[78-L] KKK records

[Michael Biel]

Bertrand CHAUMELLE wrote:
> Le 1 mars 10, à 00:51, Michael Biel a écrit :
>
>   
>> Bertrand CHAUMELLE wrote:
>>     
>>> Sorry, but I don't own a copy of 'Mein Kampf", I've never read it.
>>> However, I know it's an evil book. Can you explain that ?
>>>
>>>       
>> Because of second hand information and knowledge of what resulted from
>> those who followed his teachings.
>>     
> +++Exactly, but also:
> -teaching from my parents who endured WWII
> -instinct.
>   

Actually that is the type of examples I meant when I said "knowledge of 
what resulted from those who followed his teachings" but I didn't mean 
you would get the knowledge from the followers but from those who would 
know about his followers actions. 

>>   But the book itself is not evil, many
>> of the ideas are.  But if you read some of it you will see that these
>> evil thoughts are couched in perfectly calm and logical arguements.  It
>> is quite unlike what you expect.  Reading it give you an understanding
>> of how this madman was able to enthrall and pervert a nation.
>>     
> +++I've read a few books about the Nazi regime, that includes some 
> excerpts from 'M.K.', of course.
>   

And that is what I meant by "second hand information".  But the authors 
and researchers of those books DID actually read the book, or at least I 
hope they did -- otherwise their books would not be properly researched 
or trustworthy.

>>> I don't want to buy any KKK 78 either. But I know they're bad. Prof.
>>> Biehl said that he never listened to the songs, but he 'thinks' that
>>> they are less offensive than some 45s from the 'sixties. How come ?
>>>
>>>       
>> Because of the song titles and because I don't think it is humanly
>> possible to be more offensive than the Johnny Rebel records.  Do a
>> google search on Johnny Rebel and look at the Wikipedia  article on 
>> him,
>> and then go to the Dizzler.com page where you can hear some of this
>> bilge for yourself.  (I will not give the URLs.)
>>     
> +++No way. I trust you about that, I don't need to sample it.
>
>   
>>  I haven't  listened to
>> any of this for maybe forty years, and I'm not sure if I ever listened
>> all the way through any of them.  But you don't even need to listen to
>> know what they will be like -- the titles tell it all.
>>     
> +++Right, so it's not necessary to collect those things.
>
>   

If you want to write about them authoritatively you do need access to 
them somehow.  For example, could you write about how jazz sounded 
without ever hearing some of it?  If you did write without hearing it, 
the writing would be worthless.
>
>>> If you want to give children a lesson in history, burn those KKK
>>> records in front of them.
>>>
>>> That's my opinion, and if you think I'm 'doomed to repeat the past',
>>> you have the right to think so.
>>>       
>> You would be repeating history yourself and proving it to your children
>> that what you have learned from history are some of its worst
>> incidents.  When tyrants want to aggrandize themselves and wipe out the
>> past they disagree with, they burn the books.
>>     
> +++Of course, I've heard about autodafés and 'Fahrenheit 451'.
>   

No, I'm talking about the Nazi book burnings, not fiction. 

>>   It is a truly
>> reprehensible symbol, and I am surprised to hear an intelligent person
>> suggesting such a foul deed.
>>     
> +++That's because you give too much importance to the 'symbol' aspect. 
>   

No, I'm talking about what actually happened in 1933 when the Nazi book 
burnings was just a part of the suppression of the ideas in those books 
-- it included the disbanding of schools and eventually the murder of 
the writers and the readers.

> I see those stupid records had dead things, dead leaves that you can 
> burn in your backyard when winter comes, nothing more.
>   

You only wish they were dead things.  The Nazis hoped the things they 
burned were dead things -- fortunately they weren't.  And there ARE 
those that still believe in these things also -- and pretending they 
aren't there won't cause them to disappear.

>>  Burning the history of the past will not
>> stop it, it only leaves you and your children ignorant and defenseless.
>>     

> +++I'm not totally ignorant, I told you . I know enough. And if you 
> think preserving dead artefacts will CURE and PREVENT racism, you 
> couldn't be more wrong.
>   

I never said or thought it would.  My purpose is to instruct US of what 
went on in the past.

> Here in France, there was a record label, SERP, dedicated to that kind 
> of documents: Hitler speeches, and so on. Do you think its purpose was 
> to enlighten the masses and to avoid the propagation of racism ? 

But it could be used that way.

> SERP 
> was owned by the extreme-right political leader Jean-Marie Le Pen, 
> Hitler's most fervent admirer. He's still around, by the way.
> On TV, we have a French-German channel, the 5th, airing very frequently 
> movies about the Holocaust.
> Believe me, racist acts are on the rise everywhere in France, in 
> stadiums, in cemetaries...
>
>   

... in government decrees. 

>> But history is repeating itself  It may happen sooner than you think.
>>     
> +++I know that history is repeating itself. We could speak about 
> Serbia, for instance. How that tragedy could have been prevented ? By 
> telling the 'history of the past' to determined racists ? I just don't 
> believe it's efficient.
>
> BC
>   

No, the knowledge of the past is for those who could have prevented it 
-- to help them to have recognized the signs of what was possibly coming 
again because it is how it happened the earlier time.

Mike Biel mbiel at mbiel.com