I still seem to fail in my understanding of why people refuse to or simply cannot see bias.
I read a lot of Kowalskils writings which he so generously shared with us. I must say that I see the usual bias, it is little different from anything else I have read about Stalinism or the old USSR. Don't get me wrong, of all the things written by all the propagandists, ideologues, intellectuals and so called historians most of it is worth keeping if only to point out what/who the real enemy is.
Mr Kowalskil seems to have a clear bias. He points a finger at Nazism and Stalinism while completely ignoring the enormous extent of western brutality perpetrated by almost all peoples of the western world on many others. The Nazis concentration camps were not the first, nor were Stalins the Gulags the first of their kind. It is curious how his gulags can be compared to the prisons of America run by private companies. There was profit made by people who ran the gulags, there is HUGE profits made by running Americas own gulags. Should I go on?
Here is a paragraph from K's book. He makes a good point but I must ask, why the bias? Why the blindness?
“It is remarkable that the two most destructive ideologies of the 20th century were conceived in a highly civilized country, Germany. Marxism, which subsequently became the ideology of the Soviet Union, was based on the idea that the proletarian dictatorship would lead to social harmony.
Hitlerism, the ideology of the Third Reich, was based on the idea of race superiority. The world, according to Hitler, would be better without Jews, Slavs, Blacks, and other inferior races. Stalin and Hitler viewed themselves as agents of historical destiny. Moral reservations against mass killing, according to them, were totally irrelevant. Morality had to be modified to make killing possible.
Both “final solution” ideologies were rooted in the concept of supremacy of one group of people over another. For Hitler it was the idea of Aryan domination; for Marx, Lenin and Stalin it was the idea of proletarian domination. The concept of supremacy is not consistent with the concept of social harmony. Were Hitler's Nazi state and Stalin's Bolshevik state deplorable aberrations or were they precursors of what may come in other forms? ”
Why the bias?
Why the bias?
I believe many of us see and recognize bias except when it comes to our own social and political views.
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Why the bias?
Scrat;1363634 wrote:
Mr Kowalskil seems to have a clear bias. He points a finger at Nazism and Stalinism while completely ignoring the enormous extent of western brutality perpetrated by almost all peoples of the western world on many others. The Nazis concentration camps were not the first, nor were Stalins the Gulags the first of their kind. It is curious how his gulags can be compared to the prisons of America run by private companies. There was profit made by people who ran the gulags, there is HUGE profits made by running Americas own gulags. Should I go on?
Yes, America had internments camps during WWII, the reservation system for Native Americans, enslavement of certain Native People until 1934-at a huge profit to the US government too.
Mr Kowalskil seems to have a clear bias. He points a finger at Nazism and Stalinism while completely ignoring the enormous extent of western brutality perpetrated by almost all peoples of the western world on many others. The Nazis concentration camps were not the first, nor were Stalins the Gulags the first of their kind. It is curious how his gulags can be compared to the prisons of America run by private companies. There was profit made by people who ran the gulags, there is HUGE profits made by running Americas own gulags. Should I go on?
Yes, America had internments camps during WWII, the reservation system for Native Americans, enslavement of certain Native People until 1934-at a huge profit to the US government too.
Why the bias?
chonsigirl;1363644 wrote: Yes, America had internments camps during WWII, the reservation system for Native Americans, enslavement of certain Native People until 1934-at a huge profit to the US government too.How so?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Why the bias?
chonsigirl;1363644 wrote: Yes, America had internments camps during WWII, the reservation system for Native Americans, enslavement of certain Native People until 1934-at a huge profit to the US government too.
I don't know about the US Government, itself, profiting from the Reservation system, but it was definitely profitable for many of the agents and supervisors of many of those reservations.
It is also hard to compare the internment camps in the US to the concentration camps, Ghettos and Gulags the Nazis and Stalinists created.
I am not suggesting any of it was right, but what America did was nothing like what was done by the Nazis, or the Stalin Socialists.
I don't know about the US Government, itself, profiting from the Reservation system, but it was definitely profitable for many of the agents and supervisors of many of those reservations.
It is also hard to compare the internment camps in the US to the concentration camps, Ghettos and Gulags the Nazis and Stalinists created.
I am not suggesting any of it was right, but what America did was nothing like what was done by the Nazis, or the Stalin Socialists.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Why the bias?
The fur seal trade-they were more than indentured, made millions of dollars for the US government, profits went to the feds. The natives were limited to what they could even keep for subsistence.
It is public knowledge if you know where to look Ahso, it is also the topic I am currently researching and writing on. 46 million dollar profit to government for the time period of 76 years, the US government spent 4 million on the native population. If you want a link to the decision, write me a PM and I will send it.
It is public knowledge if you know where to look Ahso, it is also the topic I am currently researching and writing on. 46 million dollar profit to government for the time period of 76 years, the US government spent 4 million on the native population. If you want a link to the decision, write me a PM and I will send it.
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Why the bias?
LarsMac;1363648 wrote: I don't know about the US Government, itself, profiting from the Reservation system, but it was definitely profitable for many of the agents and supervisors of many of those reservations.
It is also hard to compare the internment camps in the US to the concentration camps, Ghettos and Gulags the Nazis and Stalinists created.
I am not suggesting any of it was right, but what America did was nothing like what was done by the Nazis, or the Stalin Socialists.
It is not a comparison of numbers, Lars-any system that creates an injustice to a group is wrong. And yes, the US Government many times profitted from the Native Americans-it was just one example. As were the internment camps, where Japanese Americans lost all that they owned, besides their rights as citizens.
