71–80 of 220 posts
Quoted post unavailable.
Franco was so bad that a law had to be enacted recently to stop people from cherishing him.
What are the bad parts? I ask as a genuine question, the only bad things I can find is poor treatment of jews and killing of political opponents, which is pretty similar to everything else that was going on at the time, and seems tame contrasted against communist powers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Openly” is probably going to throw some people off here, because it’s knowable history but not widely broadcasted or widely known. I think (and hope) your intent is to draw the parallel so similar programs targeting natives in the US (and Canada, I’ll add, they seldom diverge very far) can be viewed in the same light. I’m not adding much nuance besides noting that your wording could be misinterpreted as a dismissive…
I was saying these programs don't need to be run by fascist dictators who forged documents far away in the distant past. The democratic US either did or does the same kind of thing without that kind of deception.
Quoted post unavailable.
No need for the clarification, it's easy to tell.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was going to say the Catholic Church often seems to be at the center of these regimes, but I guess we all see things through our own lens.
Do you have rationale supporting the hand of the Church in fascist regimes? The Catholic Church expressed its rejection of fascism via the strongest possible channel: an encyclic written by Pius XI in 1937, _Mit Brennender Sorge_, was read during the Sunday mass in all churches of Germany although the Nazis were already repressing opponents. Even more: according to statistical studies, out of many socioeconomic varia…
The Vatican was gifted to Church by… fascists.
What an incredible thing to do - to steal someone's child and raise it and love it as your own. Why didn't they adopt orphans? Were there none?
The article touches on this - the practise began with orphans (from the regiemes executions!) and illegitimate children from poor single mothers handed over to the church. But as social mores changed in the sixties, single parenting was not such a social stigma and so the "supply" dried up. At this point the church had people "alongside" management of hospitals etc, so the institutions were compromised, and the next…
This doesn't seem drastically different than what was openly happening to Native Americans in the US until the passage of the Indian Child Welfare Act in 1978. By some estimates, as many as 3/4ths of Native American children were taken from their families for adoption or foster care. And that's assuming the law stopped the practice, some states still see many Native American children shipped to non-Native communities…
Quoted post unavailable.
> they were openly called fascist By whom? Some political factions before the war were close to Italian fascism but the after-war dictatorship was not fascist in any meaningful sense.
I don't mind the title, and I know that it was only semi-fascist, but the main point I'm making is that the title seems to bring about connotations that might not warrant it (from my casual observations).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
directly from the article: "But one of the most lasting abuses of the era was borne by children. In the late 1930s and 1940s, Antonio Vallejo-Nájera, a leading psychiatrist in the regime who was trained in Nazi Germany, promoted the idea of a Marxist “red gene” carried by the children of Franco’s left-wing opponents. The gene, he said, might be suppressed by removing children from their mothers and placing them with…
> Antonio Vallejo-Nájera was explicit about the political/eugenic character of these transfers There's nothing "eugenic" about a policy with a premise of "these children have bad genes, but we can overcome that by getting the right people to raise them". That is the opposite of eugenics.
These forms of eugenics that stop one level before literal Nazi Lebensborn programs are by no means less vile and came in many different forms during the 19th and 20th century. They're no less deserving of the label.
Medicine and psychiatry often seem to be at the center of these regimes. Is there sometihng about doctors and ideology that goes so closely together? Maybe it's the pretext the regimes to suspend rules and rationality. German doctors began a "euthenasia" program several years before the war broke out, and no governing body of theirs seems to have historically been above using prisoners for medical experiments. Even r…
My understanding is the German “euthanasia” program didn’t start until after after the war began. Not in big numbers anyway.
So you have a source?