Skip to main content

    Eliana Johnson, editor of rightwinged blog, National Reveiw, wrote today that Nazism was not "senseless and that "25 NONsenseless points include ... NO Jew can be a member of the race"

     In her article, Eliana wrote in support of Nazism:

Nazism may have been an ideology to which the United States was — and to which the president is — implacably opposed, but it is hardly “senseless.” By the early 1930s, the Nazi party had hundreds of thousands of devoted members and repeatedly attracted a third of the votes in German elections; its political leaders campaigned on a platform comprising 25 non-senseless points, including the “unification of all Germans,” a demand for “land and territory for the sustenance of our people,” and an assertion that “no Jew can be a member of the race.” Suffice it to say, many sensible Germans were persuaded.

~GOP Eliana Johnson, Published in National Review Blog

Wow!  Just fricken wow!

      The Anti-Semite comment should be condemned by the left and the right.
"25 non-senseless points, including ... an assertion that NO Jew can be a member of the race.”

      Definition: Anti-Semite: a person who persecutes or discriminates against Jews

      When Eliana Johnson wrote that "NO Jew can be a member of the race" was a sensible ("non-senseless") Nazi Platform she was clearly discriminating against Jews and highlighting her own Anti-Semitic views.

      If you read her entire article, she is condemning President Obama for calling the Holocaust a "senseless violence"  and at the same time, she accidentally revealed her Anti-Semitic views - which I find completely disgusting.

      In my opinion, Eliana Johnson has accidentally revealed the true "nazi" (aka white supremacy) colors of the far rightwingers in the Republican party.

 

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  What part of her Anti-Semite comment do you not (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hey338Too, keepemhonest

      follow?

    •  she doesn't (6+ / 0-)

      realize she is saying Nazism makes sense.  I think he Freudian slip is showing.

      When you say it is "common sense" what you are really saying is "I don't have any evidence to back up my argument", because it is quite often neither common nor sense.

      by kaminpdx on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:22:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Naziism makes sense. It's also evil. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WB Reeves

        Nonsense implies that you can't make sense of a statement.

        Evil statements usually are remarkably clear.

        Have you ever listened to Kissinger or the NeoCons ???

        "Have you left no sense of decency, sir, at long last?" Army Attorney to Sen. McCarthy, 1954. "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012.

        by bontemps2012 on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 05:25:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  The mass extermination of Jews is senseless... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kaminpdx

      but Ms. Johnson disagrees and takes Obama to task for mentioning it.

      Its actually pretty easy to understand.

    •  Not a great diary (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      shanesnana, sturunner, Ahianne

      but did you click on the link and read the article?  If you wanted to be generous, you could say at best that Johnson's article is ambiguous.  I think what she was trying to say was that Obama keeps throwing around the world "senseless", equating the genocide of the Holocaust with the terrorist attack in Benghazi.  But then she goes further and says that there is a rationale behind the acts to be understood.  In her attempt to explain, it sounds as if she is in fact apologizing for that rationale, for example that "sensible Germans" followed the call for the identification of a German race which excluded Jews.  

      That last little tidbit sent shivers down my spine.  I don't know how she's going to argue her way out of this one.  The comments on the site are pretty good.

      •  Sneaky, I'm highlighting her AntiSemitic statement (0+ / 0-)

        that
        "No Jew can be a member of the race"

        And yes, I did read the article but I thought the most disgusting part was when she accidentally revealed her Anti-Semitic views.

        •  That was not her comment. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sturunner, bontemps2012

          She was quoting.

          •  Yes, it WAS her comment. (0+ / 0-)

            From her article

            Nazi party ... campaigned on a platform comprising 25 non-senseless points, including ... no Jew can be a member of the race.”

            the opposite of "non-senseless" is "sensible"

            Johnson said it was "non-senseless" (meaning sensible) that the Nazi platform included 'no Jew can be a member of the race.'

            And that is what makes Johnson's article Anti-Semitic.

            •  "Senseless" has more than one meaning (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sturunner, Ahianne, bontemps2012

              and thus more than one opposite.

