Nazi-themed cafe opened in Indonesia

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,606
again what have german nazis have to do with the atrocities done by britishers on indians???
i clearly said if you consider nazis to be bad then please increase the no.'s in the list and add some other colonial powers names.
didn't expected this from an american.you were there slaves too and you know how they were.
Pointless. I cannot understand at all what you are trying to say. Can you?
 

apple

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
612
Likes
174
that's your version of history.
AFAIK hitler welcomed subhash chandra bose and he wanted the british to leave india.he also sent subhash chandra bose to japan where subhash chandra bose made azad hind fauj fight with british thugs.
history is written by the victors and you can write anything you want.
"History being written by the victors" may have been true, 3,000 years old when one civilisation was destroyed by another. Now-a-days, it's really, really not,

Hitler, in all version of history, encouraged the British to be more brutal towards Indians, considered Indians untermensch, and only wanted to "liberate" India from British oppression, after the British had refused to surrender to him.

Hitler shipped off Bose to Japan, after giving him nothing (apart from some baksheesh). While its quite a hypothetical situation, with no definite answer, there's alot of evidence that Hitler "gave" India to the Japanese.
 

angeldude13

Lestat De Lioncourt
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
2,499
Likes
3,999
Country flag
"History being written by the victors" may have been true, 3,000 years old when one civilisation was destroyed by another. Now-a-days, it's really, really not,

Hitler, in all version of history, encouraged the British to be more brutal towards Indians, considered Indians untermensch, and only wanted to "liberate" India from British oppression, after the British had refused to surrender to him.

Hitler shipped off Bose to Japan, after giving him nothing (apart from some baksheesh). While its quite a hypothetical situation, with no definite answer, there's alot of evidence that Hitler "gave" India to the Japanese.
again your version of history.
allied forces tried to hide the bombings of unarmed german citizens and mass rape of german ladies.
 

apple

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
612
Likes
174
again your version of history.
allied forces tried to hide the bombings of unarmed german citizens and mass rape of german ladies.
Ad hominem, you've got nothing fella. And you know it.

There was no hiding of the effects of strategic bombing. Us "Western Hypocritics", believe in free speech and transparency. Some, probably most actually, of the biggest opponents of the bombing campaign against Europe were Westerners. The mass rape of Germans+ others was done by the Soviets (or French Muslims from the Maghreb). You do know enough about history to understand we are different, right?

This has to do with an Indonesian café how?
 

angeldude13

Lestat De Lioncourt
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
2,499
Likes
3,999
Country flag
Ad hominem, you've got nothing fella. And you know it.

There was no hiding of the effects of strategic bombing. Us "Western Hypocritics", believe in free speech and transparency. Some, probably most actually, of the biggest opponents of the bombing campaign against Europe were Westerners. The mass rape of Germans+ others was done by the Soviets (or French Muslims from the Maghreb). You do know enough about history to understand we are different, right?

This has to do with an Indonesian café how?
britishers comminted atrocities on indian people and i want there and other colonial powers name in the list of like of the nazis.
not interested in debating with a hypocrite westerner doesn't mean i don't have fact or proofs.
it's just i don't wanna waste my time educating another ignorant westerner.
 

apple

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
612
Likes
174
britishers comminted atrocities on indian people and i want there and other colonial powers name in the list of like of the nazis.
not interested in debating with a hypocrite westerner doesn't mean i don't have fact or proofs.
it's just i don't wanna waste my time educating another ignorant westerner.
Do it yourself. You're not my boss, you can't make demands of me. I'm not writing up a proganda broadsheet for a Nazi sympathiser.

All you you've educated me on is insane some users of this forum, and presumably some Indians, are.

P.S. This is how you do ad hominem.

You are a digrace to yourself.

You are a disgrace to this board.

You are a disgrace to your country.

You are a disgrace to human kind.

You are a disgrace to Mammals.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
Hitler was no friend of India. Neither were the British nor even the Japanese. Two planned on subjugating us while one was already subjugating us.

Levels of cruelty don't matter as long as we were not at the receiving end. Hitler's cruelty to the Jews was astounding but was of no consequence to us. Whereas Britain's cruelty to us was of a far lesser degree but still relevant to us.

