WWOD? (what would Orwell do)

pzrmeyer2 · Post by **pzrmeyer2** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:45 pm

can't they just ban the entire language, country, and volk?

SPIEGEL ONLINE - January 30, 2008, 04:49 PM
URL: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zei ... 00,00.html

FROM 'ANSCHLUSS' TO 'ZYKLON B'
New Dictionary Highlights Nazi Words to Avoid
By David Gordon Smith

Dozens of words in the German language, from "degenerate" to "final solution," have become taboo because of their use by the Nazis. A new dictionary of Third Reich terms provides a guide through the linguistic minefield.

DPA
The Nazis carried out a hate campaign against 'degenerate' music -- now the word itself has become taboo.
As if German weren't hard enough. Three genders, endlessly long words, verbs coming at the end of impossibly rambling sentences.

But there is another, more subtle, linguistic trap which both Germans and non-Germans can easily fall into -- and which is far worse a faux pas than a mere slip of the article. Mention that you've found the "Endlösung" ("final solution") to a problem you've been grappling with, or that you've made a "Selektion" ("selection") from a number of possible alternatives, and you will quickly find yourself the target of disapproving stares.

The reason is simple -- the aforementioned words are so tainted by their use by the Nazis that they are now completely taboo. To modern German ears, "Endlösung" will forever be associated with Hitler's genocidal "Final Solution to the Jewish Question," while "Selektion" is now verbum non grata due to its use to refer to the death camp practice of "selecting" inmates to be executed.

Now a new dictionary examines just what roles such terms play in the collective German psyche. The "Wörterbuch der 'Vergangenheitsbewältigung'" ("Dictionary of 'Coming to Terms with the Past'") examines around 1,000 words and phrases -- everything from "Anschluss," used to refer to the 1938 "annexation" of Austria, to "Wehrmacht," the name of the Nazi-era armed forces -- looking at how the meaning and usage of the terms have developed since the end of World War II.

Taboo Nazi Terms

German studies professor Georg Stötzel, who co-authored the dictionary together with Thorsten Eitz, explains how the words disappeared from the language after the end of the war. "There are very few terms associated with the Nazis which continued to be used with the same meaning after 1945," he told SPIEGEL ONLINE in an interview. In fact, as early as the late 1940s, German intellectuals like Dolf Sternberger and Wilhelm Süskind -- father of Patrick Süskind, author of the bestseller "Perfume" -- were writing essays examining the newly taboo Nazi terms.

For many, the simple power of the words and their associations made them literally unspeakable. That applied especially to victims of the Nazis. "Survivors simply couldn't bear to hear the word 'Lager,'" says Stötzel, referring to the German term for concentration or death camp.

Another reason for avoiding Nazi terms in public discourse is the fact that the speaker runs the risk of being accused of harboring Nazi sympathies. Often such a usage is enough to land the speaker on the front pages of Germany's newspapers. The late head of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, Paul Spiegel, courted controversy in 2005 when he criticized German policy on which Jews were allowed to immigrate from the former Soviet Union by saying that Russian Jews were being "selected." Similarly, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Cologne, Joachim Meisner, was heavily criticized last year when he used the word "entartete" ("degenerate") in a speech about art. The word is taboo -- particularly in that context -- because of its use by the Nazis to condemn modern art.

As it happens, the Catholic Church is one of the institutions which is quickest to make comparisons with the Third Reich, another linguistic phenomenon which Eitz and Stötzel's dictionary examines. Other groups which have few qualms about comparing their opponents with Hitler, or undesirable phenomena with Auschwitz, include environmental and peace groups, Stötzel explains. "These groups feel they have the moral right to make explicit comparisons with the Nazis," he says.

'Holocaust on Your Plate'

Such comparisons also get instant media attention -- and frequently condemnation. The controversial Archbishop Meisner was also the target of criticism in this regard when he made an implicit comparison between an abortion pill and the Zyklon B poison gas used by the Nazis in the gas chambers of Auschwitz, while other Catholic campaigners have coined the term "Babycaust" by analogy with "Holocaust" to condemn abortion. Meanwhile German animal rights activists attracted attention with an anti-factory farming campaign entitled "Holocaust on Your Plate."

But you don't even need to use Nazi-tainted terms to get into trouble. Just using the same rhetorical techniques as Joseph Goebbels, king of Third Reich propaganda, and other leading Nazis can land you in hot water. Former Vice Chancellor Franz Müntefering found this out the hard way in 2005 when he described hostile foreign investors as "locusts." Müntefering, who belongs to the left wing of the Social Democratic Party, was criticized for comparing people with animals, a trope considered deeply problematic due to the Nazi practise of portraying Jews as parasites and vermin.

"Sixty years later, people are still being compared to animals and plagues which have to be destroyed," wrote historian Michael Wolffsohn in a damning essay.

Where Is Eastern Germany?

Interestingly, it's precisely those groups who presumably most admire the Nazis who take the most care to avoid using specifically Third Reich terms. Far-right parties such as the National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD) flirt with Nazi ideology while avoiding taboo terms. "You can recognize the implication but you can't accuse them of using Nazi terminology," says Stötzel.

For example, senior NPD politician Holger Apfel has talked of his party's ambition to win seats in the "Reichstag," using the pre-1945 term for the German government instead of the modern "Bundestag" -- today, "Reichstag" can only be used in politically correct German to refer to the historical parliament building, not the institution. Similarly, far-right German politicians like to refer to the states of the former East Germany as "Mitteldeutschland" ("Central Germany") -- the implication being that present-day Poland actually comprises the eastern part of the country.

