File spoon-archives/marxism-international.archive/marxism-international_1997/marxism-international.9709, message 168


Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 11:03:17 +0100
From: James Heartfield <James-AT-heartfield.demon.co.uk>
Subject: M-I: HWE LET'S HAVE A VOTE


Like Chris and a few others I think this discussion, whilst interesting
is interminable. I suspect it is because we all are finding it diffiult
to retreat from loudly proclaimed principles, myself included.

I don't normally want to put the breaks on discussion, but this one has
surely been round the houses by now. So let's have a vote.

I don't know if that is a breach of list etiquette, but I don't see why
it should be. I guess it might be seen as 'might is right', but I think
it would just be the best way to agree to differ.

Of course there is always the problem of how you frame the question.
First, not everyone has read Daniel Goldhagen's book or Norman
Finkelstein's review (and it did not seem to help when we did), so let's
assume knowledge only of the points of view represented on the list.
That way if people have failed to convince others, they have at least
had a chance to put their case.

As an opponent of Goldhagen's thesis, I want to avoid the temptation of
putting the case too weakly, so I propose this wording:

'Do you agree or disagree with this statement:

"Most ordinary Germans were not Hitler's willing executioners"'

Now of course you can object that you do not have all the information to
make that judgement. In which case you do not have to vote either way.
Conversely, you might object that other people do not know enough to
make that judgement. But let's face it, we have all had enough
opportunity to put the case.

To start the ball rolling I vote that

'I agree with the statement "most ordinary Germans were not Hitler's
willing executioners"'
-- 
James Heartfield


     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005