Take for example taxation during the times of British America. The Americans hated the tax regime which was considered "high." But they have no idea that the British tax in India was three times that of what the Americans faced, apart from loss of jobs and the right to live. The average life expectancy of an Indian under British rule was less than 30 years. Wonder why? While it was much more higher in Britain during the same time.

However we don't hate the British today, who actually harmed us. Similarly we have no reasons to hate Hitler, who never harmed us, regardless of whether he intended it or not.

People in Asia are enamoured by Hitler as much as the Americans are by Genghiz Khan who was far more cruel than Hitler. I doubt there is anybody in the US who hate Genghis Khan. So you shouldn't expect Asians to hate Hitler either.
 

apple

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
612
Likes
174
Hitler was no friend of India. Neither were the British nor even the Japanese. Two planned on subjugating us while one was already subjugating us.

Levels of cruelty don't matter as long as we were not at the receiving end. Hitler's cruelty to the Jews was astounding but was of no consequence to us. Whereas Britain's cruelty to us was of a far lesser degree but still relevant to us.

Take for example taxation during the times of British America. The Americans hated the tax regime which was considered "high." But they have no idea that the British tax in India was three times that of what the Americans faced, apart from loss of jobs and the right to live. The average life expectancy of an Indian under British rule was less than 30 years. Wonder why? While it was much more higher in Britain during the same time.

However we don't hate the British today, who actually harmed us. Similarly we have no reasons to hate Hitler, who never harmed us, regardless of whether he intended it or not.

People in Asia are enamoured by Hitler as much as the Americans are by Genghiz Khan who was far more cruel than Hitler. I doubt there is anybody in the US who hate Genghis Khan. So you shouldn't expect Asians to hate Hitler either.
Sure, you had no reason to specifically hate Hitler. But, judging from this thread, and this forum in general, there seem to a disturbingly high percentage of people who actually support Hitler. As I was saying, for me, it's mind-blowing that any non Germanic person wouldn't be, at least, tacitly opposed to Nazism.

Indian's comparing Hitler to British India have a, vague, point. But, it's a very difficult arguement to make, Hitler being Hitler. Hitler considered the British his cousins. He supported Britain's possession of India, and, he (should we say) "didn't like" Indians. Hitler really, really "didn't like" Indians. This is ignoring the nature of Nazi Europe, compared to British India.

Genghis Khan isn't the best example. For a start, I don't think many people know who is. Also, se was so long ago, he's quite divorced from the modern world. But, more importantly, I don't think there are any modern "Neo- Genghisites" who use him, and his regime, as role models.
 

angeldude13

Lestat De Lioncourt
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
2,499
Likes
3,999
Country flag
Do it yourself. You're not my boss, you can't make demands of me. I'm not writing up a proganda broadsheet for a Nazi sympathiser.

All you you've educated me on is insane some users of this forum, and presumably some Indians, are.

P.S. This is how you do ad hominem.

You are a digrace to yourself.

You are a disgrace to this board.

You are a disgrace to your country.

You are a disgrace to human kind.

You are a disgrace to Mammals.
you talk bull sh8t and i don't generally entertain people like you.
carry on
i will not entertain you any further
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,966
Likes
48,915
Country flag
This reminds me of the restaurant in india named Hitler it made international news
And the owner changed the name same thing with the Indian tv serial Hitler didi to
General didi.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,017
Sure, you had no reason to specifically hate Hitler. But, judging from this thread, and this forum in general, there seem to a disturbingly high percentage of people who actually support Hitler. As I was saying, for me, it's mind-blowing that any non Germanic person wouldn't be, at least, tacitly opposed to Nazism.

Genghis Khan isn't the best example. For a start, I don't think many people know who is. Also, se was so long ago, he's quite divorced from the modern world. But, more importantly, I don't think there are any modern "Neo- Genghisites" who use him, and his regime, as role models.
There are just a handful of Neo-Nazis here. Not all. The rest don't care. That's why the comparison to Genghis Khan. Most of our population is illiterate in such matters even with regards to Hitler, hence it is comparable to the numbers who know about Genghis in the US.

In a 100 years even the Neo-Nazi model would be obsolete, like the Neo-Genghite model, but the white man will forever remind us of his brutality.