              She is not saying it was sensible (at least not "sensible" in its most common usage, meaning "good sense").  She is saying it was non-random, and bringing up the specific points of the Nazi platform to show that it was systematic and based on ideology rather than random.

              She is quite correct on this point, albeit extremely stupid in thinking that this point constitutes reasonable criticism of the President's statement, as "random" was not the meaning of "senseless" that he was using.

              •  No definition of "senseless" means "random" (0+ / 0-)

                you seem to be making that up as you go along here.

                From the Dictionary:

                sense·less  (snsls)
                adj.
                1. Lacking sense or meaning; meaningless.
                2. Deficient in sense; foolish or stupid.
                3. Insensate; unconscious.
                Also, I have not found one single Thesaurus to back up your claim that 'senseless' means 'random'

                No where in Johnson's article does she say "senseless" means "random"

                I tend to use the dictionary meaning of words when I read them.  She is an Editor and it is expected she will use words as defined in a Dictionary.

                She wrote

                Nazi party ... campaigned on a platform comprising 25 non-senseless points, including ... no Jew can be a member of the race.”
                And, by definition, the opposite of "non-senseless" is "sensible"

                Johnson was saying the Nazi platform was SENSIBLE in that "no Jew can be a member of a race."

                •  I googled "thesaurus senseless". (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  WB Reeves, Noddy, Ahianne

                  And found thison the first result:

                  Part of Speech:  adjective  
                  Definition:  silly, meaningless  
                  Synonyms:  absurd, asinine, batty, crazy, daft, double talk, doublespeak, fatuous, flaky, foolish, idiotic, illogical, imbecilic, inane, incongruous, inconsistent, insignificant, irrational, ludicrous, mad, mindless, moronic, nonsensical, nutty, pointless, purportless, purposeless, ridiculous, simple, stupid, trivial, unimportant, unintelligent, unmeaning, unreasonable, unsound, unwise, wacky*, without rhyme or reason
                  I draw your attention to the bolded definitions, particularly "pointless," "purposeless," and "without rhyme or reason."

                  It is obvious from Johnson's choice of counterargument that she is interpreting "senseless" as "pointless" or "purposeless" (which is what I meant by"random" but is a better way of putting it; thank you, thesaurus).

                  •  Your list supports what I wrote: (0+ / 0-)

                    You wrote:

                    She is saying it was non-random, and bringing up the specific points of the Nazi platform to show that it was systematic and based on ideology rather than random.
                    To which I replied:
                    I have not found one single Thesaurus to back up your claim that 'senseless' means 'random'
                    No where in Johnson's article does she say "senseless" means "random"
                    Your list supports what I wrote, the randomness of a violent act has nothing at all to do with "senseless" as it is the violent act that would be "senseless."

                    Face it Johnson wrote a Pro-Nazi article just to condemn a black man, President Obama.

                    When she wrote:

                    Nazi party ... campaigned on a platform comprising 25 non-senseless points, including ... no Jew can be a member of the race.
                    Since "non-senseless" means "sensible"

                    Johnson was saying she thinks it was sensible for the Nazi platform to include "NO Jew can be a member of a race."

                    •  Oh for god's sake. (0+ / 0-)

                      Are you going to insist that "pointless" and "purposeless" and "without rhyme or reason" don't mean "random"?  Despite the fact that "random" is one of the synonyms of "purposeless" in the link below?

                      •  Now you pretend you didn't use the word "random" (0+ / 0-)

                        Oh for god's sake is right.

                        You've been on here making up definitions of words.

                        Getting caught making up definitions of words

                        Now you want to pretend that I did not call you out on your false notion that the word "random" has nothing to do with the word "senseless."

                        Face it, Johnson wrote a Pro-Nazi article and within her article she exposed herself as being Anti-Semitic

                        In Johnson's article she admitted, in her own words, that she supported and thought Nazi Platform was SENSIBLE in that their platform was "No Jews can be a member of a race."

                        I cannot believe all the trouble you are going to: making up words, pretending she was saying Nazism was not random.

                        Johnson did not say anything about the Nazi's randomness or non-randomness - yet you want to pretend she did.

                        Oh for God's sake is right!

              •  She's Using An Obviously Absurd Meaning (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Batya the Toon, JamieG from Md

                Her argument is that an act is not "senseless" if it is undertaken in the cause of some specific belief.

