of this or that person as to whether they were good or bad a better question might be not do we think they are bad but do the average citizen living during those times and in the same place think they were bad. In Hitlers time my understanding is that many Germans at the time felt he was wrong for what he was doing and most certainly his neighbors would have felt what he was doing was wrong.

[MakeeLearn]

warspite1

But I think that it is not that easy as saying 'they must have understood'. Take this example. I was born in London in the sixties. In the schools I went to there was no minority issue. Even in the seventies there was probably almost as many non-whites as whites where I lived. So from an early age I have mixed with other races, other nationalities. That has continued in work, still living in London as I do, there is no escaping the multi-cultural society in which I live. If I were a racist I would have no excuse for being so given my upbringing and my personal experience.

But what about someone living in 1700? I think you are not giving enough credit for what the world was like then. Think about it? You've never seen an African, you've never heard an African speak. You have no idea why they are black, but compared to you that can't be normal can it? You may have been told 'horror' stories about them by others that feed your ignorance - about sub human savages and you may have heard things from people who 'know' like the local slave-owning vicar! In such a world, where many people rarely stepped out of their own community, no I don't see why someone should definitely 'know' slavery was wrong or that the black man was not simply a savage. This is why education is so important - education that wasn't available to most in the past.

Now clearly, the more you know, the less excuse you have for being a mindless racist ****, but lets face it - then as now - some neanderthals are just wired that way. But that is not everybody.

That is not the only case. I could be called a racist and not racist and I would agree to both. Ive been the victim of racism in both the military and the army yet the world tells me that is not possible only Iam racist as a white male. Going from rural to urban environments was quite a eye opener. A realist.

Ive been around many, many races and lots of times Ive been in the minority.

Listening to people they tend to become more racial aware with more exposure. Not the reverse as Hollywood has been brainwashing people with. Its those lack in depth interaction that are the most naive.

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: z1812

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: z1812




We can't. Each country and each group will express their own self interest. A person can work locally to encourage historical preservation. One can also encourage a respect for history amongst friends and Family.

Going back to the topic of Hitler's birth place, I think there are many who "respect history" who might think tearing down the house is a good idea. Not everything can be preserved. Otherwise there would be no place to build shopping malls. [:)]

Visual cues are very important in generating curiosity that may lead to knowledge. I would say that those who respect history but who favour destroying certain objects that inform a curiosity about history have not thought their position through. The logic in destroying the house is to deprive neo-nazis of a shrine. Really, do you think that will stop people from becoming facists. Austria and Germany have done a pretty thorough job of trying to eliminate Nazism, racism and anti-semitism. Yet it still persists and is growing. Destroying this house will have no effect.

I wonder how many people really need Hitler's birth place intact in order to gain knowledge of what happened in WW2, though? If they wanted to leave the place intact as some sort of historical monument then maybe they could turn it into a holocaust museum. That seems appropriate to me.

I don't fault Austria for tearing that particular place down. It's up to them. If it were the Anne Frank house, OTOH, I would be saddened as I would love to visit the place one of these days if I ever get out of the US.

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: mullk

Something somewhat on point with your comment is when you mention folks who speak ill of slave races you have them do so from a position of them knowing it is wrong. One consideration you must face is to some folks of their times they were not oppressing their slaves but did honestly believe they were aiding them or that indeed they were not human. While it may offend our sensibilities it may not have been such at another time and place. I know of folks who think owning a pet is slavery and all animals must be freed right now. If in 100 years this becomes the societal norm do you think you should be labeled the most evil human alive during this century for owning a dog? While a slave and a dog are very different things they are very different things to us today then to folks back then. I Have been a scientist in the past and have seen similar issues with scientific theory where folks are mocked and derided for beliefs that today we know are wrong but then were accepted theory and to accept anything else including the correct theory would have been unthinkable. Unfortunately any discussion of this or that person as to whether they were good or bad a better question might be not do we think they are bad but do the average citizen living during those times and in the same place think they were bad. In Hitlers time my understanding is that many Germans at the time felt he was wrong for what he was doing and most certainly his neighbors would have felt what he was doing was wrong.

As Muhammad Ali said after a trip to Africa, "I'm glad my great-grandpa got on that boat."