The Holocaust was not Hitlers design, if anything Hitler was perhaps "cruel" and "thoughtless" for not stopping it but to be fair, the Jews were considered the slime and vermin of society in not only Germany, but in Russia as well as England.
Hitler is not evil, hes just a man following social ideology to gain power and become populour to his people, althouh he didnt actually order the Holocaust. But as Chithappens has said, there have been cruel events across time, every nation has cruel tendancies, nations today for example are basically controlling the minds of people through diffrent types of propaganda and forms, I think destroying/breaking human freewill into an invisible slavery is nearly as bad as the Holocaust.
Originally posted by chithappens
Every nation-state established has used similar ideology at some point in it's history.I fail to see the difference.
Prove that Norway ever used a similar ideology.
Originally posted by Burning thought
The Holocaust was not Hitlers design, if anything Hitler was perhaps "cruel" and "thoughtless" for not stopping it but to be fair, the Jews were considered the slime and vermin of society in not only Germany, but in Russia as well as England.Hitler is not evil, hes just a man following social ideology to gain power and become populour to his people, althouh he didnt actually order the Holocaust. But as Chithappens has said, there have been cruel events across time, every nation has cruel tendancies, nations today for example are basically controlling the minds of people through diffrent types of propaganda and forms, I think destroying/breaking human freewill into an invisible slavery is nearly as bad as the Holocaust.
Hitler was insane.
He was declared insane around WW1.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Crazy =/= Evil
I never made that claim.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The nation that didn't even recognize the idea of hate crimes until 2007?
Eh, proof?
We've always had laws that guaranteed equality and forbade people from discriminating others because of gender, race, orientation and so on. Jens Storberget changed it in 2007, but it has always been dealt with, just in a different manner.
Originally posted by llagrok
I never made that claim.
Then why did you respond to the charge "Hitler wasn't evil." with "Hitler was insane."?
😕
Originally posted by llagrok
Eh, proof?We've always had laws that guaranteed equality and forbade people from discriminating others because of gender, race, orientation and so on. Jens Storberget changed it in 2007, but it has always been dealt with, just in a different manner.
Not much, I did a search for "norway hate crimes" and something came up with a quote from 2007 about how they were going to start prosecuting people for "so called hate crimes" that made it sound like they hadn't been doing that before.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Hate crimes obviously are a shit idea anyways.
Yeah, what the odds that someone might do something criminal out of hatred? Probably incalculable.
Originally posted by Kovacs86
Oh obviously. I say we go and blow up the mental institutions before those freaks come and eat our babies...
How does that even begin to follow from what I said?
Originally posted by Burning thought
If Hitler was declared insane and its true then he cannot be Evil
explain plz?
one would think evil and sanity are not necessarily co-related variables
especially considering "sane" is a largely contextually defined category
(and the fact Hitler was capable of living a normal [re:extrodinary] life, immediatly disqualifies him from any modern definition of mental disability)
Originally posted by Bardock42
Hate crimes obviously are a shit idea anyways.
agreed
for another reason: they are totally ineffective and beuracratic anyways. A pair of men in the states sprayed a chemical into the nursery of a mosque while prayers were in session. Because the [white] men didn't say something racist and didn't specifically, i dont know, like spray paint kkk stuff everywhere, the police couldn't call it a hate crime.
not that I think they need to be harder on hate crimes or anything, but if that doesn't qualify for one.... useless laws.
Originally posted by inimalist
agreedfor another reason: they are totally ineffective and beuracratic anyways. A pair of men in the states sprayed a chemical into the nursery of a mosque while prayers were in session. Because the [white] men didn't say something racist and didn't specifically, i dont know, like spray paint kkk stuff everywhere, the police couldn't call it a hate crime.
not that I think they need to be harder on hate crimes or anything, but if that doesn't qualify for one.... useless laws.
Actually that's just the system choosing when to implement the law. It is clearly a "hate" crime.
Originally posted by inimalist
explain plz?one would think evil and sanity are not necessarily co-related variables
especially considering "sane" is a largely contextually defined category
(and the fact Hitler was capable of living a normal [re:extrodinary] life, immediatly disqualifies him from any modern definition of mental disability)
If a man is truly mad, then he doesnt know much of what hes doing, he doesnt see thingsthe way soceity does, this doesnt make him evil though does it....no ofc not, if hes mad then he would be infact far less evil than a man who was 100% sane and doing these things.
Originally posted by Burning thought
If a man is truly mad, then he doesnt know much of what hes doing, he doesnt see thingsthe way soceity does, this doesnt make him evil though does it....no ofc not, if hes mad then he would be infact far less evil than a man who was 100% sane and doing these things.
so you get your definition of evil from cartoon super villainy?
obviously evil people will be called mad by society. Can you provide logic that shows they are mutually exclusive?
put simply, I don't believe intent is what defines evil, but in fact, knowable causation. Whether it is madness or personal whim that leads an individual to knowingly cause evil, it is still evil.
EDIT: this is all moot though, as Hitler fails any standard for insane except for moralistic ones, which are subjective at best.