That scene in Cabaret is one of the most chilling things ever.
How often have you referred to German soldiers in WWII as Nazis without a nuanced examination of their personal beliefs?
And if someone had stepped in to correct you, would you have acknowledged your error, or said “No, dude, he’s a Nazi”?
rowe33
1806
Yeah, but you really have to look at the good he did after serving in the Nazi army to really appreciate his value as a man. Can’t judge him on his unfortunate affiliation with Hitler & friends. Is he not redeemed by protecting all those Bishops from the evil of being prosecuted for their molestations?
Timex
1807
I think that’s fair, although I tend to have a more illiberal condemnation of Germany than most.
But in this case, folks are blaming a literal child for being completed to join the Hitler youth, and then a young adult for being drafted while in seminary school. Convinced with his family’s history of seeming to buck the Nazi trend, to their detriment.
That’s, to me, not the same as someone who voluntarily joined the German army.
rowe33
1808
I don’t think anyone would really care as much about the Nazi stuff if he didn’t turn out to be such a piece of shit later in life. He had a chance at a great redemption arc but shat the bed on it. Imagine if he had actually come out and done genuine good by assisting in the prosecution and destruction of some truly evil bishops?
To be clear, I’m not actually blaming him for that. I’m just saying to most non-Catholics, a one-sentence summary of the man will likely (and not unreasonably) contain the word “Nazi”.
Also, this:
As a non Catholic, that doesn’t come to my mind. He was a conservative Pope that stepped down, one of the few that did. The word Nazis doesn’t come, especially when real Nazis do exist, and we almost lost the US to a bunch of fascist insurrectionists.
Hate who you want to hate, but this line of thinking is just a nonsense line of thinking. Cant believe people think this line of thinking would have any traction in world.
shrug
It’s been my experience, at least. I recall his Hitler Youth membership getting prominent coverage when he became Pope, and it was a big topic of conversation with people who otherwise didn’t pay much attention to the church or theology.
My point is, if you were to survey the nation on what they could name about the man, I’d wager that “Hitler Youth”/“Nazi”, “resigned” and “sex abuse” would be among the top answers.
Alstein
1812
For me , it is the child molestation and bigotry.
Francis for all his faults, at least seems to have some idea how to be a Christian and isn’t as bad.
The media made a big deal about beige suits and Dijon mustard.
Nothing burgers get made all the times and that people would list something as important as child Abuse scandals with forced participation in Hitler Youth is just a sad state of affairs.
It kind of shows how watered down the term Nazis has become, especially when you compare Hitler Youth to things like Auschwitz (God, if you ever want to ruin a summer faction with your family, have your dad bring you there).
Again, I don’t blame him for his forced membership and being drafted. My point is just that it’s a strong and lingering association in the public perception.
Personally, I’d much rather focus on the sex abuse scandals, anyway.
Poor Benedict: at least he only pretended to be a nazi for a short time
Aleck
1816
As another non-Catholic, when I think of Benedict I think of a man who was conservative, recognized he wasn’t up to the task of leading the Catholic Church, and stepped down.
His academic or theological prowess isn’t something I’m familiar with. What I do know about him is that his conservative values were pretty out of step with the majority of the U.S. church, and that he didn’t move as quickly or as aggressively as he should have to deal with the sex abuse scandal. Of course, neither did John Paul II or Francis, so maybe he gets graded on a sliding scale there.
So I heard an extended piece on NPR yesterday on Benedict and his legacy. The word Nazi didn’t come up once. I have no interest looking into other sources, but based this one, my bias is further confirmed that views posted on this board are not always representative of reality, however assertively they are expressed.
Carry on.
There are many cases where the views that are most popular in this board don’t match up with large swathes of the general populace. So hardly a surprise. But the phrasing of “representative of reality” is, in my opinion, not the right one. There’s a big difference between what a lot of people believe and the real facts on some topics. Vaccines are a great example.
Yes, but in this case the hypothesized facts were regarding what the views would be for large swathes of the general populace. Maybe the board is more blind in that area specifically. I’ll ruminate on it.
LockerK
1820
And as a counterpoint/sort of agreement: I wouldn’t consider NPR listeners to be “large swathes of the general populace” either.
True, but the rest of the country doesn’t really care one way or another.
So you have Catholics, people that don’t care, NPR Listeners, and than others.
So, of the group, the most disinterested interested party are NPR Listeners. So, if they don’t hear about it, I doubt others will.
Or their actual journalists, for that matter. I half suspect that NPR could do a piece on Kurt Waldheim without mentioning the word ‘Nazi’.
Nazis and Hitler Youth were two different things.
You could also be a soldier in the Wehrmacht and not be a Nazi.
