Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

If we're using "murder" as a legal term to mean something along the lines of "unlawful killing of a human" then according to German law at the time (as I understand it), no, it was not murder. If we're using it to mean something like "killing of a human in a way that I consider to be morally unjustified and which would be considered murder in jurisdictions that I consider to be civilized" then yes, it was murder.

Neither of those represent the definition I use for the word murder.

Let me simplify the question to this for you:

Was the killing of German Jews during the Holocaust consensual? Was it (1) non-consensual non-defensive killing or (2) merely consensual assisted suicide?

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

I have never ever in my life done anything remotely close to making that argument...
...
The OP makes it very clear that I firmly believe the killing of the Jews in Nazi Germany was not consensual....

I apologise for misreading you.

No worries, and no need to apologize.

Understanding each other (vs misunderstanding) is the exception not the rule, especially when communicating in writing, and especially when discussing philosophical topics like these were precision and technicalities are so key.

Seems like we all agree that the Jews did not consent to the Holocaust.

Yes, we agree completely on that.

Some of your words were about how far the "ordinary Germans" consented to the Holocaust. (I quoted the bits I was responding to).

My best guess is that you simply confused someone else's post with mine. To the best of my memory, I have never ever in my entire life used the phrase "ordinary Germans", which you have put into quotation marks.

However, if you are meaning to paraphrase something I wrote (and put that paraphrasing into quotation marks), then my advice to you in general is to always present and confirm your understanding/paraphrasing is correct, before then giving your would-be counter argument (or even expressing disagreement). For instance, you can say, "When you say 'ABC', do you mean 'XYZ'? I just want to confirm I understand you correctly before I respond further." It will save your interlocutor some time and stress, but it will save you even more.



With love,
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
a.k.a. Scott

[Steve3007]

Neither of those represent the definition I use for the word murder.

Let me simplify the question to this for you:

Was the killing of German Jews during the Holocaust consensual? Was it (1) non-consensual non-defensive killing or (2) merely consensual assisted suicide?

(1)

I think many would argue that the actions of the Nzo party in the matter of killing Jews was, even in term sof their own legal system , illegal...

You may well be right, but I guess Scott's aim is to construct a kind of reductio ad absurdum style of argument in support of his earlier proposals that taxation is violent robbery by saying something of the form: "If you believe A then in order to be consistent you must believe B and since B is absurd you can't consistently believe A". I suppose even if the murder of Jews in Nazi Germany was illegal even under German law at the time, since it was sanctioned, or at least tolerated, by the state, he could continue to make the argument in some form. I think it then shifts from an argument about the meaning of "murder" to one about the meaning of "consent".

No covlilised country would get a president/chancellor legal immunity for offical acts.

I guess you're thinking of the US Supreme Court's recent decision there eh?

[abuislam]

The Holocaust was a horrific genocide carried out by a totalitarian regime. The concept of "consent" doesn't apply here—victims had no choice or agency. Comparing this atrocity to issues like taxation misunderstands the nature of both. The Holocaust was unequivocally murder, not consensual in any sense. It’s crucial to address such topics with the respect and accuracy they deserve.

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

Hi, abuislam,

Some Background Facts:

Jews in Germany had the right to vote before Hitler came to power. The Weimar Republic, which existed from 1919 to 1933, was a democratic state where Jews, like other citizens, had voting rights and were able to participate in the electoral process. Many of the Jews who were killed in the Holocaust were German citizens.


With those facts in mind, among any others, do you believe the killing of German Jews during the Holocaust was consensual?

The Holocaust was unequivocally murder, not consensual in any sense.

I agree completely with your sentence above.


With love,
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
a.k.a. Scott

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

Neither of those represent the definition I use for the word murder.

Let me simplify the question to this for you:

Was the killing of German Jews during the Holocaust consensual? Was it (1) non-consensual non-defensive killing or (2) merely consensual assisted suicide?

(1)

I agree.


With love,
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes