Tag: history

Reminder: Holocaust victims weren’t killed in ovens…

I hate to go and ruin the fun in historical acts of genocide, but this seemingly minor detail of a myth is one worth straightening out: victims of the Nazi’s weren’t killed in ovens.

This historical correction comes on the heels of a quote getting buzz by critics of Mike Huckabee who, in a condemnation of the Obama administrations nuclear deal with Iran (a nation dedicated to “wiping Israel off the map” in one way or another).

The actual quote isn’t anything remarkable, but got a lot of coverage because of the specific holocaust reference he used.

“This president’s foreign policy is the most feckless in American history. It is so naive that he would trust the Iranians. By doing so, he will take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven. This is the most idiotic thing, this Iran deal. It should be rejected by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress and by the American people. I read the whole deal. We gave away the whole store. It’s got to be stopped.”

As a political story, this doesn’t interest me because there’s no reason it should. The Left tried to exploit it as a big deal. It was misconstrued as every Nazi-related analogy is. Other 2016 Primary Republicans had to play the “agree or disagree with what the Left says is a big deal” game (Rick Santorum said right-on – Jeb Bush said tone it down). Huckabee doubled down on the sentiment. blah blah blah.

But what no one is mentioning in any of the coverage is the misleading history in the comment. Jews weren’t “marched to the ovens” in the holocaust. Ovens weren’t a method of slaughter.

It’s an easy mix-up to make since the holocaust is known for mass killing and mass body burning, so skipping over the part where the bodies were dead and mashing it with the part where people were murdered in unconventional methods is a common jumble. I used to be one of the mixer-uppers. Around 2008 when I was baking a pizza and I opened the lid, causing the wave of heat to hit me in the face, I had an immediate empathic PTSD-style flashback of how holocaust victims had to have felt dying this way. Everyones worst way to die is burning, and even if you’re not claustrophobic – the addition of being in a casket sized space is a tremendous horror. Everyone who has had a loved one cremated has had their mind go to the morbid “what if” thought of their own death being misdiagnosed somehow and waking up just as they were being put into the crematory oven. *shudder*


Survivors of the Dachau concentration camp demonstrate the operation of the crematorium by preparing a corpse to be placed into one of the ovens. Dachau, Germany, April 29-May 10, 1945. Credit.

But if there’s a bright side to horrific senseless mass murder, there is the comfort that this didn’t happen in the concentration camps of the holocaust. Back when I had my pizza vision, I looked up how many people died this way and could only find one or two instances of a prisoner being put into a crematorium oven alive as a special punishment.

I blame for this myth, the intentionally-offensive joke regarding exactly this connection between the best thing on earth (pizza) and the worst thing on earth (burning alive) that goes “Q: What’s the difference between a Jew and a pizza? A: the pizza doesn’t scream when you put it in the oven.” Womp womp. But you’ll be shocked to find out that the normally reliable factually rigorous nature of anti-semitism has, in this instance, failed on accuracy. Idk about you, but I did Nazi that coming.

But for real, guys: Victims murdered by the Nazi’s were shot or gassed to death en masse. Their bodies were carried to crematoriums afterward. Yet a lot of people, evidently a 2016 Presidential candidate included, seem to think mass oven killing went on in the holocaust.

While Huckabee didn’t explicitly state the historical inaccuracy, it’s implied in the term “marching to the door” and he continued the implication that people were murdered by ovens when commenting on the comment afterward:

“When I talked about the oven door, I have stood at that oven door,” he said. “I know exactly what it looks like, 1.1 million people killed. For 6,000 years, Jews have been chased and hunted and killed all over this Earth, and when someone in a government says we’re going to kill them, I think, by gosh, we better take that seriously.”

It’s the Iranians who used the word Holocaust first, Huckabee said, and refused during the negotiations to recognize Israel’s right to exist.”

“They refused to tone down their rhetoric and said the Holocaust did not exist and that they’re going to wipe Israel off the map,” he said. “When people in a government position continue to say they’re going to kill you, I think somebody ought to wake up and take that seriously.”

Not withstanding dopiness of his Appeal to Authority fallacy in saying he saw the ovens in person (and I saw them on a Bing search alongside disturbing juxtapositions of actual ovens. So what?)…

 

-the rest of what he said is at least accurate. Iran brought up the holocaust first so if someone thinks the Obama deal with Iran empowers the enemy-state (as it does) then it’s not a wildly off base comment – just in-artfully stated (he should have said that it potentially makes such a march, not that it does).

