Comments on: Ultimate Racism: The Liberation of Paris

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 21:21:49 +0000

Joshua, not really. The logic outcome of unfettered racism is slavery until things become difficult. Then you kill them all. This is how it has happened too many times to split hairs over the nature of inductive arguments.

By: Joshua Zelinsky

Joshua Zelinsky — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:38:58 +0000

Greg, that’s an argument that racism can lead to genocide, not that it must lead to genocide.

By: Theo McBride

Theo McBride — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:20:42 +0000

Greg, I understand what you are saying and take your point. Salt in the wounds, indeed.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 08:33:20 +0000

Theo, you are (may be correct) about “the” ultimate. I’m using the term here more lie “Extreme” in “extreme sports” but I did not want to use the word “extreme” because that opens the question of “non extreme” racism. (which may be a valid arguing point put a disraction)

Also, this story is about three events. The cold blooded assassination (because they were African) of soldiers after surrender, the holocaust, and the decision by the US to insist that the French only march white troops in the front column on the return to Paris. Talk about salt in the wounds!

By: Theo McBride

Theo McBride — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 07:21:07 +0000

Surely Nazism was the ultimate racism. What you’re talking about here is hardly in their league.

By: Mankel

Mankel — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 23:31:46 +0000

Of course Joshua,

In South Africa no one had the intention of massacring the black while they were working in the gold mines and cleaning their houses. The Hutus and the Tutsis didn’t have any intentions of killing each other (with machetes) until they had it easily instilled by a radical minority.

But the better example is that of the long history of the conquest of America. South and north. Did the conquerors have the intention to massacre them?

In the north the cleansing was almost surgical, while in the south, as mainly men came, they enslaved the indigenous population, raped (and after married) the women and left a mostly mixed population that is still ruled in most of the countries by the “mostly white”.

So, the racists that don’t have the intention of massacring their hate subjects is because they can’t, yet.

By: Joshua Zelinsky

Joshua Zelinsky — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 23:09:25 +0000

Greg, I presume you mean “unchallenged.” In any event, I’d be curious what evidence you have for that claim. There are a lot of people out there who are racist who have zero intention of massacring the groups they are racist to.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 22:42:42 +0000

Joshua: Racism, left challenged, always leads to genocide. Always.

By: Mankel

Mankel — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 22:10:32 +0000

A great portion of those “white Frenchmen” that entered Paris were actually white Spaniards that fought with the allied armies (mostly French) after the defeat of the republicans (the loyalists) in the Spanish Civil War.

We all know how the allied forces forced Franco to step down in favor of a liberal democracy… uh, I mean, not…

By: a lurker

a lurker — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 22:08:17 +0000

Ami y'a bon (8:47) This is a French short. I can't find a copy without subtitles, but basically the loudspeaker near the end of the film is saying that your services are no longer needed and you are not getting paid. That should be enough to understand what is going on.