                By this standard, the Son of Sam murders were not "senseless" -- "my 2000-year-old dog told me to kill those people" is a specific belief.

                On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

                by stevemb on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 12:54:11 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Wrong. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              WB Reeves

              That is a bizarre misreading of the Johnson article.

              Naziism provided simple solutions for every problem. Lying solutions. Falsely constructed solutions. Evil solutions.

              Every one of them clearly, simply stated.

              The very opposites to nonsense.

              "Have you left no sense of decency, sir, at long last?" Army Attorney to Sen. McCarthy, 1954. "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012.

              by bontemps2012 on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 05:28:58 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  The Tenets of National Socialism (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SneakySnu

    I like the Dude's reaction - he's heard this a million times.

    There’s always free cheddar in a mousetrap, baby

    by bernardpliers on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:26:10 AM PST

  •  One of the great comments below the article... (7+ / 0-)

    ... on the National Review website:
    "Were you folks bought out by the Onion?"

    Another point Ms. Johnson makes in her "argument"

    The idea that all violence is “senseless” violence is one that has taken deep root on the left; it’s also, unfortunately, one that poses a major impediment to understanding the world.
    How could National Review leave this article up for 4 days?  Sickening.

    I haven't been here long enough to be considered a Kossack, does that mean that I'm just a sack?

    by Hey338Too on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:27:19 AM PST

  •  Just because they attracted 1/3 of the vote (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    keepemhonest, kaminpdx, Chi

    doesn't mean the Nazi's, or the Tea Party, make sense.

    Oh for crying out loud!

    by 4mygirls on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:29:08 AM PST

  •  So nuts. This should ruin her career. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    keepemhonest

    I'm not sure how it isn't "senseless" because the points Nazi-ism made were insane and lacking in sense.

    But apparently because they explained them and believed them, that means something to this person. So nuts. This should ruin her career.

  •  Just imagine the wingnutosphere freakout (3+ / 0-)

    If that supposed Israel-hater Barack Obama had said that it was a sensible proposition that “no Jew can be a member of the race.”

    The GOP and its propaganda organs like the NRO aren't even trying to maintain the pretense of being rational any more. They are literally insane.

  •  When arguing semantics makes you look pro-Nazi, (6+ / 0-)

    it's probably best to pick a wiser fight somewhere else.  Unless of course you are pro-Nazi.

  •  Since there appears to be disagreement over... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cc, keepemhonest, denig

    meaning, it might be appropriate to define "Senseless"

    1. Lacking sense or meaning; meaningless.
    2. Deficient in sense; foolish or stupid.
    3. Insensate; unconscious.

    I believe in Obama's case, definition 1 and/or 2 can be applied.  The Nazi genocide was meaningless since it served no purpose beyond the twisted fantasies of Hitler and the rabid hatred of the Nazis and it was foolish/stupid as it consumed hugh amounts of resources in the middle of a worsening and expanding war.

    So yes, the Nazi genocide was "senseless violence" and the complaint by this Nazi sympathizer is bogus.

    Tax and Spend I can understand. I can even understand Borrow and Spend. But Borrow and give Billionaires tax cuts? That I have a problem with.

    by LiberalCanuck on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:42:27 AM PST

    •  I disagree on point 1. (0+ / 0-)

      Having an incorrect or baseless meaning doesn't make something meaningless.

      In the case of Obama's statement, definition 2 can absolutely be applied; definition 1 is debatable.

      •  Its the Dictionary Definition, how can you disagre (0+ / 0-)

        You disagree with the Dictionary Definition?

        Liberal Canuck put the dictionary definition in and you disagree????

        From the Dictionary
        sense·less  (snsls) adj.
        1. Lacking sense or meaning; meaningless.
        2. Deficient in sense; foolish or stupid.
        3. Insensate; unconscious.
        Interesting that you disagree with the Dictionary definition.
      •  By That Standard, Nothing Is Meaningless (0+ / 0-)

        Everybody who decides to do something, however absurd or insane, sees some sort of meaning in the decision. Sometimes the meaning is sensible; sometimes it isn't.

