Banality of evil

[BarryW]

The question of why normally sane civilian people do terrible things is interesting. As a result of my interest in modelling WWII propeller aircraft I have clarified my mind on this issue a bit, partly through some fairly recent programmes on TV, and during talks given by an excellent history teacher.The TV programmes (and other sources) said that the German people, having gone through the horrors of inflation etc. in the 1930s, welcomed relief. Hitler, a great orator, offered them a new life. In doing so he taught the people that they were above others, a master race, hijacking Nietzsche's Ubermench,. (Being German, they did and believed what they were told.) This led to them supporting Hitler when he should have been seen even by Germans as a tyrant, especially after the deportation and mass killing of Jews. This would partly explain the conundrum which has puzzled me as to why the German people supported the war right up to the Russians reaching Hitler's bunker, when it was very clear that the war was lost. Even Hariss's carpet bombing had little practical effect: raids with 1,000 bombers, each bomber with ten bombs. (Part of the reason of course was the rifles of the Gestapo pointing at anyone who objected). This support for Hitler seems to have a parallel in the British who enthusiastically supported the Empire and all its suppressive activities right up to the 1950s, e.g. the earlier Indian Mutiny, and in the case of the Mau Mau rebellion in the 1950s it should have been clear that withdrawal was both the honourable and practical thing to do.

The history talks centred on the nature of Fascism, Communism, Conservatism and Liberalism. We were told that Communism has at least an intellectual basis: the people ruling themselves under a benign people-oriented government. But Fascism lacks any such basis, being tyrant-based: "I hoodwink the people about what is best for them and they will obey me or else."

I'm not a historian. I just pick up stuff here and there.

PS: Can it really have been 1,000 bombers per raid?

I don't think you can call Communism as people ruling themselves under a benign people-orientated government'. The Soviet Union was as bad as Hitler, maybe even worse under Stalin, Steve.

Neither do I think you can provide the British Empire as a parallel either. Sure some terrible things were done, by modern day standards, but that needs to be judged by the standards of the time and, as Empires go, it was a pretty benign one. Dyer's actions at Amritrar were described by Churchill (a great supporter of Empire) as 'monstrous and after the massacre (much exaggerated and embroidered by many) a delegation of Indian shopkeepers visited Dyer to thank him! Then look at the slave trade - yes it made huge sums for Britain but nevertheless it was rightly abolished by the British parliament, losing £billions in trade plus £billions more were spent to stamp it out and enforce the ban. Indeed it was only possible to stamp it out because of the extent, power and wealth of Empire. Looking at the British Empire as a whole and in a balance way it was by no means bad. You cannot say that about Hitler's National Socialists.

[spanner570]

Here's a little story my late dad told me when I questioned the awful things that happened during WW2.

"Son" he said. "Awful things were done by all sides, but sometimes the good side shines through."

This is what he told me.....

He was in the far east, serving with the RAF Regiment, who job it was, amongst other things, to consolidate captured airfields.

At one particular airstrip there were half a dozen captured Japanese soldiers who were working in a trench clearing out some oil drums from the bottom, my dad was guarding them. One of the prisoners refused to lift one of the drums miming it was too heavy.

My dad jumped down into the trench and flung one of the drums over the edge - which, by pure good luck, was empty! He then pointed his sten gun at the prisoner. The poor bloke, thinking my dad was super strong and he was going to be shot, fell on his knees and started to cry, and at the same time fumbled inside his tunic and pulled out a photo of his family.

This horrified my dad so much that he knelt down by his side and produced a picture of my mum...He too started to cry......

Two human beings sat in a trench in Burma, miles from home, sharing family photos.

So sometimes good things do happen in war.......especially when there are no thugs and evil people around.

I posted this story on here a long while back, so apologies for it's second outing.

[stona]

Steve you may find Goldenhagen's book something of a help in understanding what led a perfectly normal, cultured and civilised people like the Germans down the path they took in the 1930s and 40s.

A warning. Goldenhagen has come in for much criticism and I do not agree with his central tenet nor share his indictment of a whole people, I think it is simplistic. He does help understand the moral, cultural, even economic circumstances that allowed the holocaust to happen. Unlike Goldenhagen I think something like a holocaust could have been perpetrated by just about any European culture in different circumstances. I do not believe that what he calls "eliminationist antisemitism" had to be necessarily a product of German culture.

The book does dispel many popular myths and is certainly an interesting read, whether you agree with him or not.

"Hitler's Willing Executioners - Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust" Daniel Goldenhagen ISBN 0679446958

My edition is 622 pages long so it will keep you going for a while!

Cheers

Steve

[Guest]

What a truly interesting thread. I know very little about this history and this has made me want to know a lot more about these event

[eddiesolo]

Your story Ron is similar to an experience that a friend of mines Grandfather had.

He was a rear turret gunner on Lancs and in one particular instance a German fighter came in from behind, higher and to one side, he fired a burst into the Lanc, then shot underneath, came around again and fired again. My mates Grandfather fired his guns also at the fighter.

