capitalism.png: Living Wage as a Service (LWaaS)

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > capitalism.png: Living Wage as a Service (LWaaS)

DJJIB-DJDCT: Feb 1, 2024

I think influencer culture has really broken some people, if this is how they handle this happening in their life

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmdAYAttFAE

# ¿ Apr 1, 2024 13:15

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 21, 2024 04:43

DJJIB-DJDCT: Feb 1, 2024

Ruffian Price posted:

Imagine seeing this guy on the subway as he looks at his reflection in the door, realizes it would make for a good shot for the video, then quietly pulls out his phone and makes a pensive face for 10 seconds

# ¿ Apr 1, 2024 20:14

DJJIB-DJDCT: Feb 1, 2024

This came up in the Ukraine thread, but the one time Germans actually protested against the Holocaust, the Rosenstrasse protest, the protestors won, no violence was used against them, and memos show the Nazi party was immediately concerned and responsive to public protest against one of their policies.

Contemporary Liberalism, is literally more heavy handed and less responsive than Naziism.

# ¿ Apr 3, 2024 20:10

DJJIB-DJDCT: Feb 1, 2024

Since the turn away from industrial labour in the 1970's, there's no real reason, materially, for protests to be listened to. What are you going to do? How could you actually hurt them in a meaningful way? Your protests don't impact stock prices and spreadsheets.

Compare to general strikes and protests crippling industrial economies, and thus leading to a response addressing their demands. In 1968, the French economy was practically shut down. Occupy, critically, did not actually occupy Wall Street in the same way that occupying docks and factories did - by shutting down productivity.

# ¿ Apr 3, 2024 20:41

DJJIB-DJDCT: Feb 1, 2024

BonHair posted:

Yeah, over in Denmark, mass protests and demonstrations are fairly common (currently for Gaza for example), but the beauty is that they can be applauded for their voice in the conversation and then ignored. America is just being stupid about it. Sounds like even the Nazis were smarter (they did not, in fact, stop holocausting).

They did stop Holocausting the specific group the protests were about. It's why Rosenstrasse is so troubling, because it makes it clear that if people protested on behalf of other victims, they'd have been saved too. In fact, Nazi memos about it openly say they would drop the policy, a core part of their ideology, if they thought the German people didn't approve.

Whereas, in America, it's drummed into the technocrats that there is nothing worse than abandoning policy for something as gauche as what the public wants. Their ideology is premised on opposition to popular will, if anything.

Which is why the only way for people to actually change things is by confronting them. Actually damaging their material interests until they relent. If there was to be another Occupy, it would have to actually shut down trading, consistently, somehow.

# ¿ Apr 3, 2024 21:02

DJJIB-DJDCT: Feb 1, 2024

khazar sansculotte posted:

Are the primary sources readily accessible? Reading the Wikipedia page makes it sound like the protestors "got away with it" because the Nazis didn't want to create the appearance of disunity and wouldn't be able to keep it secret if they killed them all, rather than because they cared whether people approved of deporting Jews.

Resistance of the Heart, Nathan Stoltzfus posted:

�When I arrived in Berlin to write the story of the Rosenstrasse Protest in 1985, no one else was working on the
project, and there were merely a couple of dozen written sources, mostly in German, that mentioned the event at
all. The longest was a newspaper article; most treated the story in a paragraph or less, as if it were a fluke
and had nothing to say about the nature of Nazi power in general. Nazi documentation of the Rosenstrasse Protest,
other than that of Goebbels�s diary, had apparently not survived the war, and much of the explanation for the
Nazi response to the Rosenstrasse Protest had to be drawn from the nature and structure of the National Socialist
concept and practice of political power. I was told by a professor at the Free University as well as at the West
Berlin Jewish Community that the last survivors of the incident had �just died.� But in response to radio
interviews and newspaper notices, dozens of eyewitnesses began to call me. Two employees of the West Berlin
Jewish Community had shared the experience of the Rosenstrasse Protest without
knowing it. Occasionally Germans called to assure me that all eyewitnesses were certainly dead by now.

Although there was not a single scholarly article on the protest, I learned that to claim the protest was
successful was to challenge prevailing interpretations. Resistance to interpreting the protest as a force that
influenced the regime and saved Jews from death continues. As a means of influence, the protest carries a very
mixed message: On the one hand, some Germans did protest the Holocaust, but on the other, if it was possible to
do so, why didn�t more do this? The German Resistance Memorial Museum of Berlin has scores of pamphlets on topics
ranging from grocers who secretly gave Jews more than was officially allowed to the assassination attempt on
Hitler, but nothing on Rosenstrasse.

