Ian Pace escribió: [quoting me]
>> I am not _that_ sure of this. The "final solution" was linked to the >> decission to wage a total war on two fronts, it was in a sense a result >> of desperation. If Hitler had managed to strike an agreement with the >> West to fight against Moscow together, then it would not be impossible >> that the German bourgeoisie had managed to replace the Nazis with a more >> sensible political group... and carry on the anti-Bolshevik parcel of >> her programme without mass murdering Jews, Gypsies or homosexuals. >> > Whilst the Final Solution was not, I believe, absolutely inevitable until > around 1941, I do feel the above tends to underplay the centrality of > anti-semitism (and anti-Gypsyism, anti-gayness, etc.) to Nazi ideology. > I would be the last guy on Earth to underplay the centrality of anti-semitism, etc., to Nazi ideology. Half my family was turned into thin hot air due to that centrality. But I would not underplay the centrality of political wisdom in the general political framework of the German bourgeoisie, which is the reason why I suggest that they would have discarded the Nazis if they had only been given a chance to strike Eastwards together with their Western counterparts. Of course, all of this is pipe dreaming. What happened, happened. Period. The single reason why I suggested a "what if" scenario was that I wanted to stress that anti-semitism, though central to the Nazis, is NOT central to imperialism. ________________________________________________ YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