But perhaps the taint of at least some Nazi terms may fade with time. Take the word "Mädel," for example, a dialect word for "girl" which was favored by the Nazis. Its Third Reich connotations appear to be lost on young Germans today, many of whom use the word -- often ironically -- without a second thought. "Young people don't know it was used by the Nazis," says Stötzel.

Hans · Post by **Hans** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:43 am

I thought THEY had. Whoever THEY are.

- Hans

Tom Houlihan · Post by **Tom Houlihan** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:14 am

"Wörterbuch der 'Vergangenheitsbewältigung'"

Would a native speaker be so kind as to translate that title, please. If it means what I believe it means, then I have a comment. If it means something different, the comment might not have any validity.

Hans · Post by **Hans** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:14 pm

Literally "Dictionary of Coping with the Past" or "D. for Managing the Past".
Two different contexts.

However, "D. of Coming to Terms with the Past" is perhaps more apt. Although I don't agree. By hiding under a rock, you don't come to terms, cope, or manage anything.

- Hans

Tom Houlihan · Post by **Tom Houlihan** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 9:51 pm

Thanks, Hans!

That has nothing to do with "coming to terms" with the past. You can't erase parts of the language because somebody didn't use the words nicely a long time ago!

There are very few left who either planned or implemented what happened in the Reich. There are still some around who could say "We didn't know that was going on!" Mos of the wartime Germans who are still alive were children during those years.

It is time for Germany as a nation to stand up and say "WE had nothing to do with it. Leave us the hell alone." As has been discussed on this forum before, not a nation in today's world has an unblemished record.

Hans · Post by **Hans** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:46 pm

Tom,

Could not agree more. Language is there to be used. On my trips to Germany, the "oldies" enjoy my company, because I use "their" language [fracture my tongue at times] and talk about things that are "verboten". After initial hesitation they open up and by crikey I get some good stories/experiences/tragedies etc.

The young ones however attack me for wanting to talk about the past and confess to things on behalf of their elders of which they have no knowledge or idea. It's all sack cloth and ashes, self loathing etc. It's bloody sickening. Said it earlier, no backbone.

Bought some Volksmusik in Dresden and asked the owner if he had the song/march "Erika". Well the Commie bastard started to rant and rave about the Nazis and about "singing this type of rubbish as they "went over the top". 'It's just a song" says I and off he went again. In other stores they cringed everytime I asked for it. Hell, it's just a song, but hey brainwashing does different things to different people. What a sorry lot.

- Hans

- Hans

Klaus1 · Post by **Klaus1** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 1:25 am

I live in Vorarlberg (Austria). "Heil" is commonly used to greet somone. Altough we don't do the salute anymore it is not hard to determine where this comes from. Completely normal for any vorarlbergian, it is sometime a little confusing for the rest of Austria. As well as it is for the bigger part of Germany. We share a good deal of dialect with bavaria. A lot of words are used from that time. Most of us just don't know.

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:15 am

Similarly, far-right German politicians like to refer to the states of the former East Germany as "Mitteldeutschland" ("Central Germany") -- the implication being that present-day Poland actually comprises the eastern part of the country.

Question - was Mitteldeutschland ever used as a term to refer to Prussia after German Unification in the 19th century?

pzrmeyer2 · Post by **pzrmeyer2** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:22 am

phylo_roadking wrote:
Similarly, far-right German politicians like to refer to the states of the former East Germany as "Mitteldeutschland" ("Central Germany") -- the implication being that present-day Poland actually comprises the eastern part of the country.
Question - was Mitteldeutschland ever used as a term to refer to Prussia after German Unification in the 19th century?

hadnt heard that before, but you'd be hard pressed to find anyone befoer 1945 who thought that Leipzig or Magdeburg were "eastern" German cities...

Tom Houlihan · Post by **Tom Houlihan** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:53 am

Has anyone picked this up yet?

lwd · Post by **lwd** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 6:49 am

Tom Houlihan wrote:Thanks, Hans!
... As has been discussed on this forum before, not a nation in today's world has an unblemished record.

Iceland is pretty close if it doesn't provide the proveing exception.

phylo_roadking · Post by **phylo_roadking** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:03 am

Actually...Iceland had it's own (brief) period of religious intolerance and violence for religious reasons, around the time of the conversion to Christianity of the Norse population in 1000AD! The Old Gods did not go quietly there...but thankfully for a small island, in the end FAR more quietly and by arbitration compared with the parent Norway...!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiani ... of_Iceland

Hans · Post by **Hans** » Thu Feb 07, 2008 3:07 pm

Not to mention the "Cod Wars".

- Hans

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:07 am

I work with an ex-pat Russian Jew who told me recently that it was "refreshing" to talk to me because I'm not uptight and say what I really think.

I took it first as a complement then I realized how scary that sentence is. Its even scarier when we realize that this terrifying political correctness regarding the nazis is a) very much like them! and b) ignores an even worse ideology - communism. Which suggests what "they" have in store for us.

I turned my pal on to Al Stewart's "Roads to Moscow" and he sat there almost in tears - I love people who know their history! And God help us - there aren't many...

cheers
Reb

lwd · Post by **lwd** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 10:18 am

phylo_roadking wrote:Actually...Iceland had it's own (brief) period of religious intolerance and violence for religious reasons, around the time of the conversion to Christianity of the Norse population in 1000AD! The Old Gods did not go quietly there...but thankfully for a small island, in the end FAR more quietly and by arbitration compared with the parent Norway...!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christiani ... of_Iceland

But the current country of Iceland is a very distinct entity compared what existed in 1000AD. For one thing Denmark controled it for quite a period of time. Was the island even united in 1000 AD? Does the Icelandic "Thing" of that time period count as a government or is more like an international tribunal?