        On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

        by stevemb on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 12:58:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Barely Coherent (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SneakySnu, TiaRachel

    IMHO the NRO article is very poorly written. The points it tries to make don't follow from what Obama said, and the Nazi apologia doesn't make sense at all.

    Grade "F." Please see me after class.

    "Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything even remotely true." -- H. Simpson

    by midnight lurker on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 09:42:28 AM PST

  •  I'm amazed at how many commenters (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cc, keepemhonest, JamieG from Md

    here are standing up for Johnson's amazingly stupid article when most of the comments on NRO itself are very critical of it.

    There is no misunderstanding here. Johnson is standing up for Nazism in order to criticize President Obama. He didn't misspeak. The Holocaust was senseless violence.

  •  My Analysis Of Nazis 25 Point Original Platform (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WB Reeves

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    You can read into it anything you want because these are generic political talking points (except for the antisemitism and xenophobia).

    If someone is stupid and ignorant and puffed up on right wing nonsense, I guess this can be a mind blowing document to read.  Anyone knowledgable who reads it would be like "Ho-hum, that's Lincoln, that's Andrew Jackson, that's Reagan."

    I think it's less about Nazi leanings than just being dumber-than-dog-shit, not that those two things don't overlap politically.

    There’s always free cheddar in a mousetrap, baby

    by bernardpliers on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:05:29 AM PST

  •  I'm a little bewildered (4+ / 0-)

    by how many people are interpreting this as support of Nazism.

    It's a petty attack based on a (deliberate? maybe) misinterpretation of what "senseless" meant in the context of the President's speech, but you (and others) are misinterpreting what "not senseless" means in Ms. Johnson's speech just as badly.

    She is using "senseless" in the sense of its fairly common usage as "pointless and random," which (a) is pretty clearly not what Obama meant, and (b) she accurately states does not apply to the Nazi agenda.  Her statement is neither pro-Nazi nor anti-Semitic.

    (This shouldn't be necessary, but I'm going to say this anyway, in the interests of avoiding it later: I'm Jewish and I work for a company that does Holocaust reparations and funds Holocaust-related research and education.)

    •  Johnson used "non-senseless" (0+ / 0-)

      The Dictionary defines "senseless"

      sense·less  (snsls)
      adj.
      1. Lacking sense or meaning; meaningless.
      2. Deficient in sense; foolish or stupid.
      3. Insensate; unconscious.
      No where in the Dictionary definition does it limit the definition of "senseless" to mean "pointless and random"

      No where in Johnson's article does she say she is using your definition of senseless to mean "pointless and random"

      Johnson revealed she is pro-Nazi when she wrote:

      Nazi party ... campaigned on a platform comprising 25 non-senseless points, including ... no Jew can be a member of the race.”
      the opposite of "non-senseless" is "sensible"
      •  You've said that last line about three times now. (0+ / 0-)

        Please see my response to it above.

        (Also you might want to get rid of the "non-" part, or else say "another word for" instead of "the opposite of".)

      •  How does that differ? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Batya the Toon, WB Reeves, Noddy

        "lacking meaning" vs "pointless"?

        And while the source article is playing silly games in an attempt to get a jab in at the President, there is a distinction between something being done for no apparent reason; and something being done for a reason, however horrendous and hateful that reason is.

        "No one life is more important than another. No one voice is more valid than another. Each life is a treasure. Each voice deserves to be heard." Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse & Onomastic

        by Catte Nappe on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:45:28 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  you missed the word "random" (0+ / 0-)

          Easy to miss a word when you're reading.  But, go back and you'll see you missed the word "random"

          You see, no dictionary defines senseless as "pointless and random"

          Keyword: random

          •  Why do you think this matters? N/T (0+ / 0-)

            Nothing human is alien to me.

            by WB Reeves on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:06:09 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Batya is saying random is definition of senseless (0+ / 0-)

              and Batya is then concluding, based off of the word "random" that Johnson is not being anti-semitic when she wrote:
              Nazi party ... campaigned on a platform comprising 25 non-senseless points, including ... no Jew can be a member of the race.

              Whereas I was saying "random" has nothing to do with the definition of "senseless" and therefore Johnson was being Anti-Semitic when she wrote that.

