-Caveat Lector- >Synecdoche alert! > >To compare Mao, Hitler and Stalin and to compare China, Germany, and the >USSR are quite different things. To compare the Chinese, the Germans and >the Soviets is a third. Yes, I know the lives of people, the times they live in, the political forces that shape their social environment, the physical and philosophical countries they occupy, etc. are all ver y complex, distinct entities which are interrelated but should not be confused with one another when speaking of the great, historical scheme of things. It was an e-mail message referring to another e-mail message that, from the sound of your reply, you may not have completely read. Your reaction is just a bit on the pedantic side, for most everyone knows the deeply intertwined complexities of history, yet you speak as if you were instructing a third-grader of this commonly known fact. Sometimes it's easier (especially in quick, usually brief formats such as e-mail) to condense messages by omitting commonly accepted conventions in order to get to the meat of the concept. For instance, I don't have to describe the workings of the MIME e-mail format in order to send you this exceptionally well-written reply. ;-) In the same way, I shouldn't have to explain the intricacies of motivation, political forces, classes and castes of people, DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THE ACTUAL COUNTRY AND ONE OF ITS HISTORICAL LEADERS, etc. when I respond to a statement regarding what has been done by such a leader and his followers within that country. > If we are going to blame the "historical" (sic) >body count on groups of people, the Christians win hands down. Did I blame anything on anyone? If you were trying to read between the lines, you missed. In fact, I think you did more than read between the lines, you put words in my mouth that can in no way be evidenced by anything that I initially wrote. (If I were to try to read between the lines, I would say that you followed up a mistakenly diagnosed bias on my part with an ACTUAL one of your own concerning Christians. It's a good thing I'm not trying to read between the lines, however, for if I were, I would ask how you could substantiate and document YOUR numbers, especially over the 2,000 year period since Christ's birth.) >First and foremost, we must remember that there is no such thing >as a "historical" body count, except for that part of "the Holocaust" >which took place in the lager system, and even that leaves gaps in the >record. Why must WE remember that? Because YOU say numbers cannot be substantiated? Some of the numbers have been estimated from accounts of those who were there (unlike you). Not only that, but there are many official documents which indicate, both directly and indirectly, the numbers of those who were killed. It is not in any way an exact science, but to say that one cannot quantify and rank through such estimates implies that NO estimates are possible without signed, dated, and verified tally sheets. No scientist would say that they know how many stars are in the universe or how many atoms there are in a slice of bread, but they can certainly get a good enough estimate from the part of the picture they CAN see. In fact, those estimates have been sufficient to spur advances in astronomy, quantum and nuclear physics, etc. Why can't eye-witness reports and official documents be used just as a scientist might use an average count of atoms, stars, micro-organisms, etc. to estimate an entire population? >There is simply no way of knowing how many people died as a result >of orders given by Mao, Hitler, OR Stalin. The actual numbers are simply >not available. The available numbers are not reliable. First of all, an >accurate count was never taken, let alone recorded. Second, these are >among the most lied about numbers in history. Even rough approximations >are extremely difficult to sort out from the propaganda. WWII deaths alone >range in estimate from twenty to fifty million. That's a WIDE range, a >VERY wide range. It's also a matter of very biased opinion. As usual, the >correct opinion is my own, ie. one death was too many. Whether it happened >at Belsen or Sobibor, Stalingrad or Nanking, Hamburg, Dresden, Hiroshima, >Nagasaki or Tokyo matters little to the corpse. Dead is dead. Period. That's true, but I never said anyone had exact numbers. What evidence do you have that they are the most lied about numbers in history? If you do have sources, can we be sure THEY'RE not lying? Then, when you report from those sources, could we be sure that YOU are not lying? You see, when you attempt to discredit a source simply by asserting that the source has lied, you either have to doubt ALL sources or supply FACTS explaining why that one source is wrong. I prefer the second approach. If one throws out all ground as invalid, there's absolutely no ground to stand on, whether right or wrong. >What's more, it is as absurd to blame "the" Chinese, "the" Germans, and >"the" Soviets, as it is to blame Mao, Hitler and