Indian's comparing Hitler to British India have a, vague, point. But, it's a very difficult arguement to make, Hitler being Hitler. Hitler considered the British his cousins. He supported Britain's possession of India, and, he (should we say) "didn't like" Indians. Hitler really, really "didn't like" Indians. This is ignoring the nature of Nazi Europe, compared to British India.
His scholars considered Indians to be Aryans, but mixed with inferior tribes and hence no longer Aryans. Yeah, he made political noises about race, which didn't have to be true as long as they had political connotations, but his views did not really affect India directly. Meaning he had planned to hold India between the Japanese and the Germans back in 1942, but obviously nothing came out of it. I mean we can't be serious against a person whose threats were just hot air, 50 years later.

Even in India during the time, most Indians in the political class were against the war, and so was Gandhi. Help was given, but reluctantly. Meaning India was pushed to war without consultation of the Indian leadership. It was during the Battle of Britain and the threat of Japanese invasion that pushed even Gandhi to support the war effort. Meaning, none of this was done because we "hate" Hitler.

Hitler is the white man's burden. Hate him if you like. But don't ask us to hate a man who did nothing to us. However this doesn't mean I support Hitler's views of course. Even the so called "supporters" of Hitler don't support his racial views. As Satish mentioned in post 8, it is about how one man could bring about so much change so quickly. You can say we can make a more objective criticism of Hitler than the Europeans can.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,606
again your version of history.
allied forces tried to hide the bombings of unarmed german citizens and mass rape of german ladies.
The Luftwaffe blitzed London and every major city in Europe to include Norway. Bomber Command & 8th USAAF did what it had to.

Hitler also cynically supported the IRA. I don't see many Irish singing his praises today or wearing nazi regalia.
 

aerokan

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2011
Messages
1,024
Likes
817
Country flag
Sure, you had no reason to specifically hate Hitler. But, judging from this thread, and this forum in general, there seem to a disturbingly high percentage of people who actually support Hitler. As I was saying, for me, it's mind-blowing that any non Germanic person wouldn't be, at least, tacitly opposed to Nazism.

Indian's comparing Hitler to British India have a, vague, point. But, it's a very difficult arguement to make, Hitler being Hitler. Hitler considered the British his cousins. He supported Britain's possession of India, and, he (should we say) "didn't like" Indians. Hitler really, really "didn't like" Indians. This is ignoring the nature of Nazi Europe, compared to British India.

Genghis Khan isn't the best example. For a start, I don't think many people know who is. Also, se was so long ago, he's quite divorced from the modern world. But, more importantly, I don't think there are any modern "Neo- Genghisites" who use him, and his regime, as role models.
Our understanding of support and your understanding of support is not the same. You just blindly hate him because he did racial murders. Even when we take the argument that Hitler hated us, we don't have to 'hate' someone just because he hated us. That's not how it works in India. We don't have to look too deep into 'racial sensitivities' when we don't attach racial superiority any importance.

For example, if you look at our religious scripture of Ramayana,Lord Ram, (hero of the story) fights against Ravana (demon, villian of the story) and defeats him and kills him. When Ravana is on his death bed, Ram sends his brother to get some advice from Ravana. That is what is ingrained in us. It tells us to learn the good things and discard the bad things wherever they come from. BTW, Hitler would have commited suicide for the lack of attention when compared to Ravana for his evil deeds.

FYI, I always admired hitler for his ability to get his nation back on foot after being kept suppressed by the other powers in the West and denied them self-respect. And certainly, we still couldn't remotely match what he had achieved 70 years ago in terms of aircraft production rate per year even now.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,840
That's over the top, I would say. What fascinates those Asians who are into nazism?
The rationale why Asians do not have such revulsion to Hitler or Nazis is because Hitler and Nazis were in Germany and they did not in anyway influence or damage the Asian nations as they did to the Europeans.

Let me explain it as best as I can.

Anti Semitism has been a historical fact in Europe and within those of the Christian faith.

As is know hostility among Christians to Judaism is a historical fact from the infancy of Christianity. They were competitive religion and aggravated by the the persecution of Christians (in the New Testament,) and persisted over the years. The Christian drive for coverts as decreed by the Great Commission is also a reason for the wedge.