 

Why This Stupid Confederate Flag Debate is Stupid

The Confederate flag should not be praised by the government and it should not be banned by it either. There’s nothing inherently wrong about the flag but it has been used for bad causes, giving the symbol a negative connotation. Thus the answer is the first sentence of this paragraph: Government is right to not endorse its use and hippies are wrong to blanketly demonize its use.

There. I solved your stupid non-problem.

How did I accomplish such a marvel? Behold, the rudimentary use of facts + situational reality. Tada!
The truth is that the flag is used as mind-numbingly ignorant symbol of un-american attitude of separation, segregation, hate, ignorance, and bad ideas in general, but also — none of that… Because the other truth is that it’s used as a legitimate symbol of history and heritage without any racial connotations whatsoever.


Dukes of Hazzard stuff is now banned due to history revisionism about the Confederate flag in the past week.

I think “pride” in the flag, or any other exclusively regional symbols, is dumb. But who cares? You’re dumb for caring. Or more likely, just ignorant. I’ve been interrogating Confederate flag supporters for over a decade trying to understand why any toolbag dummy would embrace it and while I disagree with the rationale I always receive, it’s not fair to lump the common arguments in with bigots, haters and truly evil people that include murderers and violently wicked humans.
Most often I hear displayers of the Confederate flag talk about pride in history. Which would be fine, except that history is about a war that caused an obscene amount of death that was largely over a dispute regarding the allowability of the ownership of human beings as property. and it lost. So… you’re telling me you’re proudly representing a period of historical bloodshed in the name of legal enslavement of humans that caused immense suffering and negative historical repercussions despite being an ultimate failure because….your family tree at certain points in history lived in the geographical area in which this horrible event took place? Are you THAT friggin tribal and stupid?

That’s *my* reaction at least. even though I know some of it is fairly dubious, such as the more ambiguous role that slavery played in the Civil War. My position on that has always been that yes, the war was about slavery, but yes, it is factually accurate to note the real-life conflicts of the issue and reason there was a separation attempt and ensuing war.  But despite acknowledging the nuances of the historical record – the fact remains that slavery was AN issue if not THE issue and since it’s immoral – why would you want to fly a flag that went to war to defend against encroachments into that immoral institution?

It shows you the heart of anti-americanism in the Hippie mind when they call Confederate Flag wavers racists but defended the fighters in Iraq with the emotional relation appeal trope, saying “what would YOU do if Iraq invaded YOUR city?”. So to some dummies, it’s only okay to fight and murder encroachers into your immoral bondage of innocents if you’re not American. To everyone else – we think that regardless of the prudence of resuming the Iraq war of the 90s again in the 2000s, that like the south in the Civil War – the people defending their state were resisting forces that are there to make things better for everyone. So yes we get why they feel put upon – they’re jerks. What jerk loves to be corrected or told they have to follow the same rules of decency as everyone else? Why would you lionize a losing team that fought in protection of a thing you recognize is bad?

It seems painfully obvious to me but the response I get to this reaction raises some points, not all of which are illegitimate. Bearers of the flag always tell me that no, they are not celebrating the causes of the war or it’s goal, but yes they are representing their geographical location and that that area of the globe and heritage, losing side or not – regardless of the immoral reason behind it – was the center of a lot of death and horror that people suffered through, not all of which because they were adamant supporters of slavery. I think geographical representation is dopey, but no one else does, so if you don’t think it’s horrible to feel a sports-team style kinship with your state, then there’s no reason to do so in a collection of states.

And that’s all the confederate flag is. The problem is not what it *is*, it’s what it *can be*. And it *can be* a symbol of racism, “white pride”, pro-slavery, and any other number of subsets having to do with unjust separation of races. This is why there is a conservative and liberal divide over the issue: Liberals see things in black and white (despite liking to think of themselves as doing otherwise) and thus anything that they view as possibly racist IS racist and unless it is exterminated it is contributing to “racist culture” which a large government must remedy by force. Conservatives, being less collective and more individualistic, see things more individually and draw generalizations from patterns instead of starting with a blanket rule with which to retroactively apply to everyone in all time periods. It’s how Hillary Clintons and Barack Obama can get away with being firmly against re-defining “marriage” to include same sex unions just 3 years ago but now act like only Hitler would ever say such a thing. Likewise with the flag, people selectively choose at what time a trending buzz about the meaning of a symbol dominated and retroactively apply it to all time. Only when it’s politically expedient to try to marginalize it’s opponents as bigots in order to gain power does the Left suddenly realize a position or symbol is unjust. Many people go along with it because following the herd on an issue is most natural when there are emotional appeals involved that don’t motivate resistance or opposition research. Everyone else points out the group think of the herd and is perplexed that people are actually just going along with the history revision that the flag unequivocally means horrible things. Never mind that that unequivication is brand-new (causing awkward blind-eyes to have to be turned about that time Governor Bill Clinton commemorated the Confederacy Star in the Arkansas flag or that campaign supporters for both Bill in 1992 and Hillary in 2008 distributed completely non-controversial Confederate Flag promotional items).


