Quote:

---

And I think that Americans get overwhelmed with the amazing amount of prejudice and violence that the Nazis propogated, reviling them for their flaws

---

Killing six million Jews and perhaps four million Slavs is a "FLAW"?

No. Poor infrastructure, high unemployment, government corruption.... those are "flaws". Killing millions of people because of racist ideology is an ABOMINATION.

Quote:

---

while seeming to forget our own prejudices and violence of the day. The kind of bigotry Germans and Japanese, even those fleeing the governments Americans fought, even those who were Americans themselves, faced in America during that time cannot be overlooked.

---

THOSE.
PEOPLE.
SURVIVED.

Quote:

---

Perhaps it cannot be compared to the Nazis

---

PERHAPS?

Quote:

---

but it is not less offensive itself for that, and we certainly shouldn't be casting the first stones.

---

Nonsense. Of course the US can cast the first stones. Oh, yes... we *were* the first North American nation ever to intern members of an ethnic minority during a World War... except for (hakkaf!) Canada, which did it in World War to its Ukrainians, a number of whom (how can I put this?) DIED... but that's either made-up or else doesn't matter, because Canada is a very inclusive nation, just look how they made an avowed separatist and French citizen their G-G, bla bla bla.

Non-evidence of the non-internment of non-Ukrainians by non-Canadians cannot be found at this non-site.

Interestingly enough, I have the impression that during WWII the media and government in Britain did in fact try very hard - and quite successfully - in maintaining the distinction between Germans and Nazis.

On the whole, the Ministry of Information (ok, Propaganda, as George Orwell and some others felt) did in fact do a delicate job extremely well in difficult circumstances.

Perhaps I'm a shade biased as my mother worked for the Ministry of Information for some years during WWII - putting together anti-Nazi information (for the press) and producing anti-Nazi propaganda. She, together with co-workers and their superiors, made a point of doing their utmost to avoid producing racist propaganda. After all, it would have been most ironic (and very bad) if a British government department had fallen into that trap in WWII. The point hardly needs belabouring.

During WWII, despite the blitz, attitudes towards the Germans seem to have been more relaxed in Britain than in WWI when there was spontaneous violence against some Germans - and when some naturalized Germans were stripped of citizenship. Obviously, I'm not pretending that everything was ideal, but some lessons had been learned from WWI.

What strikes me as odd is that some anti-German attitudes seem to have resurfaced in recent years, and of course I'm aware that neo-Nazi activity in Germany is highly newsworthy in many countries, often without any assessment of its real significance.

However, we are getting off-topic, which is often a recipe for problems.

Well I was kind of wondering when and if the thread would be allowed to be returned to 'my national pride', instead of 'your national pride stinks'. I'm still not sure it has, but before it vanishes altogether I'd just like to toss in some of my two bits worth.
National pride is something I couldn't possibly put into just a paragraph or two. But it's also something I don't ever feel I have to express in any manner or on any occasion. This is a result of my American heritage, and I'm perfectly satisfied with knowing what I feel is a good thing for me.

What I feel is not a good thing for anybody is having to sling mud or cast aspersions on another's opinions of their pride. It sort of ticks 'em off, and has been known to even start wars.

Quote:

---

Nonsense. Of course the US can cast the first stones

---

Let those without sin cast the first stone. The US is certainly not without sin. Their treatment of the Indian Nations in the 19th century is nothing to be proud of.

OK, back on topic, I am proud to be of both British and German ancestry. I am one generation closer than Lothruin, it was my mother who came to England shortly after the end of the war.There was some anti German feeling about, which is why she couldn't bring herself to teach us the language.Both of my 'home' countries have long and proud histories and have given much to the rest of the world.
National pride is nothing to be ashamed of, unless it turns into fanaticism, but in many cases that is spawned not by pride but by racism.

I'm proud to be Irish, we're not all drunks, we might drink a little lol, but not as much as every other country makes us out to. (that comment is excluding one of my brothers) We went through alot over the last couple of centries like alot of other countries have. I love Ireland and I'd never leave it but I'm extremely greatful to the other countries especially America who have accepted alot of Irish people into their countries over the last hundred or more years, even though in the beginning they were treated badly but over the years alot of that changed. I don't like people who critise other people's countries. I don't like America's president but that's not critising America as such but if it is I'm sorry. We celebrate St. Patrick's day like mad but that's because we were once prevented from celebrating it at all so we're making up for lost time.

We do still get laughed at, it hurts but we learn to laugh along, well it's either that or moan about it and get miserable. We probably tell more Irish jokes than everyone else nowadays.

Others say we have short tempers (I must admit I know I do)but I think that's from the days where we were prevented from doing almost everything, we weren't allowed to attend catholic mass, speak our native tongue (Irish Gaelic)or we'd be killed so it's in the genes - have to blame someone.

