American eugenics inspired Hitler

Rhamiel said:

you are pointing out "people do not like it when you compare abortion to the holocaust"
that is true
but you are not really saying if the comparison is valid or not
lets look at a few things
killed an insane number of human beings
check
goes against the teachings of the Catholic Church
check
has a small number of fanatical supporters in high office and among the population and a large number of people who give it partial support or just kinda go along with it
check
has as its main justification "these people are subhuman"
oh that is a big check
kills people from all walks of life but has higher rates of murder among ethnic minorities
check

yeah, if the jackboot fits....

Click to expand...

Insert mandatory discussion over what constitutes a human "being". Speaking for myself, I can't understand how anyone can equate the killing if sentients with non sentients. *sigh* no, that's not an argument for abortion or anything. Don't try to read any subtext into it. IMHO killing a self aware being is an order of magnitude worse than killing an un self aware one.

Yes, abortion is bad. Yes, large numbers of abortion are very bad. But to try to claim moral equivalence between 50 million abortions and 50 million violent deaths of self aware people is all kinds of wrong, AND makes us look ridiculous into the bargain.

Rhamiel said:

you are pointing out "people do not like it when you compare abortion to the holocaust"
that is true
but you are not really saying if the comparison is valid or not

lets look at a few things
killed an insane number of human beings
check
goes against the teachings of the Catholic Church
check
has a small number of fanatical supporters in high office and among the population and a large number of people who give it partial support or just kinda go along with it
check
has as its main justification "these people are subhuman"
oh that is a big check
kills people from all walks of life but has higher rates of murder among ethnic minorities
check

yeah, if the jackboot fits....

Click to expand...

I guess I should be more clear.

I understand you political position, and its absurdity.

Given that I am so clear on your political priorities, I will no longer comment on your political posts.

Armoured said:

IMHO killing a self aware being is an order of magnitude worse than killing an un self aware one.

Click to expand...

remind me never to take a nap around you
cause... you seem to base human rights on if we are aware or not.....

is killing a 2 month old baby of a lesser magnitude then killing a 11 year old?
because I doubt you could say a 2 month old baby has the same level of self awareness as a 11 year old?

Armoured said:

But to try to claim moral equivalence between 50 million abortions and 50 million violent deaths of self aware people is all kinds of wrong, AND makes us look ridiculous into the bargain

Click to expand...

you know, back in the 1800's, Europeans routinely talked the same way about other ethnicities
"well yes, I mean I do not want them to die, some of them are very useful, I met a chinaman who is a shoeshine on Mott Street and he is very conversational, you would almost think you were talking to a white man.... but I mean, to put them as being equivalent to us just sounds ridiculous"

---edit, the point of that is to show that talking about some humans being "less human" then other humans is creepy and wrong --

anyways, you have this made up standard of "self aware = human"
and the Nazis had their own made up standards on what made a human a human

why do you think your made up standards are any less silly then the ones made up by the members of the Nazi party?

mark46 said:

I guess I should be more clear.

I understand you political position, and its absurdity.

Given that I am so clear on your political priorities, I will no longer comment on your political posts.

Click to expand...

have you shown my views to be absurd?
what have I said that is absurd

if the killing of millions of human beings through abortion is not a priority, then you really need to rethink your priorities
I never said that abortion is the ONLY priority

Rhamiel said:

have you shown my views to be absurd?
what have I said that is absurd

if the killing of millions of human beings through abortion is not a priority, then you really need to rethink your priorities
I never said that abortion is the ONLY priority

Click to expand...

I am not trying to convince you.

you always hear liberals say stuff like "we need to have a national conversation on these issues"
they say that for just about anything
racism, sexism, patriarchy... whatever is the flavor of the month

but when we actually try to talk about it, they feign moral superiority and do not even deign to talk things over like reasonable adults

Rhamiel said:

you always hear liberals say stuff like "we need to have a national conversation on these issues"
they say that for just about anything
racism, sexism, patriarchy... whatever is the flavor of the month

but when we actually try to talk about it, they feign moral superiority and do not even deign to talk things over like reasonable adults

Click to expand...

You start the discussion with your fact that abortion in the US is equal to all the killings in WWII. That stops discussion.

