Talk:Horst Mahler
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
I made this article un-biased, as the previous entry was clearly written by somebody with no objectiveity. Now it is fair and balanced. I report, you decide.
[edit] Changes
If you made the changes that I am associating you with, I absolutely agree. Still, yours seemed to have a sympathetic POV in Mahler's favor, rather than NPOV. The current version (before I edited it) swung the pendulum back far in the other direction...so I tried my best to stay NPOV in my revision, especially by adding some of his background that I find especially interesting.
I kept the anti-semetic labelling because he attributes a lot of problems to the jews that become generalizations...which, in my opinion, is anti-semetism.
However, I would argue that the NPD he is associated with is not neo-nazi; they attract a great deal of support from these individuals for various reasons, but that does not mean this is a neo-nazi organization per se. Their platform has several indications that they might be, but if it were found to be a Nazi organization, it certainly would not exist in Germany. If there was concrete evidence, its opponents would jump on it. Whether or not they are hiding behind a curtain is another issue, but calling them neo-nazi is making a call the powers to be have not been able to. A lot of it has to do with perception and perspective; Who is a terrorist and who qualifies as a radical activist? Or even a freedom fighter? Is a nationalist who agrees with socialism a neo-nazi, as the nazis were technically national socialists? Is xenophobia Nazism, or is it isolationism? What about nationalism with volkish interests? A social consensus seems to have done this for us, though the NPD registers off the chart in some people's minds. Likewise, the last thing to consider is the threat people tend to percieve by the movement and the instant comparison to a historical event for context - a wise reaction indeed. Still, this can sometimes render an inaccurate conclusion.
- The NPD's political activities are constrained by German law, but it is clear that they push in a far right direction, and many of their politicians have been revealed as neo-nazis. --- Charles Stewart 15:39, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Naturally they draw attention from the neo-nazis...in comparison, Irish pride bands here in the states draw neo-nazi crowds. You should keep in mind that only in the past ten years has nationalism in Germany not been directly equated to Nazism.
It is true in the post war years, many key figures within the organization did have Nazi backgrounds - yet so did the United States' Research Department. Case in point, you cannot judge a party from its past participation or leadership. Go back far enough, the Democrats and Republicans are in a lot of hot water by your logic.
Furthermore, other so-called "far right" political organizations in Germany have vanished because of strong neo-Nazi undercurrents. The NPD is still around and actually growing marginally stronger. I repeat myself: if they were "neo-Nazi", whatever that means, they would be banned. In a contemporary sense, what does that word mean when applied to a political party anyway? To be a nationalist? To have racialist leanings? Every civilization then, except the United States and the areas its influence has stread into as of late, would be "Nazi" by your book.
How incredibly convienant that "Nazi" is such a universal term that can be used to discredit any program that works against a multicultural agenda and the imperialist global market. Germany is America's pet.
It never ceases to amaze me how willingly people fall for such utter nonsense when it is used as a manipulative tool. Neo-nazism is best described as it relates to the Holocaust: hatred towards others based on race or ethnic prejudice carried out through VIOLENT means. Stopping immigration? Not neo-nazi. Preserving cultural identity? not neo-nazi. Trying to start a race war? Neo-nazi. Conducting assults on immigrants and other ethnicities? Neo-nazi. Unless we are talking about mass genocide or discrimination towards residents as announced policy, the NPD should not be banned. Why have other far-right parties been kicked to the curb? Violence, too close of an identification with the Nazis. To glorify a policy or two does not qualify. Yet to openly embrace the regime is to accept all that has been done - including the slaughter of an entire peoples.
Remember that Nazis and Neo-Nazis are only abbreviations for Nationalists and Neo-Nationalists. We have a direct connection between those words. It is not because of the past but for our future that nationalistic thinking has to be overcome. Therefore the NPD has to be forbidden. What the NPD does and what it says are different things. It wasn't not forbidden because it isn't supporting fascist. The reason was a juristic farce. Too many Agents of the Verfassungsschutz were in the NPD. And the Kolleg is definitely not aiming for a socialist revolution...