              It might be easier if you read my and Batya comments to each other.

              •  I did read them (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Batya the Toon, Catte Nappe

                Frankly, I think you're being silly.

                Batya's point is that, in this instance, Johnson is interpreting "senseless" as arbitrary and illogical. That's clearly not what the President meant and it's dishonest to pretend otherwise.

                However, it is indisputable that the Nazi's genocide was the logical and foreseeable result of their racist and anti-Semitic premises. Being "sensible" to this fact doesn't make one either anti-Semitic or pro-Nazi.

                Imitating Johnson's sophomoric style of argument is a waste of time and energy. Further, degrading the historic fact of the Nazi Genocide to the status of a rhetorical and political football is grossly offensive, regardless of who does it.  

                Nothing human is alien to me.

                by WB Reeves on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 12:43:19 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Johnson is not "interpreting" anything and she is (0+ / 0-)

                  not even claiming to be re-defining 'senseless"

                  She is, in fact, saying that when the left calls the Holocaust, "senseless violence" then the left is wrong.

                  She wrote:

                  The idea that all violence is “senseless” violence is one that has taken deep root on the left; it’s also, unfortunately, one that poses a major impediment to understanding the world.

                  Yea, because calling the Holocaust senseless violence impedes us and makes us think genocide is evil .... whereas Eliana Johnson thinks "sensible Germans" understood genocide of jews was a-ok

                  She wrote:

                  By the early 1930s, the Nazi party had hundreds of thousands of devoted members and repeatedly attracted a third of the votes in German elections; its political leaders campaigned on a platform comprising 25 non-senseless points, including the “unification of all Germans,” a demand for “land and territory for the sustenance of our people,” and an assertion that “no Jew can be a member of the race.” Suffice it to say, many SENSIBLE Germans were persuaded.
                  By saying "Sensible" Germans agreed that "no Jew can be a member of the race.” -- Johnson is saying that non-sensible people, like the left, would not agree that "no Jew can be a member of the race.”

                  Therefore, Johnson is saying that she would have been one of those sensible Germans who were Anti-Semitic

                  As Wheever wrote below

                  To describe a people that agreed with, and took part in, overt violent racial extermination and genocide as "sensible" cannot be parsed away.

                  The proper and usual description of such people by those who DO NOT agree with such people usually includes such terms as "vile" "murderous" "criminal" "insane" "thugs" "war criminals" "Racists" "evil" "despicable" and "unforgivable," to name but a few.

                  You will note that "sensible" is not included in that list.

                  I won't say you are being silly, but I do say you are wrong.

                  Eliana Johnson has, indeed, proven with her own words that she is Anti-Semitic and agreed with the Nazi's who said, 'No Jew can be a member of the race."

                  •  You are no more entitled (0+ / 0-)

                    to impose your interpretation of the meaning of Johnson's words than Johnson is to impose her own on the President's.

                    Whether you like it or not, Nazism is a comprehensible ideology. That it appealed to a broad segment of Germans who would have been otherwise described as "average" or "normal" is an ugly fact of history. That it is a despicable and murderous ideology alters this fact not at all.

                    Recognizing this fact as Johnson does, albeit for the purpose of scoring completely spurious debating points, says absolutely nothing about her attitude towards  Nazism.

                    You are engaged in the same intellectual/rhetorical shell game as Johnson. You're just approaching it from the opposing political pole.

                    Nothing human is alien to me.

                    by WB Reeves on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 01:39:37 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Each death involved is as senseless as any other (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Batya the Toon

      But that does not mean the Nazis hadn't thought it through.  They had.  That is what evil IS, near enough.

      I am a leaf on the wind - i hover, twirl, float,
      Weightless, frictionless, I fly

      by chmood on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 07:20:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Makes sense to me! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    keepemhonest

    If only in my perceived notion of ensuing GOP political direction:

    After all, numerically Jews in America scarcely IMO are worth
    right wing haters attention much less the new to be sought after while being looked down on numbers of the potentially developing Latino vote for the GOP efforts.

  •  Eliana Johnson defending Nazism against a Black (3+ / 0-)

    man.