I'm sorry, I'd be lying if I said I didn't hold some sort of grudge against England/the British for what the Irish were put through even though it was in the past and my mother always says 'what happens in the past, stays in the past'. We live in the past, you only have to look at the situation in Northern Ireland to see that. The Irish are always made out to be the bad guys, you can deny it but you know it's true. History is always written by the people who won the battle/war. I wish I could go back in time and really ban the word war then maybe we'd all live in a peaceful world, no fighting or anything, I know that seems a little bit unrealistic but who knows maybe in the future everyone will get along (well into the future but still). I love going to Gaelic Football matches wether it be local or county games and that's the place you definitely are proud to be Irish and if you're not then there's somthing wrong with you, and when they play the national anthem it's hard to describe - I cried and then fainted one year while it was on, it was a bit embarassing, oops, but I was ok after a while.

I know we're only a little dot on the map of the world but doesn't mean bigger dots can bully us. I do feel for the Irish people living in Northern Ireland and I'd love to do something to help them but there's nothing I can do, they can't do anything or they run the risk of getting attacked. I know it's on both sides of the divide that that happens but they aren't allowed to fly their flags, they can't wear anything that'll indicate that they are Irish or there'll be trouble - you think that's a way to live a life do you really think that's fair not to be allowed to do anything, they are human too you know.

It does make me sick to hear about an Irish person anywhere in the world who died or got attacked, I don't know why but I produce the same reaction when a close relative dies or maybe I'm just abnormal in that sense.

I know we attacked England alot - we got attacked first, you never hear about the times we were bombed too here in Southern Ireland, A few of my relatives were close to the Dublin bomb that went off in 1974 it scares me to think what could have happened to them. We don't know what's around the corner we could get attacked tomorrow, no one knows except the people who are going to do it of course.

I think some people don't want to hear the truth when the blame is aimed at their country, in their eyes they did nothing wrong. Every single country in this world who got attacked or who did the attacking - it's right in their eyes but wrong in the victims eyes so no one wins. I don't agree with terrorism of any sort wether it's in the past or the present. One country attacks because they got attacked first but that just makes you as bad as the other so we're all bad people, all whatever billion of us, no one's a saint except the real saints like Patrick, George, Andrew, David (I don't know America's or any other countries one, if they even have one that is, I assume they do). Anyone can disagree with what I wrote - freedom of speech - but I'm proud to be Irish so I won't lose too much sleep over it but I suppose I am sorry if anyone was offended in any way.

I know it's a bit long but one thing other people were right about the Irish, we sure can talk alot.

DiaDuit73, I've been to Ireland several times and I've never met an Irish person yet that I didn't like.
Ireland is an incredibly beautiful country and I'd go back in a flash...if I wasn't so terrified of flying
It's great that you are so proud of your country and it's citizens. You have every right to be.

I didn't read this thread again until today, but I must just say this: If you choose to take offense at my attitude, that's fine. I'll probably take offense right back. No matter, it's happened before, and I find I seldom honestly dislike people who disagree with me with intelligence and conviction. However, the response above simultaneously mocks my feelings and writing style while seemingly making itself an example of the very vehemence which I was describing.

In no way will I defend Naziism or Nazis, and in no way have I. I feel just as strongly about that as you do, I'm sure, Coolupway. Killing of millions of people is not a flaw. In fact, its beyond words suitable to describe it properly. I don't even think abomination cuts it. However, I'm sure that most would agree that Naziism had many flaws, political and economical, even though the movement was led by an (cliche but true) evil genious. But this is a matter of semantics, in my opinion, and not a real point of disagreement.

The rest, though, I'll disagree with. What happened in the United States at that time cannot be compared with what the Nazis did. (Again, quibble with my wording if you desire, but we do agree on the basic principal.) But your response implies something that I find disturbing, and perhaps it is just my interpretation. You almost seem to say that because the situation in Germany was incomparably worse, the rest doesn't matter. The people in the US survived, and besides, Canada did it first, so it really isn't worthy of bringing up in the same discussion?

My point, which is still perfectly viable despite your choosing to pick apart my statements, is that America readily embraced prejudice of its own during WWII, and has yet to entirely shake it off. The fact that there was minimal violence in comparison does not minimize that prejudice. Unlike what was described regarding the UK, American propaganda made no difference between German and Nazi, and often still doesn't in history lessons, and that is unforgivably destructive. No amount of comparing it to other nations who've done the same or worse will change that.

This matter extends beyond my pride in my German heritage. It is at the essence of my pride as an American. I take pride in my country, and in order to do that properly I must address the flaws while I uphold the strengths. To me, the situation I've described and the general attitude that breeds it is a character flaw, and it pains me to see such a flaw in a country I love so dearly.

