[HN Gopher] Stanford launches Archive of the Military Tribunal a...
___________________________________________________________________
Stanford launches Archive of the Military Tribunal at Nuremberg,
1945-46
Author : drdee
Score : 35 points
Date : 2023-06-01 02:37 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (library.stanford.edu)
(TXT) w3m dump (library.stanford.edu)
| BSEdlMMldESB wrote:
| ah, this confirms some stuff.
|
| now that the last person who lived through this has died, the
| time is ripe for the 'official' history to be officially
| officialized
| NoRelToEmber wrote:
| _They had also accepted Soviet insistence that only Axis
| aggression was covered by the new court - otherwise the Soviet
| authorities would have been in the dock as well for carving up
| Poland in 1939 and attacking Finland three months later._ -
| http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/20...
| eschulz wrote:
| The Nuremberg Trials were fascinating. While I think many of the
| individuals leading the tribunal were trying to do a good job in
| the tradition of their respective nations' legal frameworks, the
| victorious allies could really not see eye to eye on what was a
| fair measure of retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence, etc. So
| my take is that largely all legal norms were discarded or
| violated, and the tribunal had to reach sentences and conclusions
| that were politically and diplomatically acceptable for the US,
| UK, France, and the USSR (not to mention a dozen or more other
| nations relying on the four victorious major powers in the
| immediate aftermath of the war).
| dmix wrote:
| Are there any good documentaries or books that dig into this
| without getting to academic?
| eschulz wrote:
| I'd be very curious to see what people recommend since I
| think it's very important to consider how the victors behaved
| at the end of the war. I studied some details about Nuremberg
| while in law school, from an Anglo American legal point of
| view, and then I spent a lot of time on wikipedia learning
| the historical background of the individuals involved.
| 0xdeadbeefbabe wrote:
| Eichmann in My Hands by Peter Malkin
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| I wonder what the founding president of Stanford, David Starr
| Jordan, has to say about eugenics, or how his ideas contributed
| to one of the most horrific situations in human history.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blood_of_the_Nation
|
| https://archive.org/details/bloodofnationstu00jorduoft
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_eugenics#Relationship_wit...
|
| Jim Crow and the Trail of Tears were other inspirations of the
| monstrosities crimes against humankind tried at Nuremberg.
|
| Nazis were horrible. Some Americans were just as horrible and got
| away with it. Some of them worked as Stanford as _their first
| president_.
| idlewords wrote:
| Another impressive reverse Godwin (niwdog?) in what is proving
| to be a fecund thread.
| ed25519FUUU wrote:
| Nuremberg Code #1
|
| > _The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely
| essential. This means that the person involved should have legal
| capacity to give consent; should be situated as to be able to
| exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any
| element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other
| ulterior form of constraint or coercion_
|
| Wow we sure threw that one out the window with the covid 19
| vaccine didn't we?
|
| Sincerely, a remote employee who was still forced to get the
| vaccine with the threat of losing my job.
| hackerlight wrote:
| > Wow we sure threw that one out the window with the covid 19
| vaccine didn't we?
|
| I don't consent to breathing in the virus particles of someone
| who increased their chances of getting infected, or increased
| the viral load they carried around, because they refused the
| vaccine. Ultimately you need some way to balance people's
| rights whenever they are conflicting. Your right to refuse the
| vaccine vs my right to not die due to your ignorance.
| ed25519FUUU wrote:
| How would you have breathed in my virus particles when I'm a
| remote employee 1,000 miles away from you?
| akomtu wrote:
| We need to go deeper: "I don't consent to being exposed to
| crazy ideas that bloom in the minds of some people."
| iosono88 wrote:
| [dead]
| cyberax wrote:
| > Wow we sure threw that one out the window with the covid 19
| vaccine didn't we?
|
| No, we have not.
|
| Also, it's completely asinine to compare voluntary vaccination
| by an incredibly safe vaccine in the middle of a pandemic that
| claimed millions of lives, with forced medical experiments
| often resulting in deaths.
| gbN025tt2Z1E2E4 wrote:
| > an incredibly safe vaccine
|
| yeah, i'm going to need you to prove that statement by
| showing me the standard 10-12 year safety studies available
| for those "incredibly safe" mRNA vaccines.
| phillc73 wrote:
| In some countries vaccination was planned to not be
| voluntary. This was the case in Austria, with a government
| stipulated mandate.[1] The situation changed rapidly, but
| just pointing out that vaccination against COVID was not
| always planned to be voluntary, especially as the OP
| mentioned his employer was mandating it.
|
| [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60155635
| idlewords wrote:
| This is like a reverse Godwin. Nice!
| [deleted]
| AlbertCory wrote:
| I recently reread _The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich_ which
| was written a long, long time ago. But the author had paid his
| dues by reading all this, when it was a lot harder to get at than
| it is now.
| IceHegel wrote:
| I highly recommend Human Smoke by Nicholas Baker (2008) for a
| book that puts WWII in a historical perspective different from
| the one we inherited.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-06-02 23:00 UTC)