BF2S Forums Inmate hunger strike

your first paragraph just details in a textbook way the exact same point i made re: mugabe. if you think that sort of widespread coercion and manipulation is 'democracy' then fine, personally i like to consider a democratic election as something a little more than the ability to be a populist at a time of great national embitterment.

i see the nazis as an inevitable socio-political consequence of both germany's recent history and the general character of its people within the context of a greater european community. i don't see it as a democratic expression of freely determined people - quite the opposite. the nazi situation was forged out of forces far greater than a simple election and a good public speaker. that's why i don't see it as being wholly 'democratic', unless you take the cynical view of democracy being a whimsical expression of the ignorance of the oppressive masses, etc.etc...

Uzique wrote:

i see the nazis as an inevitable socio-political consequence of both germany's recent history and the general character of its people within the context of a greater european community. i don't see it as a democratic expression of freely determined people - quite the opposite. the nazi situation was forged out of forces far greater than a simple election and a good public speaker. that's why i don't see it as being wholly 'democratic', unless you take the cynical view of democracy being a whimsical expression of the ignorance of the oppressive masses, etc.etc...

I have the view that there was nothing unique to the German people that meant they became Nazis. I.e. if the UK had the same recent history then it would be possible for a far right charismatic party to gain power. What im badly trying to say is that the German people were not predisposed to become Nazis, there was no genetic prejudice towards it.

Yes it was forged out of forces far greater than an election and a good speaker I agree with you. However I dont agree that 25 years of world history influencing the voting choice of an entire nation as fundamentally opposed to a democratic election. I think this is where you are coming from?

I would agree it was not democratic if the Nazis had manipulated peoples votes by intimidation or similar. When somebody is interfering with the electorates voting selections then it is not democratic but while people are freely making their own choices then I would claim democracy.

dilbert wrote:

Would a 'free and fair' election normally involve gangs of thugs beating to death anyone who looked like they were from the wrong party?
Hitler was not democratically elected.

Popular misconception and part of the many untruths which surfaced immediately after the war claiming that people were forced to do things otherwise they would be killed and that the Nazis weren't popular they just killed anybody who didn't toe the line.

The NSDAP and KPD were both as guilty as one another of starting fights. There was a great deal of fear in Germany of the KPD getting into power and the 5 main moderate parties pandering to their whims and not daring to stand against them. Hitler harnessed this and formed his brown shirts who championed the popular desire to stand up to the KPD. The brown shirts did not go around randomly beating up anybody who wasn't a Nazi. There is no evidence of this being a common occurrence. The KPD were very much a fringe party same as the NSDAP started as, however it was Hitler that connected best with the electorate (even if he was giving the easy answers).

I say again the election of Hitler was not a result of "thugary" and violence. There popularity increased up to the point that all of the other parties (exc KPD) could not form a majority government which is unheard of in a 7 party system. The NSDAPs popularity was staggering.

Dont make me start quoting Kershaw at you.

But anyway this should all be in the WWII thread that ended up about mother russia.

It doesnt change the fact that the Arizona immigration law that you told me to look takes the same view to immigrants (illegal or otherwise) as the 33-38 Nazi party took to Jews.

There is a reason that none of the other border states are enacting similar laws, but of course you missed that part of my post.

And that reminds me.

Would you hire somebody who has been in prison but now has a degree?
Would you hire somebody who has been in prison but now has a degree?
Would you hire somebody who has been in prison but now has a degree?
Would you hire somebody who has been in prison but now has a degree?
Would you hire somebody who has been in prison but now has a degree?
Would you hire somebody who has been in prison but now has a degree?
Would you hire somebody who has been in prison but now has a degree?
Would you hire somebody who has been in prison but now has a degree?
Would you hire somebody who has been in prison but now has a degree?