There's something about the quotation at the very start of this thread that leaves me uneasy.

Quote:

---

"National pride is to countries what self-respect is to individuals: a necessary condition for self improvment. Those with no pride in their country will have no motivation to seek their personal growth in conjunction with their nations needs and development."

---

I'm very skeptical indeed about analogies between individuals and countries. For me, such notions imply "indelible national character" and the like. For a moment, however, let's accept the quotation at face value and simply ask two questions: (1) "Who has true self-respect? Those who are quietly confident or those who boast?" (2) "What kind of national pride runs deeper? The kind that is quiet and dignified, that is aware of faults in a nation's life - and keen to impove matters - or the kind that is characterized by flag-waving, by claiming that almost everything was invented by members of one's own country, the kind that says, 'My country, right or wrong?' "

Two interrelated thoughts regarding "national pride" and what I may loosely call the German(ic) experience:

1. I'm currently re-reading Geoffrey Barraclough's masterpiece, The Origins of Modern Germany. This book was, I believe, written while the author was on active duty in the British armed forces during World War II. Despite this, the book displays a sense of understanding for the depredations suffered by the German peoples at the hands of foreign powers from the dissolution of the Carolingian Empire through 1871. His thesis is that a lack of national identity retarded the political maturation of the German people. "Ompredre tout c'est tout pardonner"? Barraclough makes no excuses, nor should we. To know more is to understand more. National pride must not prevent us from learning the lessons of the past -- the past of every nation and people.

2. "National pride" can transcend ethnicity, when that pride is based upon transcendent ideals. My grandparents emigrated to the U.S. from German-speaking areas of Europe in the early years of the 20th century. I've never known anyone more "proud" and indeed grateful to be an American. ("Stand up; it's the National Anthem!" "Grandma, it's only on t.v." "Doesn't matter -- you hear that music, you stand up and put your hand over your heart!!" When I was seven, it seemed strange. Now, I understand.) Their American patriotism was not a matter of ethnicity -- how could it have been? -- but rather a devotion to the transcendent ideals of freedom, opportunity and pluralism that characterize our nation at its best, yet are not unique to our nation. Their pride was not one of particularism. It rejected prejudice, as should we all.

Verzeihen Sie, bitte. That's "Comprendere," isn't it? Don't speak French.

Quote:

---

My point, which is still perfectly viable despite your choosing to pick apart my statements, is that America readily embraced prejudice of its own during WWII, and has yet to entirely shake it off. The fact that there was minimal violence in comparison does not minimize that prejudice. Unlike what was described regarding the UK, American propaganda made no difference between German and Nazi, and often still doesn't in history lessons, and that is unforgivably destructive. No amount of comparing it to other nations who've done the same or worse will change that.

This matter extends beyond my pride in my German heritage. It is at the essence of my pride as an American. I take pride in my country, and in order to do that properly I must address the flaws while I uphold the strengths. To me, the situation I've described and the general attitude that breeds it is a character flaw, and it pains me to see such a flaw in a country I love so dearly.

---

I would like to hear about nations which didn't anathematize and vilify their enemies during the course of a shooting war. The "prejudice" of which you speak has nothing at all do with "America" or any specific country, nor, arguably, is it even a flaw; it is, rather, a natural human tendency to say not terribly nice things about those nations whose citizens are killing their countrymen. Have you any idea of how the Brits (to choose just one other nation) described the Germans prior to the US' entry into the FIRST World War, and how heavily and often outrageously they propagandized about the serial atrocities of the "Hun" and the "Boche"?

As for making a distinction between Germans and Nazis during WWII, why should anyone in any Allied nation have been expected to do so? Hitler was appointed Chancellor of the Reich in a manner which was constitutionally legal; the outward forms of representative government were observed. Were citizens of the Allied nations supposed to assume that because Hitler was not, in fact *elected*, his government was therefore not the representative of the German people?

Quote:

---

As for making a distinction between Germans and Nazis during WWII, why should anyone in any Allied nation have been expected to do so?

---

In practice, both the British and American governments did try to make a point of not tarring all Germans with the Nazi brush. Key reasons for this included:

1. The presence in both countries of German refugees from Nazi oppression. In the case of Britain all male refugees of enemy nationality (and a few women) were interned in June 1940. However, those who were able to establish their bona fides were released, and it was important that their position was understood.

2. In Britain and America it was known that co-operation with some Germans would be essential after victory. This, too, meant in practice that there was a case against total demonization.

3. In Britain there had been some instances in WWI involving physical attacks on Germans and their property. (This had included attacks on some people and businesses that weren't German but had German or German-sounding names). The government was keen to avoid a repetition of this kind of thing.

