--- Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Perhaps it isn't clear that this is about context, > not facts. Clearly, > Gautam knows the facts. My objection is the failure > to contextualize the > Vichy "government" as a puppet of the Nazis, with > policies that did not > exist before or after. Its behavior should never be > interpreted as > representative of France. > > The words that sparked this were, "The Vichy > government could, at the least, > have pretended to care about preserving the lives of > its Jewish citizens, > instead of shipping them off with enthusiasm," in a > comparison of national > behavior during WWII. Substitute an appropriate > description and the > sentence becomes almost oxymoronic: "The Nazi puppet > government could, at > the least, have pretended to care about preserving > the lives of its Jewish > citizens, instead of shipping them off with > enthusiasm." Who would expect > Nazi puppets *not* to collaborate? > > Perhaps what Gautam meant to say was that "The > people of France could have > fought harder against the Nazis and their puppet > French government, which > collaborated by shipping Jews off with enthusiasm." > > Nick
I would go so far as to say that the people of France could hardly have fought less hard. But the Vichy government, as I've pointed out several times, and as you've never even attempted to rebut, had a non-trivial degree of independence from Nazi control. They didn't just ship the Jews off - they seem to have done it without even batting an eye. _In Germany itself_ the Nazi government did not force _anyone_ to participate in the murder of Jews. Anyone who opted out was free to do so. Danny Goldhagen documented this extensively, but it's always been fairly clear. In Vichy France, which was not even under German occupation, there was (obviously) considerably more freedom to act. People did not do so. They did not even try. My comments were in fine context, and - despite all of your gratuitous insults - you have not even attempted to rebut their central context, which is that everyone in France, from Vichy to the average Jean Winebottle in Paris, had a choice to act differently, and they almost all failed. Italy was an Axis country - it did not participate in the same way. Bulgaria was an allied Axis power - it succeeded in saving almost all of its Jews. Denmark was a country under occupation, with an occupation government, and they managed it too. But France, where the German boot fell lightest - in France, things didn't go so well. The parable to the US you made was a poor one, but it is illuminating in one sense. If the US was under such occupation, what would happen? Well, I hope to God that if I wasn't dead, I'd be helping to smuggle Jews out of the country, and I'm confident that the rest of the population would do the same. If we failed to do so, and only America east of the Mississippi was occupied, but America west of the Mississippi was run by a government that, although under threat of enemy attack, was not, in fact, occupied, and America west of the Mississippi kept shipping its Jews off to death camps too - well then, I'd say that everyone save those who fought or died fighting was complicit in what happened. There was more than enough sin to go around. You seem reluctant to judge everyone but the American government (and conservatives in general, I guess - I'm not going to forget the fascist slander, implied though it might have been) but this is a situation that cries out for judgment. Gautam __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online http://webhosting.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
