Only Nixon can go to China.
Only a conservative political leader who was a captain on the Eastern Front telling the nation that it was time to acknowledge the past and look to the future could be heard.
Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
11–20 of 110 posts
Re: Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
#12The honesty and bravery of the speech is remarkable - that a leader can tell those he leads painful and difficult truths - rather than tell them merely what will appease them. Everyday we see evidence of how easy it is to appeal to base and superficial feelings, rather than what is noble and honest.
There is so much we can learn from both the causes of the tyranny and how the aftermath was handled, politically, personally and socially.
Re: Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
#13This passage near the end resonated with me:
"In our country, a new generation has grown up to assume political responsibility. Our young people are not responsible for what happened over forty years ago. But they are responsible for the historical consequences. We in the older generation owe to young people not the fulfilment of dreams but honesty. We must help younger people to understand why it is vital to keep memories alive. We want to help them to accept historical truth soberly, not one-sidedly, without taking refuge in utopian doctrines, but also without moral arrogance.
From our own history we learn what man is capable of. For that reason we must not imagine that we are now quite different and have become better. There is no ultimately achievable moral perfection – for no individual and for no nation. We have learned as human beings, and as human beings we remain in danger. But we have the strength to overcome such danger again and again.
Hitler's constant approach was to stir up prejudices, enmity and hatred. What is asked of young people today is this: do not let yourselves be forced into enmity and hatred of other people, of Russians or Americans, Jews or Turks, of alternatives or conservatives, blacks or whites. Learn to live together, not in opposition to each other."
Re: Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
#14It's educational how Germany's East / West division reverberates in this speech with the special relation to the USSR. The apologetic tone, appeasement, justification. One can only hope that this would no longer be necessary nowadays.
Why would apology no longer be necessary? The crimes committed by Germans against the population of the USSR are unspeakable.
One can only hope that apologies like these will never again be necessary.
Re: Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
#15It's educational how Germany's East / West division reverberates in this speech with the special relation to the USSR. The apologetic tone, appeasement, justification. One can only hope that this would no longer be necessary nowadays.
Why would apology no longer be necessary? The crimes committed by Germans against the population of the USSR are unspeakable. One can only hope that apologies like these will never again be necessary.
And the USSR undertook the greatest ethnic cleansing of the 20th century in response. Should they apologize for that?
Re: Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
#16It is a famous and well written speech, made at a time when Germany was still a cohesive country and WWII criminals were still alive. I don't see the relevance when we face completely different issues nowadays. European/German guilt has been used to justify a lot of measures that strangely enough always benefited the upper class and the stock market. Perhaps there should be a new Weizsaecker speech.
> made at a time when Germany was still a cohesive country
It's from 1985, Germany was already divided for 36 years.
Re: Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
Different issues, still generally applicable principles. Yes, there should be a new Wiezsaecker speech. I just doubt it would be what you think, considering your views on "German/European guilt".
I have German citizenship but have not lived in Germany since my teens, so I'm a bit ignorant of the political situation these days. How would you summarize GP's views on German/European guilt?
It's probably a reference to immigration and how it (in their view) only benefited Capital owners.
Re: Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would apology no longer be necessary? The crimes committed by Germans against the population of the USSR are unspeakable. One can only hope that apologies like these will never again be necessary.
And the USSR undertook the greatest ethnic cleansing of the 20th century in response. Should they apologize for that?
The USSR ethnically cleansed Germany in response? What? Or do you mean something else?
Had Nazi Germany prevailed, it is estimated about 30 million of all Slavs in Eastern Europe would have been cleansed, as per the stated goals of Generalplan Ost [1]. Getting rid of "undesirables" and "surplus population" on one of the widest scales mankind had ever seen was one of the main goals of Nazi expansion. They started to carry out this plan, but thankfully losing the war put a stop to that.
On the other hand, the USSR did prevail, and made East Germany into a puppet state. We can see the results without speculation. Indeed this resulted in repression and suppression and execution of political dissidents, let's not mince words here. But there are still Germans alive, aren't there? Had Nazi Germany prevailed, there would be few, if any, Slavs -- Russians, Poles or whatever -- alive today.
The two cases aren't even remotely comparable.
----
Re: Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have German citizenship but have not lived in Germany since my teens, so I'm a bit ignorant of the political situation these days. How would you summarize GP's views on German/European guilt?
It's probably a reference to immigration and how it (in their view) only benefited Capital owners.
Is it taboo in Germany to suggest that increasing the supply of labour would drive down the price?
Re: Weizsäcker's speech on 40th anniversary of WW2's end (1985)
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have German citizenship but have not lived in Germany since my teens, so I'm a bit ignorant of the political situation these days. How would you summarize GP's views on German/European guilt?
It's probably a reference to immigration and how it (in their view) only benefited Capital owners.
Immigration is recent and secondary (but also a factor). The Euro and eastern expansion of the EU came first. The Euro was directly justified with historical references and allegedly a precondition for the German reunification.
The Euro made companies rich and the population poor.