4. In WWII, more than in any previous war, the English-speaking countries claimed to be fighting on behalf of civilization, on behalf of all decent and humane people everywhere, on behalf of mankind. I don't think any group of nations had ever claimed this so insistently and energetically before. This claim, too, called for some self-imposed restraint in the way the Germans were represented.

(Edited to tidy up last sentence).

It feels strange to me to say the following after reading most of the other posters comments but.......I actually feel no national pride whatsoever. To me the life span of a country is so fleeting when compared to the age of the earth itself it seems pointless. A nation to me is just a group of people living close together in an area of land designated to be called a country by other people.
I feel a strong bond to the land currently called Australia but the bond wouldn`t be called national pride by me, it`s more of a feeling of knowing and growing up in a particular area. The bond does not necessarily include all people living here just because they call themselves Australian.
To me we are all the result of slaughter and wars, the result of survival of the fittest and evolution. I can think of no country that hasn`t been the scene of atrocities commited by our ancestors and can therefore myself feel no national pride. Perhaps if there was peace for a thousand years in a particular country and I was born there I could feel national pride.
The pride of being a human I can feel is when people strive to overcome their biases,raw emotions and generally do good,that pride in humanity that I can feel encompasses anyone of any area.

Well said, roos.

Forgotten in the post-WWII shirt-rending about the Japanese internment was the fact that over 10,000 German aliens resident in the US were also subjected to internment -- yes, in the US-- during the war.

Twas ever thus, at least up to that point. Canada interned a part -- over 5,000 people, in fact -- of its sizable and prominent Ukrainian population during WWI.

While the internments were perhaps egregious in retrospect, they were a part of the zeitgeist... it's hard to extrapolate from them any inherent "flaws" of the Yanks or the Canajuns, at that time or any other, especially given that actual GENOCIDE had begun to pop up just across Europe's borders as far back as 1915. The Western nations are populated by homo sapiens sapiens, and as such, their citizens act as humans invariably do in time of armed conflict, and generally hate the enemy. Save for the occasional war of liberation, (and the more embarrassing segments of the American New Left during Vietnam) when have citizens of a nation bestowed love and understanding on enemy nations which wished to kill their countrymen?

Perfectly reasonable, Coolupway. The points made by bloomsby shouldn't be overlooked, and while it is something of a subset of those points, I will also say that Germans were also a large percentage of the people the US wished to SAVE during WWII, and so I feel it would have been more reasonable to establish an anti-Nazi propoganda machine as opposed to an anti-German one. Our purposes in the war included saving Europe from being overtaken and saving Jews (and a number of other people) from genocide. Both of those purposes included saving Germans.

It just seems counterproductive to me, that's all, and it is destructive that the attitude still exists today. Few children are taught about the prejudices that existed in the US at that time, and as I said, many history classes still equate Germans with Nazis during lessons on WWII, which is inaccurate at best and dangerous at worst, and a situation that should be corrected as far as I am concerned.

I won't deny that what happened had a great deal to do with human nature. But I am one of those people who think that just because you have a gut reaction to something doesn't mean you should just go with that, doesn't make it right or acceptable.

I agree - it is possible to learn from the past, and maybe advance to a more just world. Otherwise, we would still be accusing Jews of poisoning wells....
The whole clumsy process that we call 'civilization' is, in a way, just learning to rise above human nature, for the good of the society.

[[If you stand up and say you're proud to be English you're deemed to be in possession of a dubious political viewpoint, ie. you hold extreme right wing views. Any English person reading this will understand what I'm writing here.

England has a lot to proud of and I'm enormously proud to be English, but no I'm not a Nazi and as far as I know don't have any affiliations with the Ku Klux Klan. ]]

I hope you're not implying here that "right wing" means you are affiliated with the KKK!!

Quote:

---

I hope you're not implying here that "right wing" means you are affiliated with the KKK!!

---

You signed up for the Forums on 30 March 2006, in other words two days ago. What on earth is the point is the point of commenting on a post dating from last July - and in gratuitiously aggressive terms? This is NOT a controversial issues forum.

More generally, I'd like to advise strongly reviving old threads unless there's a really good reason for doing so - after all many of the contributors may no longer post in the Forums.

It seems to me that the only good reason for reviving an older thread is avoid creating an unnecessary new thread. The background to reviving a thread should be explained.

I apologize! Like you said I am new here and had no idea this was an old thread. I have been making comments and enjoying this forum very much for the last couple of days. I will for sure pay close attention to dates from now on. I am usually never a aggressive poster but when I read that remark I was offended.

You said this is not a controversial issues forum, does that mean people can make offensive statements but no one can comment on them? As I said before, I'm sorry.

Thanks for your apology. I've looked back over the thread, and there's no indication that anybody found the remark offensive last July.