I was just pointing out some similarities, it is not exactly the same, obviously
but there are some very stark comparisons

if I am wrong, point out how I am wrong
and I did not say all the killings of WWII
the war caused many deaths
I was talking mainly about the Holocaust as point of comparison
there are valid differences of course
but there were also similarities

Red Fox said:

There's also this.

Hitler’s Inspiration and Guide: The Native American Holocaust

Ugly Precursor to Auschwitz: Hitler Said to Have Been Inspired by U.S. Indian Reservation System

Click to expand...

There was no holocaust against Native Americans. While U.S. Indian policy was misguided and there were wrongs committed, there was no intentional systematic murder on the part of the U.S. government. As a matter of fact, American Indian policy is characterized by the US doing the wrong thing for the right reason. Most deaths of Native Americans were due to exposure to European diseases that they had no immunity to---and this was not intentional. I realize that you have a personal dog in this fight, but as my noted western historian/professor/thesis adviser said, "the notion of an American genocide against Indians is ridiculous, and an insult to holocaust survivors."

Rhamiel said:

I was talking mainly about the Holocaust as point of comparison
there are valid differences of course
but there were also similarities

Click to expand...

I can see where people see the similarities, but I do believe the differences to be vast. Not getting into self-aware or not, because I don't see that as the defining point of humanity, but there is a difference between being unaware of what is going on and being keenly aware of what is going on. The Holocaust isn't just bad because of the deaths but because of the camps and breaking apart families and all that. These people were aware of what was going on and lived in fear for months or years. The babies in the womb, as tragic as their deaths are, do not know what is going on and in many cases couldn't even begin to be aware due to the stage of development.

As weird and morbid as it may sound, I think if I had to make a choice I would prefer to have been aborted than killed in a concentration camp.

Zach91 said:

There was no holocaust against Native Americans. While U.S. Indian policy was misguided and there were wrongs committed, there was no intentional systematic murder on the part of the U.S. government. As a matter of fact, American Indian policy is characterized by the US doing the wrong thing for the right reason. Most deaths of Native Americans were due to exposure to European diseases that they had no immunity to---and this was not intentional. I realize that you have a personal dog in this fight, but as my noted western historian/professor/thesis adviser said, "the notion of an American genocide against Indians is ridiculous, and an insult to holocaust survivors."

Click to expand...

If you want to deny history, that's fine. It doesn't matter to me. Your denial doesn't change it.

It also doesn't matter to me what your noted western historian/professor/thesis adviser had to say on this issue either.

Red Fox said:

If you want to deny history, that's fine. It doesn't matter to me. Your denial doesn't change it.

It also doesn't matter to me what your noted western historian/professor/thesis adviser had to say on this issue either.

Click to expand...

Of course it doesn't matter to you what reputable scholars and historians who actually specialize on the topic have to say. You have stated before in other threads that you have ignore all non-Indian historians. You are the one who is denying history. I understand that the issue is personal to you, but your personal vendetta against European-Americans causes you to plug your ears and ignore the facts. Historians are trained to look at things objectively and not let their emotions skew their research. You think I deny history? That's fine, I actually have a degree in American History, and have had my research published in academic journals.

I'll say it again: the way that the United States treated Indians was wrong, but never once did it commit genocide against them. Never once did the United States systematically attempt to kill all Indians. The very premise is ridiculous.

Francis Paul Prucha is considered by the majority of mainstream historians to be the authoritative source on U.S.-Indian policy. Try reading this book if you want an honest an non-biased:

LoAmmi said:

As weird and morbid as it may sound, I think if I had to make a choice I would prefer to have been aborted than killed in a concentration camp.

Click to expand...

that is reasonable

and you are right, there are significant differences
the dehumanizing camp system is one difference
another difference is that the genocide of the Holocaust was orchestrated by a totalitarian state
while the huge number of deaths caused by abortion are mostly voluntary on the part of the mother

the similarities lay in the mindset that justifies such an action
and the huge numbers killed

Francis Paul Prucha is considered by the majority of mainstream historians to be the authoritative source on U.S.-Indian policy. Try reading this book if you want an honest an non-biased:


That would be a view from a man who would have seen Christians as liberators bringing Christ to the savage. .