Source 


Source

In the reality of cold-hard-facts, there isn’t anything actually wrong with the flag. It’s not a synonymous symbol with racism or hate or the KKK – it’s a symbol of region of the country during an event that happened that was a massively big deal, forever affecting the country and what it is and what it stands for and thereby affecting world history in a major way. Remembering that with visual representation is not a bad thing. Yes, one has to deal with the fact that haters, racists, and the official organization of the KKK cult do in fact use that flag in all of those bad ways. They fly it not because they give a fig about remembering an event or because they’re such southern-state pride-ists that they want to display a symbol of their home – they see that flag as a symbol of a glorious event in where brave men gave their lives for the noble cause of keeping the negro in chains where they belong. Since that association isn’t a direct parallel, the problem becomes “what do we do when a symbol is co-opted?”.

As with every case where a symbol is used by a group, the rest of us have to decide how to respond. The Republican party is represented by an elephant. That doesn’t mean Democrats can’t enjoy a nice National Geographic special on pachyderms. Gay pride is represented by a rainbow. That doesn’t mean we forever have to associate rainbows and rainbow colors exclusively with homosexuality. The reason is because the factual reality is that groups don’t own symbols that pre-existed them. The sociological reality is that people associate things with what is familiar to them.

There are dumb reasons that are no more dumb than reasons of history and pride that aren’t objected to, and no we shouldn’t give in to any one group claiming exclusive representation to an image or symbol (and especially not if it’s a co-opt to a bad idea like Racism), but who cares?

The whole non-issue and it’s debate is stupid. The people acting like it’s a big deal whose repealing will have any affect over anything positive whatsoever are being dumb and the people who act like the importance of proud display over it is a big deal whose act is accomplishing literally anything positive whatsoever are being dumb.

My diagnosis: Stop being dumb.

Repeat after me:
The Confederate flag should not be praised by the government and it should not be banned by it either. There’s nothing inherently wrong about the flag but it has been used for bad causes, giving the symbol a negative connotation. Thus the answer is the first sentence of this paragraph: Government is right to not endorse its use and hippies are wrong to blanketly demonize its use.

Zombies vs Vampires

Since the nations birthing when the undead Colonists won the war against bloody England, the fight has raged on domestically between the vampires and the zombies. In the beginning there was the Werewolf party but when they couldn’t cut it any more, zombie Lincoln entered the stage to fight against the vampire insurgency and win the battle to keep the union intact.

this bar graph shows the effect political parties in the US government have over which is more popular..

Palin was right about Revere. Still flubbed it. Still shouldn’t and will not run for President

Sarah Palin said that Paul Revere “warned the British that they weren’t gonna be taking away our arms, by ringing those bells and making sure, as he’s riding his horse through town, to send those warning shots and bells that we were gonna be secure and we were gonna be free.”

Revere’s story is famous for warning the colonists and that is why Palins summary was a flub: because it would have been like describing Superbowl Sunday as “the time Coach whatever picked his nose on camera” – even if that really happened, thats not what the day is best known for so its poor media relations and spontaneous talking to phrase it that way.

Palin was accurate. Revere did warn the troops of exactly what she said. Scroll to page 4 in this 1789 letter maintained by the Massachusetts Historical Society, written by Revere talking about his encounter with a British soldier.

“He demanded what time I left Boston? I told him; and aded, that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.”

The people accusing Palin of silly ignorance are themselves committing the crime even though it was still a legit flub – and hell – i’m not even convinced that it wasn’t a flub due to ignorance that she just happened to be factually accurate on by coincidence.

UPDATE: I know I shouldn’t be the least bit shocked at the “conservative female is a moron” meme but I still have to admit that I’m fascinated at seeing this scenario play out again.

Rep. Michele Bachmann kicked off her presidential campaign on Monday in Waterloo, Iowa, and in one interview surrounding the official event she promised to mimic the spirit of Waterloo’s own John Wayne.

The only problem, as one eagle-eyed reader notes: Waterloo’s John Wayne was not the beloved movie star, but rather John Wayne Gacy, the serial killer.

That quote quickly circulated around the internet and cable news but it turns out not to be true. Of course it wont stop anyone from using false info to attack someone they hate, but it’s worth pointing out the ignorance at the base of this.