[edit] HM's involvement with the RAF
This page and National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD) both claim that HM was a member of the RAF: my understanding is that he was sympathetic to them, but that he was not a member. Can this be settled? --- Charles Stewart 15:39, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
I believe I found it on a government website going into details with the RAF. He was a cofounder if I remember correctly what I read. If you find otherwise, please feel free to change. Sorry I do not have the source on me to consult.
He was originally RAF's lawyer, but as time went by he became closer and closer to the group's activities. I do not, however, believe he joined them formally. On the other hand - how did one formally join the RAF?
good point. Anyway he was on the extreme left and now he is extreme right.
[edit] Objections to this Article as of 12/18/06
The last statement of this article's introduction, claiming that "Mahler takes pride in being one of the most aggressive antisemites; one of his openly declared main political and ideological goals is to destroy Judaism," needs to be removed. This is not only editorialising the article, but a lie unless backed up by a specific quote, which I, being familiar with alot of Mahler's writings, have never seen. Mahler's views are complex, arising out of his interpretations of Hegelian philosophy, religion, economic systems, and how they relate to different peoples. In a complicated way, (such as in this essay: http://home.alphalink.com.au/~radnat/mahler/parttwo.html) he has actually expressed a desire for moving beyond WWII, beyond the sort of redundant German-Jewish struggle that results from it, and towards a more sophisticated understanding of why the peoples are different, why they have become historical enemies (in a manner of speaking), and how things could be resolved without defaulting to mutual hatred. Make no mistake, he is a racialist-nationalist, but from reading his own words, I believe he sees this as a path to peace between peoples, and mutual respect. You may be against that, but you cannot bias this article to suit your "anti" views and then call it neutral. Have you ever even read any of Mahler's essays to make any judgment on his beliefs whatsoever?
"Anti-Semitism"
The phrase "anti-semitism" has become, like "racism," an amorphous buzz-word that is used by certain peoples simply to try and bias other's against their opponents. It is like the term "fascism," that was only ever loosely defined by Mussolini, but now is slung about in such a way as to mean all sorts of things and nothing. As has been quoted a million times, Orwell said that when someone calls Smith a fascist, what they mean is "I hate Smith." The same is true of the above. These words are largely political tools that keep people from actually engaging in exchanges of ideas about history, real issues, and real solutions. This sort of suppression only results in more of what I would truly consider hatred of Jews, as well as anti-GENTILISM, for that matter.
Am I Biased?
I don't wish for this article to be baised in a positive way towards Mahler, but for it to simply be informative and non-judgmental. Let the man's words and actions speak for themselves, and people will be repulsed, indifferent, or appreciative as a result on their own. This site is not meant to be a vehicle for your agenda or mine, but a warehouse of bare information, which is the best purpose and shining achievement of the Internet.
I do believe in nationalism myself, even with a degree of racialism - what is often referred to as "identity politics" - but I know positively that I am neither an anti-semite nor a racist. I do know and have known people of jewish descent, non-europeans, etc, and like any people, you either get along or not on an individual basis. However, this does not negate the importance of broader issues of cultures, belief systems, and human bio-diversity, both in and of itself and as it may relate to the former items. I believe mutual respect, seperateness so far as it enables sustainability and does not harm or impoverish nations, respectful and open communication between peoples, and anti-imperialist political systems are the path to as harmonious an existence humanity can find on this planet. Elements unique to the Jewish experience that relate to their dispersion and, I believe, behaviors they evolved to survive within host societies has placed them in an uncomfortable position on the world stage, and fate brought this to a head against Germany. I believe, like I think Mahler does, in finding ways to resolve this that do not rely on hatred and destruction, either of European man, Jewish man, or the Islamic people who are right now caught in the middle. How realistic that sort of resolution is, I can't say. History does not make one very optimistic. However, in all of this, I do not find any hatred. Still, to organizations like the ADL, even criticising Israeli actions against the palestinians is anti-semitism and thought crime, so I guess I'm just whistling Dixie here. 71.56.38.173 19:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
