Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsri!utcs!mnetor!clewis From: clewis@mnetor.UUCP Newsgroups: can.general Subject: Re: War Criminals Message-ID: <465@mnetor.UUCP> Date: Thu, 25-Apr-85 00:48:34 EST Article-I.D.: mnetor.465 Posted: Thu Apr 25 00:48:34 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 25-Apr-85 01:35:00 EST References: <2186@utcsstat.UUCP> <458@mnetor.UUCP> <616@utcs.UUCP> Reply-To: clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis) Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada Lines: 74 Summary: Alex, True, one is guilty in any of the circumstances that you name. Ignorance of the law has been never a particularly good excuse. However, none of the situations that you suggest are parallels to what happened in WW II. The level of propaganda (and the creation of laws and/or violent repression to support them) was *very* high in pre-war Germany. In fact, instead of "ignorance of the law" the defence used was more "in accordance with our law". Nuremburg's claim to validity was thru application of some "higher - moral law" (which was the only way they could prosecute). A closer parallel to what actually happened to many (though certainly not all) of the Germans in WW II is something like this: Take someone of relatively normal (or slightly sub-normal) intelligence and subject them to 10 or more years of state-supported brainwashing specifically designed to produce hatred. Then, give him a gun and tell him to kill those people he's been taught to hate. Also, make it impossible for him to see any counteracting information. Also, make it clear that disobedience means death. [ kinda sounds like the normal preparations for war doesn't it? However, Hitler wanted and achieved a far greater effect by completely eliminating the concept of "mercy" ] Who's guilty in this case? Depending on the precise circumstances, our laws would probably exonerate many such people. For example, if you can somehow control someone of reduced capacity sufficiently to order him to kill someone you are guilty of murder, not the "tool". As mentioned earlier in another newsgroup, the veneer (sp?) of civilization of human beings is VERY thin. To our own shame, it is shockingly easy to strip off this layer (when given sufficient power to manipulate) and produce the beast. The beast is in all of us (though it is a lot closer to the surface in some). You might want to go through the life-boat discussions in net.flame for examples. In Hitler's Germany the manipulators (creators of policy) are to blame - rarely the foot soldiers. And, most of the manipulators are dead now. However, the potential of present and future manipulators frighten me (eg: the current militarization of the U.S., Right-wing religious groups, fanatics and terrorists). Alex, the remarks about reciprocal atrocities were more of a side-comment, and I know that Fred did not intend to have them somehow apply to lessening the guilt of the guilty in ANY situation. My remarks were mainly to debunk the "we've never done it myth". [ as many consider Dresden, Nagasaki, and the population-centre-fire-bombing of Japan to be atrocities too (along with a lot of considerably clearer and lesser cases). BTW: I'm not particularly certain what I think about the cases I mentioned myself - I don't know enough about the reasoning behind them. With my current knowledge, I would tend to agree with the actions w.r.t. Hiroshima, but not Nagasaki and the fire-bombing. I just don't know about Dresden (though I think I go along with Kurt Vonnegut on this - he is very strongly anti-war but he had some very interesting comments w.r.t. WW II which many didn't expect). ] -- Help save Canadian Beavers from being Sterilized! Chris Lewis, Computer X (CANADA) Ltd. UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis BELL: (416)-475-1300 ext. 321