    There should be a point where Johnson steps back and take a look at where her life has taken her and say, "I am defending Nazis against a black man."

    And then she should begin to weep.

  •  What an utter waste of time (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Batya the Toon, Catte Nappe

    Johnson's "argument" isn't anything more than a semantic quibble based on an intentional misreading of the President's comment. The claim that she's making a pro-Nazi or anti-Semitic argument is simply more of the same. Her argument is both deeply stupid and dishonest but attempting to make more of it than that is likewise semantic quibbling and misreading.  

    Nothing human is alien to me.

    by WB Reeves on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:59:58 AM PST

  •  I can't believe (3+ / 0-)

    the number of people here that are defending an article that is prima facie so overtly supportive of Nazi "sensibilities" that they have to resort to fucking semantics and narrow parsing of words to assert that it's not.

    For the love of god, what the fuck is going on here? This woman is defending Nazis and genocide in an effort to attack the president. Are you people actually pretending she's not?

    "Suffice it to say, many sensible Germans were persuaded."
    The word "sensible" carries with it overt positive connotations and approbation. If you find yourself arguing otherwise in this context so as to defend this woman and her nightmarish worldview, you are on the wrong fucking side of the discussion and need to ask yourself why that might be.

    "'club America salutes you' says the girl on the door/we accept all major lies, we love any kind of fraud"--The Cure, "Club America"

    by Wheever on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:07:37 AM PST

    •  Disagreeing with an inaccurate condemnation (0+ / 0-)

      is not the same thing as defending.

      •  The condemnation is indeed completely accurate (3+ / 0-)

        Again, Eliana Johnson's position is completely given away by this quote:
         

        "Suffice it to say, many sensible Germans were persuaded."
        To describe a people that agreed with, and took part in, overt violent racial extermination and genocide as "sensible" cannot be parsed away.

        The proper and usual description of such people by those who DO NOT agree with such people usually includes such terms as "vile" "murderous" "criminal" "insane" "thugs" "war criminals" "Racists" "evil" "despicable" and "unforgivable," to name but a few.

        You will note that "sensible" is not included in that list.

        "'club America salutes you' says the girl on the door/we accept all major lies, we love any kind of fraud"--The Cure, "Club America"

        by Wheever on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 11:38:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Are you intending (0+ / 0-)

          to apply this judgement to the entire German population?

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 06:06:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I intend to apply it (0+ / 0-)

            to all of the Germans who supported Hitler and the Nazi party, yes.

            "'club America salutes you' says the girl on the door/we accept all major lies, we love any kind of fraud"--The Cure, "Club America"

            by Wheever on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:09:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's a large number (0+ / 0-)

              at some points the vast majority of the population, including children and the elderly. I think the reality is more complicated than you imagine.

              While it may be comforting to simply label this reality as "senseless" and excuse ourselves from further inquiry into the motives and rationales of such a massive sample of humanity, it would hardly seem wise.

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 10:57:06 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  My father's parents helped Jews escape Germany (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Wheever, JamieG from Md

        My dad was born and raised in Germany and was 12 when Hitler was APPOINTED Chancellor.

        His parents helped hide Jews and helped Jews escape Germany.  

        His parents, my grandparents were "sensible": they did not want Jews to be murdered

        They were "sensible": they knew Jews were humans and that no human should be treated the way the Nazi's treated Jews.

        It was the vile brown-shirt fascist thugs that were not "sensible"

        Johnson proved, by her own words she is Anti-Semitic.

        There was nothing "sensible" about the Nazi platform -- not now and not then.

        My condemnation of Johnson was, and is, accurate.

        •  Absolutely. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TeamSarah4Choice, JamieG from Md

          And I simply cannot believe that anyone--especially here on dkos--could be arguing otherwise.

          "'club America salutes you' says the girl on the door/we accept all major lies, we love any kind of fraud"--The Cure, "Club America"

          by Wheever on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 12:04:05 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I think you may be (0+ / 0-)

          confusing "sensible" with "decent" and/or "moral."

          The sensible thing to do, when your government is rounding up undesirables and murdering them, is to keep your head down and make sure you don't get targeted along with them.