It is also hard to compare the internment camps in the US to the concentration camps, Ghettos and Gulags the Nazis and Stalinists created.
I am not suggesting any of it was right, but what America did was nothing like what was done by the Nazis, or the Stalin Socialists.
It is not a comparison of numbers, Lars-any system that creates an injustice to a group is wrong. And yes, the US Government many times profitted from the Native Americans-it was just one example. As were the internment camps, where Japanese Americans lost all that they owned, besides their rights as citizens.
Why the bias?
I was not talking about numbers.
You cannot compare What was done to the Japanese or the native Americans to what happens to the Jews, Gypsies, Poles and others in places like Aushwitz, or Kolyma.
On the other hand, Evil is Evil, and cannot be accepted.
You cannot compare What was done to the Japanese or the native Americans to what happens to the Jews, Gypsies, Poles and others in places like Aushwitz, or Kolyma.
On the other hand, Evil is Evil, and cannot be accepted.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Why the bias?
I don't believe there is one Monarchical, Political, Social or Religious System that is without despicable acts towards others. Choose your poison.
Why the bias?
Hitlerism, the ideology of the Third Reich, was based on the idea of race superiority. The world, according to Hitler, would be better without Jews, Slavs, Blacks, and other inferior races. Stalin and Hitler viewed themselves as agents of historical destiny. Moral reservations against mass killing, according to them, were totally irrelevant. Morality had to be modified to make killing possible.
Hitlerism and marxism both have the same social, religious and political roots. Marxism was an mechanistic idealistic view of the inherent good of society as a whole that was never going to work. Communism never really took a grip where you had an educated proletariat who could see straight through to the basic flaw that all you would do is replace ones set of master with another and where power had already begun passing down the way. It was also elitist in that an educated elite would lead the masses to enlightenment. It's no coincidence that the two successful communist revolutions took place in societies that were still many agrarian economically.
Hitlers racism has it's origins in two thousand years of church teachings. It was a prejudice held in most european societies and in the states, the irony being that gernany used to be one of the least anti-semitic in europe. Racial and cutural superiority based on religion was mooted as a justification for slavery and domination long before the twentieth century. Hitler believed exterminating the jews was god's work it wasn't something he decided to do later on when he got power he was always quite clear about his intent. It fed in to the prejudices of the time, karl marx being a jew and much of the banking establishment being jewish with the godless communists trying to tear down the state - conflate it all together and you have an emotive cocktail that takes away reason.
Both “final solution” ideologies were rooted in the concept of supremacy of one group of people over another. For Hitler it was the idea of Aryan domination; for Marx, Lenin and Stalin it was the idea of proletarian domination. The concept of supremacy is not consistent with the concept of social harmony. Were Hitler's Nazi state and Stalin's Bolshevik state deplorable aberrations or were they precursors of what may come in other forms? ”
They weren't aberrations it has all happened time and time again, just think roman empire subjugating all the inferior peoples, the chinese or the mongols sweepng all before them, catholic against protestant, muslim against christian, one tribe taking over another, killing all the men and keeping the women. All that is different now is the industrial scale we can make warfare on each other.
Hitlerism and marxism both have the same social, religious and political roots. Marxism was an mechanistic idealistic view of the inherent good of society as a whole that was never going to work. Communism never really took a grip where you had an educated proletariat who could see straight through to the basic flaw that all you would do is replace ones set of master with another and where power had already begun passing down the way. It was also elitist in that an educated elite would lead the masses to enlightenment. It's no coincidence that the two successful communist revolutions took place in societies that were still many agrarian economically.
Hitlers racism has it's origins in two thousand years of church teachings. It was a prejudice held in most european societies and in the states, the irony being that gernany used to be one of the least anti-semitic in europe. Racial and cutural superiority based on religion was mooted as a justification for slavery and domination long before the twentieth century. Hitler believed exterminating the jews was god's work it wasn't something he decided to do later on when he got power he was always quite clear about his intent. It fed in to the prejudices of the time, karl marx being a jew and much of the banking establishment being jewish with the godless communists trying to tear down the state - conflate it all together and you have an emotive cocktail that takes away reason.
Both “final solution” ideologies were rooted in the concept of supremacy of one group of people over another. For Hitler it was the idea of Aryan domination; for Marx, Lenin and Stalin it was the idea of proletarian domination. The concept of supremacy is not consistent with the concept of social harmony. Were Hitler's Nazi state and Stalin's Bolshevik state deplorable aberrations or were they precursors of what may come in other forms? ”
They weren't aberrations it has all happened time and time again, just think roman empire subjugating all the inferior peoples, the chinese or the mongols sweepng all before them, catholic against protestant, muslim against christian, one tribe taking over another, killing all the men and keeping the women. All that is different now is the industrial scale we can make warfare on each other.
Why the bias?
I think people simply choose what suits them and find reason to justify their choice while shucking aside the hard truth.
Stalin and the USSRs policies in the early part of the last century while in many ways inhumane had a purpose. To unlock the potential of eastern Russia. You can't build or "civilize" a place without people. America on the other had was policy of simple annihilation or assimilation towards native Americans.
Mr Kowalskil seems to take this approach.
Stalin and the USSRs policies in the early part of the last century while in many ways inhumane had a purpose. To unlock the potential of eastern Russia. You can't build or "civilize" a place without people. America on the other had was policy of simple annihilation or assimilation towards native Americans.
Mr Kowalskil seems to take this approach.