Graffiti on Canadian memorial to former Nazi troops called a hate crime; police later apologize

[DukeTrout]

@anon33932455

The number drifted up towards the end of the war, largely because by 1945 many young men had grown up under National Socialism and so knew little else in terms of political party participation. But it was not required, and was not universal. An oath of loyalty to Hitler was required, but that’s something different

I’m sure they were entirely neutral, didn’t fire a single bullet, and never guarded a concentration camp. Just Good German boys, never meanin’ no harm. /s

[anon33932455]

I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here with this. Has anybody made the argument you’re sarcastically referring to?

[DukeTrout]

Refer back through this sub thread for context. You made the assertion that many WWII German soldiers weren’t Nazis. Other than the (pedantic and relatively meaningless) detail that some soldiers were members of the Nazi Party and some merely fought for the Nazis in power, that’s a distinction that seems meant to distract and derail.

As has been pointed out in this thread, Oskar Schindler was a member of the Nazi Party and many would say he redeemed himself through his actions. Meanwhile, a hypothetical Dachau camp guard might not have been a member of the party, but is every bit as responsible for the atrocities committed by Members of the party.

So, ultimately, the distinction is irrelevant.

[anon33932455]

@DukeTrout

You made the assertion that many WWII German soldiers weren’t Nazis. Other than the (pedantic and relatively meaningless) detail that some soldiers were members of the Nazi Party and some merely fought for the Nazis in power, that’s a distinction that seems meant to distract and derail.

It’s not at all pedantic. It helps us understand German soldiers’ motivations better. Any “distract and derail” or anything else other than an attempt to clarify a known fact is in your head. I made no other claim about what they did as soldiers and their ultimate support of the Nazi regime.

The distinction, though, is pretty relevant in terms of understanding the everyday Germans involved in the war.

[DukeTrout]

That neglects the socioeconomic and regional biases that went into whether a person was a member of the Nazi Party. Plenty of really nasty people weren’t members of the party, but for the purpose of our discussion here, are just as “Nazi” as card-carrying members.

So,again, because it’s worth repeating: defacing a monument to war criminals is alright by me, whether they were officially members of the Nazi Party or not. Trying to draw a distinction between war criminals and other war criminals is missing the Wald for the Baeume.

[taylormc]

Be thankful, then, that you’ve met one now.

[Mangochin]

Don’t think so.