[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)