100 year old WW2 veteran: "the sacrifice wasn't worth the result of what it is now"

[Mnementh]

sc94597 said:

Mnementh said:

Sorry, what is with this Turing-strawmen? Let me remind you, Turings chemical castration was forced by the *british* government *after* World War II. A non-fascist regime. So why are you applying Turing here, if his sacrifices have literally not changed the outcome as otherwise Turing wouldn't have happened.

And you pick very specific freedoms. There are lots of freedoms infringed today. Big global companies have knowledge over your life that Hitler only could've dreamed of. They are controlling your life by selecting what videos you watch, what items you most likely pick in an online shop. They are using that knowledge and power mostly for advertisment, but the Snowden leaks already revealed that governments can and will access that knowledge about you and the power over you. A Hitler today would it have much, much easier, as we have given up a lot of freedoms to corporate interest. And we haven't won much in other regards: we still have homeless, we still have people uselessly dying avoidable deaths, in the US even just of bureacracy with health care.

Let me remind you: Hitler was elected in democratic elections. Just like Trump. So, viewing from his eyes: what did his buddies die for?

Let's stop shitting over an old man that endured and sacrificed so much more than me and you can even imagine. If nothing else he at least has earned to be listened to. And not shit over because you *think* his opinion *might* damage whatever your political stance is. He deserves this respect.

Do you know what a strawman is? I am not constructing a weak argument and tearing it down. The Turing example is just that, an example of a trend that existed before, during, and right after the Second World War where people were far less free than they are today with respect to control over their own bodies. The assertion Alec Penstone made was that people in Britain are less free today than they were then, but that is obviously not true if you were a woman, or gay, or poor (NHS didn't exist yet, as one example), or mentally disabled, etc. This trend actually was on the decline after the war, largely because Hitler represented the worst of it, but it nevertheless did exist in liberal-democratic societies too. That's precisely the point. 

For example, The Mental Defieciency Act of 1913 wasn't repealed until 1959 (having been passed in 1913 as the name suggests.) 

Capitalist institutions controlled people's lives back then as well, in many ways more totally. You have to be very unaware of the history of the labor movement and capitalism to think otherwise. 

Nobody is shitting over an old man. Pointing out the biases of an old man and the use of his personal feelings by propagandists to fuel their propaganda isn't "shitting over an old man." He is being listened to, and his viewpoints are being discussed. That's what this thread is. Or what did you imagine this thread was to be? Everyone agreeing with a very controversial position and equivocating 1940's liberal democracies (as bad as they were) or modern liberal democracies (as bad as they are) with Nazi Germany? 

And I am pointing out your biases. Again, this man and many in this generation did much more than any of us to create a better world. And yes, corporate control is much more prevalent today than it was in the past with technology are more prevalent. You want to disclaim his biases, but are oblivious to your own. Again: the sacrifice of his comrades had nothing to do with Turing. That wasn't Hitler. And there are always many freedoms, and many are in conflict. He talks about some, but you make stupid comments like

"Like what other implication is there from these comments than Nazism shouldn't have been defeated during WWII?"

What is that bullshit? You implying stuff that he didn't say to fuel your own crusade.

He cannot complain about the rise of fascism again? About Putin and Trump? About the corporate control? So Turing wouldn't probably happen today, but many other things are.

And if you talk about stuff fueling fascist propaganda: currently that fuel is words that Zohran Mamdami and Keir Starmer say. Hasan Piker is currently bringing so much help to the fascist cause. You blame what an old man says instead of looking at these much more powerful or influental people and criticize them to think through what they are saying? I have not seen fascist propaganda picking up the words of this old man, but I have seen plenty for these three. So complain about them. Stop making an old man a target that helped bring about a better world, which you and I are currently profiting off (which is why I said I think the sacrifice was worth it, but then again I didn't know his comrades that have died, so what do I really know).

I think you still underestimate the immense cost he is talking about. Dead people are a very heavy cost, and if he is weighing progres and deems it too light, who am I to say he is wrong? I think you are going about this way, way too easy.

EDIT: To make it clearer: he isn't denying progress. So you bringing out some examples that aren't even connected to his fight against Hitler does nothing. He is comparing the progress to the cost. He deems it not worth it. And that is a difficult calculation, you and I may come to a different conclusion. But given the really high cost it is a conclusion he is entitled to. I don't even think he has biases, you just assume, maybe he fully agrees with your examples of progress. You only disregard the sacrifice and weigh it too lightly. You don't care enough about the people that died in the fight against Hitler. He does, because he knew them personally.

Last edited by Mnementh - on 19 November 2025