Zach91 said:

Of course it doesn't matter to you what reputable scholars and historians who actually specialize on the topic have to say. You have stated before in other threads that you have ignore all non-Indian historians. You are the one who is denying history. I understand that the issue is personal to you, but your personal vendetta against European-Americans causes you to plug your ears and ignore the facts. Historians are trained to look at things objectively and not let their emotions skew their research. You think I deny history? That's fine, I actually have a degree in American History, and have had my research published in academic journals.

I'll say it again: the way that the United States treated Indians was wrong, but never once did it commit genocide against them. Never once did the United States systematically attempt to kill all Indians. The very premise is ridiculous.

Francis Paul Prucha is considered by the majority of mainstream historians to be the authoritative source on U.S.-Indian policy. Try reading this book if you want an honest an non-biased:

Click to expand...

You seem to believe that at no time was there any federal policy that called for the extermination of a tribe of Native Americans. Most of us understand that this is a false conclusion. There many times in our history where federal and local actions called for the extermination of this tribe or that.

I do think that the issue before us is how we treat each other now. Do we consider skin color or ethnicity or are we essentially color-blind? It seems that, at a very minimum, the US NOW stands for protecting the rights of many groups, including racial and ethnic groups. There are those who disagreed over the course of my lifetime. Many of these have been politicians leading their people in protests against the rights of non-whites.

rturner76 said:

Francis Paul Prucha is considered by the majority of mainstream historians to be the authoritative source on U.S.-Indian policy. Try reading this book if you want an honest an non-biased:


That would be a view from a man who would have seen Christians as liberators bringing Christ to the savage. I wouldn't expect a Confederate to have a clear understanding of history or much of anything that is not white idealism.

Click to expand...

Why are you personally insulting me? When did I ever say "Indians are savages and Christians are liberators?" I never said that, and neither does the author I mentioned. Have you even read Prucha? As a matter of fact, I said on numerous occasions that the way the government treated Indians wasn't right, it just never amounted to genocide. You are baselessly slandering me as being a white idealist, and you have no evidence to back that up. I challenge you to show me one single post I made calling Indians "savages," or lauding whites for christianizing them.

Also, I am not a Confederate, my ancestors were, and that is why I have this avatar. I am also a published historian and understand history quite well; your bias just will not allow you to consider arguments other than your own.

You can disagree with me all you want, but so far you have failed to provide any evidence countering my claims, but have chosen instead to personally insult and slander me.

mark46 said:

You seem to believe that at no time was there any federal policy that called for the extermination of a tribe of Native Americans. Most of us understand that this is a false conclusion. There many times in our history where federal and local actions called for the extermination of this tribe or that.

I do think that the issue before us is how we treat each other now. Do we consider skin color or ethnicity or are we essentially color-blind? It seems that, at a very minimum, the US NOW stands for protecting the rights of many groups, including racial and ethnic groups. There are those who disagreed over the course of my lifetime. Many of these have been politicians leading their people in protests against the rights of non-whites.

Click to expand...

Can you cite me specific examples where the United States government, as an act of official policy, attempted to exterminate an entire tribe?

Zach91 said:

You can disagree with me all you want, but so far you have failed to provide any evidence countering my claims, but have chose instead to personally insult and slander me.

Click to expand...

On July 4, 1863, in response to raids by Dakota in southern Minnesota, the state’s Adjutant-General, Oscar Malmros, issued a general order for the establishment of a mounted corps of “volunteer scouts” to patrol from Sauk Centre to the northern edge of Sibley County. The scouts provided their own arms, equipment, and provisions, were each paid two dollars a day, and were offered an additional $25 for Dakota scalps. A reward of $75 a scalp was offered to people not in military service; that amount was raised to $200 on September 22. - See more at: http://www.usdakotawar.org/history/aftermath/bounties#sthash.XD3tPaaJ.dpuf

The taking of scalps is a clear indicator of the attempt to exterminate the native population. I'm sure it's not an indication of an attempt to preserve Native culture.

If you are insulted by my post I apologize. If you are not a confederate the comment would not apply to you. Also there are many on this very forum who would take being associated with white idealism and the Confederate cause as a compliment. If you are not on of them I commend you for your opinion on those matters.

By the way, anyone that wants to call me a white idealist should now that I am 1/4 Blackfoot. My grandfather was full blooded Indian, straight from the reservation. If he was still with us (God rest his soul) he would tell you the same thing that I have.