Mrs. Bachmann grew up in Waterloo, and used the town as the backdrop for her campaign announcement, where she told Fox News: “Well what I want them to know is just like, John Wayne was from Waterloo, Iowa. That’s the kind of spirit that I have, too.” (Someone has already posted the clip to YouTube under the name BachmannLovesGacy)

The Bachmann campaign sent this explanation: “John Wayne is from Iowa, his parents lived in Waterloo.”

So then wtf does Gacy have to do with anything? Is there any evidence that she cited a source thinking it was the actor and it turned out to be the killer? none. Of  all the things to criticize these women for – you manufacture controversies? for what gain?

And indeed his parents did in fact live briefly in Waterloo — in fact, according to “Duke: The Life and Image of John Wayne,” it’s where they met. But soon after their marriage they moved to Winterset, where Wayne was born.

It’s also worth noting that Mrs. Bachmann herself is no stranger to the actor. In the run-up to her campaign announcement she gave an interview to NewsMax.com in which she talked about him as a symbol of a good time in the country’s history.

“We’re seeing the nation move into decline. I’m not willing to do that. I’m not satisfied. I grew up with John Wayne’s America. I was proud that you grew up in John Wayne’s America: Proud to be an American, thrilled to be a patriot,” she said.

Gacy isn’t from Waterloo Iowa. He lived there briefly just like John Waynes parents. So to recap: Both John Wayne the movie actor and John Wayne Gacy the serial killer have roots in Iowa, but Michelle Bachmann is a fool for citing one because…I already forgot why. Cuz someone else lived there? Or is it really allegedly a big deal that the actors parents lived there and not him? This is stupid.

 

Why its right to celebrate Columbus Day

My first year in St Louis after my family moved from New York in the late 90s, I watched the school bus wiz by on Columbus day, confused. Evidently Missouri doesn’t give you the day off like New York did. And why the hell not? I never got an answer…

Of course Columbus Day is a perfectly legitimate holiday, despite it being protested in recent history by dumb hippies who want to hammer a propaganda message of white European evil as often as possible.

Was Chris-Co a douchebag? uh duh. wasn’t everyone back then pretty much? Did he probably do awful things? chyea. again. kinda went with the times. So what? No one is asking a religion be created around the virtues of the guy. but he did accomplish one of the biggest Historical game-changers in all recorded time, so ya – wtf is wrong with a day to acknowledge that?

Columbus discovered America. Don’t gimmie this “the native Americans discovered it” politically correct bullshit. Columbus discovered the Americas for the civilized world. Chyea, its great that there was a stoneage society already there and yes, maybe Eric the Red had bumped into the land mass before Columbus. – and? so what? Columbus’s voyage to India was what literally put America on the map. Sorry to all the hippies that love to romanticize the Native American culture in any and all of its representations, but cut the crap. You’re not in the quad with your fellow student hippies, you’re with adults, so lets be real.

Exit note: How messed up was the horrorshow that was known as “food” back then that so many expensive and life threateningly dangerous voyages were so routinely made for spices. SPICES… not gold or slaves or sex slaves or golden sex slaves – SPICES. sacks of plant extracts that made your bland and horrible meals just a tiny bit less painful to consume. gross.

Tom Hanks endorses Obama

Tom Hanks, in this video shows how to do it, if you MUST and only if you absolutely MUST endorse a presidential candidate as a celebrity: with humility, self deprecating humor, candor, and sincerity not wild eyed passion.

The only misstep I didn’t care for was his line about the country considering people of his skin color only 3/5ths of a human. Phrasing it that way is to imply that ALL people of color had that worth legally atattched to them. I’ve heard others in the media distort the history on this (none intentionally I believe) and its important to correct that the United States never said that all black people were 3 fifths of a human being. That designation was applied only to slaves, and even in 1776, not all people in America with dark skin were slaves. Michael Medved, who is a big American History afficionado (as is Tom Hanks) made an interesting point about this the other day when he said the 3 fifths designation was actually more than anti-slavery activists at the time wanted because its only purpose was Congressional designation. So in other words, if you hated slavery then you wanted slaves to be counted as 0% of a person because they weren’t allowed to vote. Counting them as 3 fifths of a person only served to seat more congressmen.

Although it’s disappointing that Hanks’ endorsement comes down to it being all about race (isn’t Obama supposed to be the ultimate non-divider?), the delivery is pleasant and not at all obnoxious, which is something other politically active celebrities could take a cue from.

Exit question: was it the best idea to hand over the subliminal metaphor of Obama’s possible campaign result in that sinking ship picture over his shoulder?