Years later after the war, he was in a hotel in London and overheard a man talking in English, although with German accent, about an incident with a bomber, he remembered the letters and number on the aircraft and was telling this guy how the rear gunner had locked onto him and had given him a good 'peppering'. The man then moved his hairline to show a diminishing scar that ran along his scalp. At this my mates Grandfather, who was not very keen on 'those bloody jerries' got up and walked over. The German pilot looked at him and smiled and asked if he was all right. My mates Grandfather smiled back and offered him his hand, they may have been on differing sides but a common bond had formed between them. They corresponded for many years after becoming good friends.

Friendships borne through war and friendships lost through war...it's a strange world.

Si

[stona]

quote="Stevekir, post: 180501, member: 22067"]

PS: Can it really have been 1,000 bombers per raid?

It could be though it was very much an exception.

Historical context.

Air Marshall Richard Pierce was removed as C-in-C bomber Command on 8th January 1942. Air Vice Marshall Baldwin (previously commander of 3 Group) took over as an interim C-in-C. The famous (or infamous) "area bombing" directive was sent to Bomber Command on 14th February 1942.

"It has been decided that the primary objective of your operations should now be focussed on the morale of the enemy civil population and in particular of the industrial workers."

The next day Portal wrote to Air Vice Marshall Bottomley, who had drafted the directive to Bomber Command.

"Ref the new bombing directive. I suppose it is clear that the aiming points are to be the built up areas, not, for instance, the dockyards or aircraft factories where these are mentioned in Appendix A.

This must be made quite clear if it is not already understood."

Now all they needed was a new C-in C to carry out the job and on 22nd February Air Chief Marshall Sir Arthur Harris took up the reigns.

The first thousand bomber raid was that on Cologne on 30/31 May 1942. 1,047 aircraft were dispatched and between 868 and 898 aircraft bombed Cologne, depending whether you believe Bomber Command's "Night Bombing Sheets" or the Official History.

Bomber Command struggled to field the so called "thousand force". The next raid on Essen actually comprised 956 aircraft. Most raids comprised far fewer bombers. Even the notorious Dresden raid was carried out by 796 Lancasters and 9 Mosquitos.

Zoom in on this image and scroll....and scroll....and scroll.



Cheers

Steve

Image edited for higher res version. Which doesn't seem to have worked, oh well, you can get the idea.

[Guest]

I don't think you can call Communism as people ruling themselves under a benign people-orientated government'. The Soviet Union was as bad as Hitler, maybe even worse under Stalin, Steve.Neither do I think you can provide the British Empire as a parallel either. Sure some terrible things were done, by modern day standards, but that needs to be judged by the standards of the time and, as Empires go, it was a pretty benign one. Dyer's actions at Amritrar were described by Churchill (a great supporter of Empire) as 'monstrous and after the massacre (much exaggerated and embroidered by many) a delegation of Indian shopkeepers visited Dyer to thank him! Then look at the slave trade - yes it made huge sums for Britain but nevertheless it was rightly abolished by the British parliament, losing £billions in trade plus £billions more were spent to stamp it out and enforce the ban. Indeed it was only possible to stamp it out because of the extent, power and wealth of Empire. Looking at the British Empire as a whole and in a balance way it was by no means bad. You cannot say that about Hitler's National Socialists.

On the Soviet Union itself, I agree, but I meant that Communism (unlike Fascism) had in principle a benign objective, and in theory could have produced a happy and prosperous country. Fascism, however, is most unlikely to do that.

I also agree that the Empire had good features (although not from the point of view, at the time, of many Indians, aborigines, Zulus etc.) Perhaps India is a better place today, for Indians, as a result of British-imposed democracy. I don't know enough about history to be able to reach conclusions on our ex-colonies in Africa, Malaya etc.

I always feel queazy about "...needs to be judged by the standards of the time" arguments. Most of Europe has had the benefit of, and been instructed by the tenets of the Christian Church, yet many acts grossly contrary to them were never-the-less carried out, some even by the Church! (I'm not religious, be the way.) Perhaps some of the Wars of the Roses, The Spanish in South America, extermination of the Tasmanian aborigines in the early 1800s, the Massacre of the Sioux at Wounded Knee by the US military (where the number killed was, I have read, greater than that of the Holocaust). These are surely stains on what it means to be human. (The persecution and killing of the Jews in Germany does not count because it was contrary to the standards of the time.)

All this is bordering on Philosophy, an interesting subject.

[Guest]

Cheers

Steve

Interesting, but I can't view the image (apart from seeing it embedded in your message).

[stona]

Right click and "save picture as" whatever you ike on your desk top. You should then be able to open it with a double click in your default image programme and zoom.

The only problem is that I have uploaded a low res version which will just look like a load of blurry outlines when zoomed. I'll try to find the original and edit my post!

Cheers

Steve