Does the glorification of Latvian Waffen SS Legion mean the glorification of Nazism?

Oct 2012
8,545
#21
Hmm, the problem that after WWII all these collaborators would have been exterminated, anyway, though they surely kept better prospects in their minds. Also, Hitler considered Lithuanians as untermench in difference with Estonians or Latvians who had no infamous connection to Poles in his eyes due to Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. That is why Lithuanian Waffen-SS was organized only in 1943 when Germans lacked manpower and when all Lithuanian Jews (190 000) were already killed.

This topic is solely about Lithuanian Waffen-SS, but since you got astray with "all Eastern Europeans fighting against evil empire USSR", I have to remind that a week or so ago a newly-elected president of Ukrain decided to whitewash crimes of Ukrainian Rebellious Army who were butchering everyone in the West of Ukraine. A century away, and Hitler will be glorified in West just like Napoleon is today.
I'm no great fan of Hitler or Napoleon, I consider them both to be foreign conquerors and comparably bad figures. But, you're right, I'm sure it will be fashionable for some to become fans of Hitler, just as it has become fashionable to be a fan of Napoleon. But speaking of the the Lithuanians, they seized the alliances they could, having just recently been occupied by the USSR I would expect them to expend their national energy against the USSR, not against the USSR's enemy, Germany. The enemy of my enemy is, after all, my friend, at least so long as we have a common enemy.
 
Jun 2013
2,325
Siberia, deep in taiga
#22
Communism is the most vile and evil ideology ever proposed in the history of mankind. Its goal, even in the most academic sense, was a systematic denial of liberty and property to every person on earth.

Plus, fascism is a lesser evil than communism, if for no other reason than because fascist aspirations were regional and communist aspirations were global.
I have read your history books and reading your media everyday. That's what makes our view - history books written by definite people and newspaper articles written by some people. So, we need some quotes here, sir, to learn what formed your way of thinking:
Who killed more Russians, Hitler or Stalin? The fact that you even have to think about it shows the true horror of Stalin, now being rehabilitated with passion by Russia's KGB ruler.
There is hardly any difference between Marxists and Nazis. They are but the same strip different colors. Both believed in “propaganda as not an end in itself, but a means to an end” as clearly stated by Goebbels.
Both Nazi and communists were terrible regimes in the first place. Stalin signed a nonaggression pact with the Nazis before World War 2 so that he and Hitler could divide the spoils of Eastern Europe between them -- the area known as the Bloodlands. (I suggest Timothy Snyder's recent book of that name.) Stalin purposely starved to death millions of human beings in Ukraine in the 1930s. Look up "holodomor" for more information. Had the Nazis not existed, the Soviet Union would still have been a terrible regime, and that's what matters.
German National Socialism and Russian Soviet Socialism were essentially the same.
Both started out with Marxist socialist goals,
both wanted to revolutionize bourgeois society,
both relied on a top-down "democratic-centralist" party led by dictators,
both used brownshirts and blackshirts and a police state to take and maintain power in the hands of the party,
both were totalitarian in that they tried to totally manage every aspect of society, from music, art, and literature to the workplace and family life, using a network of party organisations,
both used scapegoats, murdering millions of them - the Nazis used "Jewish capitalists", the Communists used "bourgeois capitalists" and "kulaks" (although the Communists murdered far more).
The fact that the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were allies, brothers in arms, until Hitler launched his invasion of the Soviet Union speaks to the great similarity between the evil twins. Hitler's concentration camps were in fact modeled on the Soviet Gulag. The Soviet regime had destroyed millions before Hitler came to power. In terms of total destruction of people Stalin outdid Hitler. The fact that Hitler and Nazism arose in Germany and Stalin and Soviet Communism arose in Russia does not reflect on the inherent worth of Germans or Russians. The majority of people are primarily well-meaning, generally kind, neighborly and helpful to others. There are outstanding Germans and outstanding Russians. The atrocities happened over 60 years ago. It no longer matters as long as it does not happen again.
From the Tsarist forged "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," to
the Stalinist "Doctors' Plot," and beyond, the history of Russia always maintained a totalitarian, and particularly anti-Semitic," theme. It was not until under pressure of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment that Soviet Jews were allowed to "vote with their feet!" The net result of pervasive bigotry was the loss of the Soviet Union's best educated scientists, engineers and physicians to Israel, the U.S. and other nations!