If one goes through the history of Europe, Anti Semitism is found to be rife.

However, the hate towards Hitler and Nazis is more of a political issue. The Holocaust, cleverly cloaked and given currency through wide propaganda has been used as a 'moral handle' and an ingenuous ploy of acting holier than thou, as it were, merely to serve a political purpose! That is if one observes it dispassionately with frank pragmatism.

If the concern for Jews and hate for Hitler and Nazis were so great as it is now, then Anne Frank's family would have got their permission to immigrate to the US and not be denied on the excuse that American immigration policies designed to protect national security and guard against an influx of foreigners during time of war..

Likewise, several of the British Royal family members were sympathetic towards Hitler. We all know about the activities of the Duke of Windsor (the former Edward VIII). One of the main reasons why he was forced to abdicate was his close relationship with Hitler's government. Even as late at 1970 the Duke of Windsor was saying that he "never thought Hitler was such a bad chap". After all, he was anti-communist wasn't he?

Edward was not the only member of the royal family who was sympathetic to Hitler. George VI's diaries and letters written in the 1930s make a fascinating read. They show that George was not concerned with the atrocities being committed by Hitler and was doing everything he could to support Neville Chamberlain's appeasement policy. In fact, his campaign was unconstitutional and was the last example in history of the monarchy trying to influence major political decisions in the UK.

George and Edward were not alone in these pro-German views. It was mainstream thought amongst the aristocracy. Recently released files on the Right Club shows a network of aristocrats and retired military officers willing to campaign for a negotiated peace with Germany in 1939 and 1940. Some of these characters were willing to provide Germany with official secrets.
(Nazi Germany and the Royal Family - Nazi Germany - The Education Forum)

In short, it became a politically correct thing to decry everything Nazi so as to justify all action against Germany and to ensure that they are totally de-fanged so that they are never a threat to the West.

Note the same thing did not happen as badly to Japan after the War, though to justify the Atom Bomb, it was necessary to show what horrid little bucktoothed chaps they were monsters and so the Nanking incident was blown larger than life and it stuck.

As late as a few days back, kosher meat has been banned in Poland.

Then, extraordinary as it seem, there is Bishop Richard Williamson amongst other Westerners who deny and even scientifically prove that the Holocaust is a myth!

Therefore, Anti Semitism is there and still flourishes in the West.

But, it is politically incorrect to exhibit Anti Semitism in the West.

For Asians, Nazism is so remote that it is not a big deal.

Secondly, Asian countries have been under colonial rule and have seen equal, if not more, atrocities. Therefore, they felt that Hitler was doing a good thing by kicking the colonialists in the teeth and so did not take into account the horrendous killings of Jews.

Odd are the ways people interpret from their own singular point of view.

At the same time the persecution of Jews in Europe through history and even now is reprehensible and very inhuman.
 
Last edited:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,840
Sure, you had no reason to specifically hate Hitler. But, judging from this thread, and this forum in general, there seem to a disturbingly high percentage of people who actually support Hitler. As I was saying, for me, it's mind-blowing that any non Germanic person wouldn't be, at least, tacitly opposed to Nazism.

Indian's comparing Hitler to British India have a, vague, point. But, it's a very difficult arguement to make, Hitler being Hitler. Hitler considered the British his cousins. He supported Britain's possession of India, and, he (should we say) "didn't like" Indians. Hitler really, really "didn't like" Indians. This is ignoring the nature of Nazi Europe, compared to British India.

Genghis Khan isn't the best example. For a start, I don't think many people know who is. Also, se was so long ago, he's quite divorced from the modern world. But, more importantly, I don't think there are any modern "Neo- Genghisites" who use him, and his regime, as role models.
I hope Post above would be an adequate explanation why disturbingly high percentage of people who actually support Hitler.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,840
@apple,

If one wants to get a glimpse of persecution of Jews in Europe, one should read Merchant of Venice.

William Shakespeare's (26 April 1564 (baptised) – 23 April 1616) play epitomises the racial inequality that Jews faced in Europe throughout history, the distaste for them waxes and waning but never vanishing, as it has not vanished even now, inspite of all the lip service done.

Here is a dialogue that indicates the agony of the Jews in Europe.

