Talk:Kaiser Wilhelm II
From Conservapedia
| ! | Part of this article was copied from Citizendium but the copied text was originally written by me, RJJensen (under the name Richard Jensen) and does not include alterations made by others on that site. | 
|
Namibia
On the genocide issue see "THE HERERO HOLOCAUST?: The Disputed History Of The 1904 Genocide," by Jeremy Silvester, Werner Hillebrecht & Casper Erichsen. RJJensen 09:20, 26 April 2009 (EDT)
- There are historians who dispute that the response to the Herero Uprising was any worse than what other colonial powers were doing at the time. Examine the actions of Belgian King Leopold II for a particularly notorious example. Therefore, do not cite only one side of what is a rather acrimonious dispute among academics.
The tone this article is taking also bothers me. Historian Niall Ferguson's The Pity of War argues that the British Empire was far more agressively expansionist and militaristic during this era. As early as 1901, there was a secret decision by the British Cabinet through which Britain would enter a war between Germany and France.
According to Winston Churchill, centuries of British foreign policy boiled down to a single concept. Whenever a continental power grew strong enough to rival Britain's domination of Europe, Whitehall would build a coalition of nations and cut the "bully" down to size by going to war.
Whatever the Kaiser's glaring flaws, he almost certainly would have acted differently in 1914 had he known that a war with France would also be a war against the British Empire.
Also, I am rather curious as to why you deleted my link to information about the annual monarchist demonstrations at Huis Doorn. The last Kaiser does have his admirers in modern Germany and it seems rather unproffessional to conceal this fact. The latter regard him as a good Christian and a loyal family man who is defamed both by wartime propaganda and by history.Kingstowngalway 19:50, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
- we don't tolerate moral relativism here. the Kaiser was a great enemy to Africans, to Americans and indeed to Germans and no whitewashing or celebrating will be tolerated. RJJensen 21:51, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
- Moral Relativism? Excuse me? I do not see how giving a voice to differing opinions qualifies as moral relativism. It is what makes encyclopedia articles great.
Most European colonialists were enemies to Africans. The ethnic cleansing of the Hereros was an vicious atrocity which was unfortunately far from unique. However, it had more in common with the U.S. Government's "pacification" of the Indians than with the Nazi Holocaust. In my opinion, it deserves an article of it's own.
During most of World War I, the Kaiser was nothing more than a mouthpiece for Generals Hindenburg and Ludendorff. In its last days, the Kaiser's Germany actually had more in common with Japan under Tojo than Germany under Hitler. The average Imperial German infantryman tended to be far better behaved than the soldiers of either regime, however.Kingstowngalway 22:55, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
- The Kaiser was a pretty poor joke for leader of a major country, we all agree. He alone had the power to overrule the civilian government and instead he turned the decisions over to Hindenberg. The question is why he was so bad--was it personal incompetence or the German system? I've followed the literature and the strong consensus is that the Herero episode was a major training ground for the Holocaust. Yes, it is moral relatavism to suggest he was just like all the other colonial leaders, no better and no worse. He was vastly worse, despite the admirers he may have. RJJensen 23:00, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
- I personally think that it was both the German Governmental system and the Kaiser's own stupidity. The fact that he was always followed by fawing yes-men did not help matters. There are a large number of documented incidents in which he unknowingly and hilariously put his foot in his mouth. Some of these might be added to this article to great effect.
As for the Hereros, I do not desire to see what happened to them whitewashed either. If you are aware of Hitler referring to the Kaiser's actions as a precedent, feel free to cite them with references. To my knowledge, he only referred to the Armenian Genocide as an influence and I am not aware of any quotations about the Hereros.
As for scholarly consensus, there is a strain of commentary in academia which attempts to paint all of German history as a training ground for the Holocaust. History, however, is a very complicated thing. It is composed of human beings, not abstractions, and is therefore very hard to push into a box.Kingstowngalway 09:09, 28 April 2009 (EDT)
- People interested in the Hereros should read the literature referenced here, which demonstrates the close links to Nazi plans. (At one point the Nazis wanted to move the Jews to Africa and they researched the issue.) German revanchism and nostalgia for aristocracy and anti-democratic norms certainly exists but is NOT the sort of conservatism we promote at Conservapedia. RJJensen 09:59, 28 April 2009 (EDT)
- Actually, the Huis Doorn pilgrimages are overseen by the monarchist organization Tradition und Leben, which, according to their website, carries the slogan, "We Crown Democracy."Kingstowngalway 11:50, 28 April 2009 (EDT)
- American rejected monarchy in 1776. RJJensen 12:29, 28 April 2009 (EDT)
- Actually, the Huis Doorn pilgrimages are overseen by the monarchist organization Tradition und Leben, which, according to their website, carries the slogan, "We Crown Democracy."Kingstowngalway 11:50, 28 April 2009 (EDT)