          The moral thing to do is act to help them.  And your grandparents deserve all praise for their act of moral courage in the face of grave danger, and for recognizing the humanity of the people their rulers worked to dehumanize.

          ...

          ... and damn it, I really hate to add a "but" after that, because honestly your story about what your grandparents did is ultimately of greater weight than anything else that's been said in this entire diary and its comments combined.   Including everything I've said and the last thing I was about to say.

          So you know what, I'm going to leave it at that.

          •  You don't know what you are talking about. (0+ / 0-)

            Let me repeat

            You don't know what you are talking about.

            I am not confusing a god damn thing.  I know my grandparents were all of those things, they were SENSIBLE, moral and decent.

            Read and Learn

            1) Eliana Johnson wrote:

            25 non-senseless points, including the “unification of all Germans,” a demand for “land and territory for the sustenance of our people,” and an assertion that “no Jew can be a member of the race.” Suffice it to say, many SENSIBLE Germans were persuaded.
            Those Nazi supporters in Germany that Johnson calls "sensible" were not sensible they were jack-booted thugs, the were fascists, murderers, war criminals

            2. My grandparents were SENSIBLE.  They kept the wits about them and were able to successfully hide Jews and help them escape Germany and helping them get to safe countries like the USA.

            Do you have any idea how sensible a person has to be in order to get obtain "documents" for those escaping to be allowed into safe countries.

            Do you even know what type of "documents" those would be?

            SENSIBLE is what they were in addition to being moral and decent -- they were also sensible.

            The Germans who supported the Nazis were NOT sensible, ... Johnson is Anti-Semitic and wrong ... they were not sensible they were murderers.

            3) I will quote Wheeler from above

            To describe a people that agreed with Nazis, and took part in, overt violent racial extermination and genocide as "sensible" cannot be parsed away.
            The proper and usual description of such people by those who DO NOT agree with such people usually includes such terms as "vile" "murderous" "criminal" "insane" "thugs" "war criminals" "Racists" "evil" "despicable" and "unforgivable," to name but a few.

            You will note that "sensible" is not included in that list.

            •  Nope. Still leaving it at that. (0+ / 0-)
              •  So you think TS4C grandparents were not Sensible (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                TeamSarah4Choice

                moral and decent?

                Ok, I must respectfully ask:
                what the fuck is wrong with you?

                You don't think people who helped Jews escape the Holocaust were: sensible, moral and decent?

                Anyone who thinks that the Nazi Platform was supported by "sensible" is not only wrong, they have a fucking screw loose.

                •  Batya clearly stated (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Batya the Toon

                  that he doesn't agree that "sensible" equates to moral and decent. I think it equally plain that Batya considers aiding the victims of Nazis to be both moral and decent. The point raised is that if we consider the preservation of one's self and one's family to be a "sensible" goal, it's one that's hard to reconcile with actions inviting death for both. That was the grim reality under Nazi occupation.

                  One reason we honor those who aided the victims of Nazism is because their actions contradicted the dictates of "sensible" self interest.

                  You really shouldn't be throwing around insults.

                  Nothing human is alien to me.

                  by WB Reeves on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 06:39:11 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  I get it, you agree with Johnson and the Nazi's (0+ / 0-)

                You and Johnson both think "sensible Germans" agreed with the Nazis ... and somehow, in your little minds you've decided that Nazis were not Anti-Semitic and neither were the Jew Haters you and Johnson think were "sensible Germans"

                No wonder you do not think my grandparents were "sensible" -- they did not hate Jews.

            •  Sorry but (0+ / 0-)

              you are conflating sensible with moral. To be sensible is to to be pragmatic in the pursuit of one's goals. To be moral is to do what is right regardless of consequence. The first requires flexibility and accommodation, the second requires courage and the will to resist.

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 06:16:18 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  Brilliant post!!! (0+ / 0-)

      I could not have said it better myself.

  •  There's no anti-semitism or defense of Nazism here (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Batya the Toon, TeamSarah4Choice

    Johnson's beef with the President is the common right-wing view that all foreign policy is basically a battle of good and evil, where we're the good guys and every one else are the bad guys.  For calling the Holocaust "senseless" instead of "evil", Johnson faults the President for not falling into that meme.