SALARINO
Why, I am sure, if he forfeit thou wilt not take his flesh.
What's that good for?

SALARINO
But you won't take his flesh if he can't pay. What's that good for?

SHYLOCK
To bait fish withal. If it will feed nothing else, it will feed my revenge. He hath disgraced me and hindered me half a million, laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies—and what's his reason? I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me I will execute—and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.


And see how the Christian Portia trick Shylock out of the legitimate contract with moral platitudes.

The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven,
Upon the place beneath.
It is twice blessed.
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
It is mightiest in the mightiest,
It becomes the throned monarch better than his crown.
His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,
An attribute to awe and majesty.
Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings.
But mercy is above this sceptred sway,
It is enthroned in the hearts of kings,
It is an attribute to God himself.
And earthly power dost the become likest God's,
Where mercy seasons justice.
Therefore Jew,
Though justice be thy plea, consider this,
That in the course of justice we all must see salvation,
We all do pray for mercy
And that same prayer doth teach us all to render the deeds of mercy.
I have spoke thus much to mittgate the justice of thy plea,
Which if thou dost follow,
This strict court of Venice
Must needs give sentence gainst the merchant there.


As the court grants Shylock his bond and Antonio prepares for Shylock's knife, Portia deftly appropriates Shylock's argument for 'specific performance', and points out that the contract only allows Shylock to remove the flesh, not the "blood", of Antonio

Note:

SHYLOCK
I have possess'd your grace of what I purpose;
And by our holy Sabbath have I sworn
To have the due and forfeit of my bond:
If you deny it, let the danger light
Upon your charter and your city's freedom.
You'll ask me, why I rather choose to have
A weight of carrion flesh than to receive
Three thousand ducats: I'll not answer that:
But, say, it is my humour: is it answer'd?
What if my house be troubled with a rat
And I be pleased to give ten thousand ducats
To have it baned? What, are you answer'd yet?
Some men there are love not a gaping pig;
Some, that are mad if they behold a cat;
And others, when the bagpipe sings i' the nose,
Cannot contain their urine: for affection,
Mistress of passion, sways it to the mood
Of what it likes or loathes. Now, for your answer:
As there is no firm reason to be render'd,
Why he cannot abide a gaping pig;
Why he, a harmless necessary cat;
Why he, a woollen bagpipe; but of force
Must yield to such inevitable shame
As to offend, himself being offended;
So can I give no reason, nor I will not,
More than a lodged hate and a certain loathing
I bear Antonio, that I follow thus
A losing suit against him. Are you answer'd?....

SHYLOCK
When it is paid according to the tenor.
It doth appear you are a worthy judge;
You know the law, your exposition
Hath been most sound: I charge you by the law,
Whereof you are a well-deserving pillar,
Proceed to judgment: by my soul I swear
There is no power in the tongue of man
To alter me: I stay here on my bond.....

PORTIA
Tarry a little; there is something else.
This bond doth give thee here no jot of blood;
The words expressly are 'a pound of flesh:'
Take then thy bond, take thou thy pound of flesh;
But, in the cutting it, if thou dost shed
One drop of Christian blood, thy lands and goods
Are, by the laws of Venice, confiscate
Unto the state of Venice.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,840
In other words, I wish to state so that Westerners do not misunderstand Indians for not having the same hatred for Hitler and the Nazis is because there has been no conflict between Germany or the Asians or even between Jews in India.

The Jews have been appreciated since they have gone about their business without causing offence, since their religion did not have any clash with Indian religions, unlike as in the world of Christendom.

The Jews existed so seamlessly in India that one did not even know of their persecution elsewhere and their agony. And they were not in such significant numbers to make much of an adverse reaction to the then Indian society.

They were, in a manner of speaking, tolerated and existed and none really found them a matter of any concern to be worried or be displeased or pleased. It was practically a social inclusiveness in all matter except maybe business.

And what happened in Europe was not really known since the connect was minimal.

Therefore, it would not be fair to be angered that the anger against Hitler in India is not that pronounced as in the West.

Neither the Jews nor the Nazis affected the routine of India.

Though, yes, one feels sorry for the Jews and of that there is no doubt. They have never harmed India and instead there were many prominent Jews in the Indian society.
 
Last edited:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top