From: Randall Parker 

In , note these
cogitations from blucy{at}mediaone.net Bill Lucy:
> > How about that book that argued that ordinary Germans were involved in
> > the Holocaust? Kinda similar theme in some respects.
> I don't know of the book, but I wouldn't be surprised if the theme is the
same.
> We are all capable of being cruel. Many of us do it without thinking that we
> are.

Luckily my memory access circuits that may fail one day will then
miraculously work the next day. Hitler's Willing Executioners. It caused
quite a stir when it came out so I'm a little surprised you aren't
familiar. Anyway, here it is:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0679772685/o/qid=958004270/sr=8-
1/ref=aps_sr_b_1_1/102-0091995-5808018

Hitler's Willing Executioners : Ordinary Germans and the
                     Holocaust
                     by Daniel Jonah Goldhagen

It has 9 editorial reviews and 78 customer reviews. So you can definitely
get the flavor of it just from Amazon. There's even a book that has been
written to collect reactions to it.

> On a macro/societal level, just so. But an individual doesn't have that
context
> much of the time.

If you are saying that a lot of individuals don't know whether they really
are thinking for themselves then I guess I'd have to agree. But a person
with a sufficiently critically and analytically trained mind ought to be
able to tell this.

Part of the problem with discussing the problem of freedom is that the very
idea that someone can be free or not free is a result of their sentience.
Partially developed sentience really limits a person's ability to even
choose to be free.

> > > Of course, I think I'm free. But Juan Miguel Gonzalez also
believes he is
free.
> >
> > You do not know that.
>
> Juan Miguel has said on more than one occasion that he believes he is free. I
> understand the difference between what someone says and what someone actually
> believes, but I tend to trust what someone says. Others do not.

Okay, he might believe it. But then I'd want to ask him what he means by
this. A Russian friend likes to point out to me that communists say exactly
the opposite of what is true. They adopt such weird definitions of common
words that they can at least partly believe these falsehoods.


> I value much more the political definition rather than some moral definition
> ("Freedom from Want" is just a Norman Rockwell painting to
me). I suspect
> that's pretty much your view.

Yes. We agree with each other far more than we should ever publically
acknowledge .

>But it also means I'd much rather focus on
> Algernon Sidney's close equivalence of freedom with revolution -- from which
> Jefferson originally took his quote about the need for our government to have
a
> revolt every few years.
>
> If "we" choose to revolt, we will for a time be in the grips of
totalitarianism
> -- it's not possible to succeed without it. If we choose not to revolt, are
we
> truly "free"?
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5