In addition to interviews, many of my sources were from the trial of Otto Bovensiepen, at the Berlin District
Court, a fortresslike and decorous building on Turmstrasse, where access was very unusual. Here were the stories,
in the form of eyewitness reports, supporting documents, and Gestapo memos of the former chief of the Berlin
Gestapo, who together with his henchmen had stood trial in 1969 for the deportation and murder of some
thirty-thousand Berlin Jews.

The Bovensiepen Trial was a fractional part of a many-faceted trial directed against the Reich Security Main
Office (RSHA), which included various police forces, the Gestapo, the secret police, the SS, and its intelligence
branch, the SD. The trial was discontinued, still incomplete, in the early 1970s. But the first step�the
collection of evidence�had filled two rooms. The court had embarked on its enormous enterprise with great
thoroughness by collecting documents from twenty-five archives and personal collections around the world. Courts
had confiscated wartime documents from the privacy of homes. On hand were scores of supporting documents, such as
maps, telephone directories, and the complete records of other postwar trials of former Nazis from around
Germany. In addition, thousands of pages of transcribed statements from hundreds of witnesses swelled the
records. There was testimony from Gestapo men and their secretaries, from Berlin street police and their
superiors in the Berlin police hierarchy, from survivors of Auschwitz and other camps and ghettos in the East,
and from eyewitnesses. Each document bore one of three colors: Purple folders were those of the victims, green
for the accused, orange for other witnesses.

In the court records differences were enormous between testimonies of victims and perpetrators who were hauled in
front of the court. The stories from the surviving Jews were always passionate and often full of detail, while
the reports of their oppressors were characteristically so lifeless as to
suggest that they must have been unconscious in twelve years of Nazi rule. The implication was that the Nazi
witnesses had not chosen anything and had taken no initiative during those twelve years (but had somehow managed
to make wonderfully big strides in their advancement up the career ladder).

Some of the depositions, culled for the Bovensiepen Trial from earlier postwar trials, were from as early as the
late 1940s and early 1950s. Most, however, were from the mid and late 1960s. Early statements made under oath
confirmed critical details. Nearly incredible events, like the return of dozens of intermarried Jews from
Auschwitz after their deportation to that death camp from Rosenstrasse, were verified in repeated testimonies and
integrated into the court�s own narrative of events. The multiplicity of sources allowed for the crosschecking of
facts, and the court itself had made judgments on issues of cause and effect. The massive collection of documents
provided invaluable insight into the operations of the machinelike efficiency of a bureaucracy that was only
briefly interrupted by a street protest. Yet the German court, which concluded that the Rosenstrasse Protest
caused the Gestapo to release intermarried Jews, had been interested in determining what the men on trial knew
about the Final Solution during the Third Reich and whether they had acted �correctly��without physical abuse�in
the process of deportation (a counterproductive inquiry since the assembly line�like efficiency with which the
deportation process worked to maximize the number of Jews killed frowned on public abuse of Jews).�

COURT TRIALS CITED

Berlin. Landgericht (District Court) Berlin. Otto Bovensiepen et al. I Js 9/65.
Berlin. Landgericht. Berlin. G�nther Abrahamsohn. 1 PkLs 7/52.
Berlin. Landgericht Berlin. Josef (�Sepp�) Dietrich. I P Js 3767.65.
Berlin. Landgericht. Berlin. Stella K�bier. I PKs I/57.
Berlin. Landgericht Berlin. Walter Stock. PkLs 3/52.
Berlin. Landgericht Berlin. Walter Stock. 4 Sp Ls 832/47.
Berlin. Landgericht Berlin. Special Court Document, Special Court IV Pk. KLs 2/42.
Berlin. Kammergericht (Supreme Court) Berlin. Friedrich Bosshammer. I Js 1/65 (RSHA).
Berlin. Kammergericht Berlin. Fritz W�hrn. I Js I/65 (RSHA).
Koblenz. National Archives. Karl Krell, 4 SpLs 16/47.
Frankfurt. Landgericht Frankfurt am Main. Alois Brunner. 50 Js 36019/84.
Nuremberg. Nuremberg Trial Documents.
Wiesbaden. Hessisches Hauptstaatsarchiv (Hessen Main State Archive). Josef Hedderich. 4 Ks 2/53.
Wiesbaden. Hessisches Hauptstaatsarchiv. Georg Albert Dengler. 2a Ks 1/49.
Wiesbaden. Hessisches Hauptstaatsarchiv. Heinrich Baab. 51 Ks 1/50.
Wiesbaden. Hessisches Hauptstaatsarchiv. Joseph Hedderich and Johann Schmitz. 4 Ks 2/53.