    •  I think that is pretty much her beef, yeah. (0+ / 0-)

      Well, that and the fact that he's a Democrat.

    •  Johnson's blog is Anti-Semitic (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JamieG from Md

      Fact is, Johnson calls him out for calling the Holocaust senseless as she, in her article, points to sensible things Nazi Platform stood for.

      Here is her entire blog and no where in her blog does she call Obama out for not using the word "evil"

      President Obama issued a statement yesterday to commemorate International Holocaust Remembrance Day. He noted that survivors who bore witness to “the horrors of the cattle cars, ghettos, and concentration camps have witnessed humanity at its very worst and know too well the pain of losing loved ones to senseless violence.” (We noted below how some in Europe chose to mark the day, which takes place each year on January 27, the day Soviet troops liberated Auschwitz.)

      The idea that all violence is “senseless” violence is one that has taken deep root on the left; it’s also, unfortunately, one that poses a major impediment to understanding the world.  

      Nazism may have been an ideology to which the United States was — and to which the president is — implacably opposed, but it is hardly “senseless.” By the early 1930s, the Nazi party had hundreds of thousands of devoted members and repeatedly attracted a third of the votes in German elections; its political leaders campaigned on a platform comprising 25 non-senseless points, including the “unification of all Germans,” a demand for “land and territory for the sustenance of our people,” and an assertion that “no Jew can be a member of the race.” Suffice it to say, many SENSIBLE Germans were persuaded.

      On September 12, 2012, President Obama also lamented the “the kind of senseless violence that took the lives” of four Americans in Benghazi. That, you may recall, is the day the president supposedly said the murders occurred as a result of a non-senseless terrorist attack carried out by jihadists.

      This sanitized version of events, both past and present, is surely more comforting. It’s also truly senseless.

      In her own words, she glorifies the Nazi platform where "No Jews can be a member of the race"

      Notice, no where in here does she say Obama should have condemned the Holocaust more than he did.  She was condemning him for condemning the Holocaust as "senseless violence"

      •  No-no-no-no-no. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WB Reeves

        She "glorifies" no such thing.

        She objects that the violence was highly directed, publicly laid out in the 1919 "25 Points," and managed to the nines with then-modern control systems.

        Look at the records the concentration camps were required to maintain. They were run as tight as bank.

        Where Eliana Johnson fails is that she goes nit-picking -- finding a distinction without a significant difference. "Senseless" from the point of view of the survivors and relatives is accurate for the President in that context.

        From the point of view of the Nazis, of course not. The Nazis over-rationalized their every political commitment. Murder. Hatred. Theft. No problem, they had rationalizations for everything.

        "Have you left no sense of decency, sir, at long last?" Army Attorney to Sen. McCarthy, 1954. "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012.

        by bontemps2012 on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 05:39:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  This diary and the comments supporting it (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bontemps2012, Batya the Toon

    are intellectually embarrassing to read.

    "It's the Dictionary definition!! How can you disagree with the Dictionary definition?!?!?"

    Jesus.

    To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

    by UntimelyRippd on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 02:26:04 PM PST

    •  Buy a more expensive dictionary ??? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      UntimelyRippd

      -
      -
      -
      -
      -
      -
      /snark

      (I do suspect that much of this is aimed to make dkos less enjoyable.)

      "Have you left no sense of decency, sir, at long last?" Army Attorney to Sen. McCarthy, 1954. "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012.

      by bontemps2012 on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 05:30:53 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  truth is, the comments have a bit of a sock-meet- (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WB Reeves, bontemps2012

        puppet flavor to them. several different commenters seem to have the same semi-literate approach to both reasoning and writing.

        To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

        by UntimelyRippd on Fri Feb 01, 2013 at 05:33:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  They're called 8-centers in China. (0+ / 0-)

          I learned that 10 minutes ago.

          "Have you left no sense of decency, sir, at long last?" Army Attorney to Sen. McCarthy, 1954. "We have done nothing to be ashamed of. We have nothing to apologize for." NRA 12/14/2012.

          by bontemps2012 on Sat Feb 02, 2013 at 03:59:42 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site