Stalin. While Mao, Hitler >and Stalin obviously didn't act alone, they in no way, shape or form acted >in concert with their entire nations. In each of their respective nations >were individuals who participated in the slaughter, both directly and >indirectly, as well as individuals who worked actively against it. Refer to my first paragraph in this message. No one said any of that. You came up with it out of some obvious need to correct others with your "enlightened" point of view. >If we are going to blame individuals for the Holocaust (for example), we >must blame the firemen on Eichmann's trains and every lowly camp guard as >surely as we blame Hitler. They were ALL following orders, even Hitler. >But are we to also blame Kathe Kolwitz or the White Rose? Were they not >Germans too? Yadda, yadda, yadda. More of the same. No one is arguing with you, and no one was trying to make such a ludicrous point! Are you so determined to set someone straight that you would actually argue such obvious points as if they were some sort of revelation to the rest of us? >While this has, as <J_HOFFA> points out, been a factor in distorting the >Holocaust in the mind of the public at large, it in no way is the primary >source of distortion. That dubious honor falls to our very definition of >the word "Holocaust." "Great or widespread destruction" is how my dictionary defines it. >Career length indeed makes these men as difficult to compare as sports >figures. Is McGuire greater that Ruth? It's too soon to tell. Even after >McGuire retires how are we to compare? Home runs per season? Total career >home runs? What about RBIs? What about TMKs (those mercilessly killed)? >Nevertheless, the real problem in evaluation of Mao's, Hitler's and >Stalin's careers as murderers lies in how we define murderer. Once again, "one person who kills another" is the most common definition. >As for Mao, it could be argued that a great many of the needless deaths >incurred at his command weren't murder at all, but manslaughter. Manslaughter is a mere legal distinction meant to lessen the sentence for those who acted out of carelessness, anger, etc. However, once someone has killed by premeditated intent, manslaughter just adds meaningless years to what is already a sentence of life. Therefore, your distinction as a legal point is meaningless as well. >Besides, there is no need to inflate >the number of people murdered at Mao's orders. There's more than enough, >even by the roughest estimate. Are you making my point for me? Did I state a number which inflated your statement about "tens of millions" being killed. I think you are working against yourself. I only spoke in general, not quantifiable, terms. ><J_HOFFA> is clearly not a Holocaust denier. Nor am I. He is not even, >as judged by what I've read so far, a revisionist. I, however, AM a >Holocaust revisionist and you should be to. Here's why. The numbers >should be revised UPWARD. More people died in the Holocaust than are >normally considered to have done so. The numbers are too low, WAY too low. >The commonly quoted figure of "the" six million, is totally deceptive and >distortionist. First of all, even if we are to limit the definition of >"the Holocaust" to those who died in the lager system, we're looking at >roughly THIRTEEN million people. Do you want me to pay you for making my point for me? How can you deny the credibility of ANY estimates in one paragraph and then quote them to make your point in another? <BIG SNIP, oh, a REALLY big snip!> I have neither the time or inclination to respond to the rest of your logically unsound forty-seven pages of reply. There is always an inherent danger about writing so incredibly much about so little (my 3 or 4 paragraphs, that is). The reaction has to, at some point, move dangerously out of proportion to the initial message. In fact, most of what you wrote had almost nothing to do with the few facts you could glean from my short message (written to someone else, by the way). So many forests have been consumed in writing about the Bible that all of it conflicts on many hundreds of thousands of points. It is not possible for ALL of it to be sound and true. It is the same with the works of Shakespeare. So you see, in taking my small message and blowing it out of proportion as if it were some kind of huge research document that says more than it actually does, you have committed a grave error of logic, judgment, and common sense, which most of the writings I referred to have done, by the way. If you have any further comments, I suggest you send them directly to me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] because I doubt all the subscribers want to continue reading our points of contention. (They may enjoy reading how I logically kicked your figurative butt, though.) :-) HOFFA P.S. Work toward a more fulfilling, satisfying quality of life, and you may no longer feel the need to argue with yourself over these matters. You obviously weren't arguing with ME! DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