The assertion that "Communists were attempting to build a humane society" and "chose inappropriate inhumane means," is particularly specious and belied by the fact that Lenin had the royal family, including children, shot and that his secret police were equally as brutal as their Stalinist successors. Aside from targeting Jews, Stalin starved the Kulaks in Ukraine, exiled the Chechins, only recently allowed return to their historic lands, to Siberia and oppressed others.

The Soviet-U.S. World War II alliance was one of convenience and yes, there must be a thorough "re-examination of history" to expose the ugly side of both parties, whether the U.S. confinement Of Americans of Japanese ancestry in concentration camps, or the pervasive Russian anti-Semitism and mass-murder of Soviet citizens!
I hope I won't be taken for communist.
 
Jun 2013
2,325
Siberia, deep in taiga
#23
To conclude, I have to say that Eastern Front in WWII was something so horrific that none of us can ever hope to understand it fully. All I can see is various shades of grey, each one slightly darker than the other, plus of course pitch black fighting almost pitch black.

Lithuanians had, by the time of Barbarossa, been occupied by their Soviet liberators for a year or so. It is fair to say that many of them were not particularly enamoured of that situation - hence the willingness (not only of the Latvians, but of many, many, Eastern Europeans) to join with the Germans in their war against the Russians.

Yes those who volunteered were (at the very least) fools - but they were fighting against the devil they knew very well (the USSR) in league with a devil they hadn't yet come to know.
 

beorna

Ad Honoris
Jan 2010
17,473
-
#24
I mentioned it long before, maybe evn in discussions where you participated. Both were police-men, my great-uncle commanded to the new created Polizeidivision, my great-aunts husband was in the Geb-Div Nord. The first died after he got a head shot in front of Leningrad, the other one surrendered in 1945 to the Americans. He and his wife differentiated allways into a good and bad SS, the good one of course the Waffen-SS. I once made the mistake to mention, that especially for the Nord, the Totenkopfstandarten gave a lot of personal.
 
Apr 2011
6,626
Sarmatia
#25
I mentioned it long before, maybe evn in discussions where you participated. Both were police-men, my great-uncle commanded to the new created Polizeidivision, my great-aunts husband was in the Geb-Div Nord. The first died after he got a head shot in front of Leningrad, the other one surrendered in 1945 to the Americans. He and his wife differentiated allways into a good and bad SS, the good one of course the Waffen-SS. I once made the mistake to mention, that especially for the Nord, the Totenkopfstandarten gave a lot of personal.
it was a joke that "I knew it" but I realise how different sense of humour we got
 

beorna

Ad Honoris
Jan 2010
17,473
-
#26
Galizien Division were good soldiers who wanted freedom for their country. I wouldnt condemn them however it is hard to glorify them.
There are two divisions. The older one, destroyed in the Brody-pocket and the later formed out of ukrainian Police units. Both were heavily inflicted in the partisan warfare and participated in several massacres. I have no doubt, that a lot just wanted to defeat communism, but were is the difference to german SS-men?
 

SSDD

Ad Honorem
Aug 2014
3,900
India
#28
If you glorify Waffen SS for it's combat toughness then not. But if you do because of it's part in Holocaust, then certainly yes.

Edit- I meant entire Waffen SS, not Latvian Waffen SS.
 
Last edited:
Oct 2012
8,545
#29
I have read your history books and reading your media everyday. That's what makes our view - history books written by definite people and newspaper articles written by some people. So, we need some quotes here, sir, to learn what formed your way of thinking:

I hope I won't be taken for communist.
Well, at least you understand why when we hear complaints about the rise of fascist movements, especially from people who were formally or whose families were formally involved in the communist party, many of us westerners' eyes glaze over and the instinctive response is 'they deserve each other and surely it's no worse than the alternative'. But something that should be kept in mind is that we fought the Nazis for 4 years, we fought the communists for 75 years and in the US we led the fight for 50 of those, the latter are obviously going to have a bigger impact on our world view than the former.
 
Jun 2013
2,325
Siberia, deep in taiga
#30
I guess your first sentence is referred to current events in Ukraine...As for communism=fascism/nazism, one can argue that Stalinism is the equivalent of Nazism but certainly not communism and without a doubt Nazism was far worse as it was a doctrine based on racial purity. I deliberately started the words with big letters pointing out them as ideologies.