Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/07/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I agree with Jim on your interesting and good photography. Also visited your flickr site. I think you make a very good point and present it in an effective way. Ric Carter http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/ricc/ On Jul 1, 2009, at 1:12 AM, K Landdeck wrote: > Long-time lurker, first time poster ... so I hope this isn't too > abrupt of a first-post, especially as it's partially OT. :-) > > As a historian of modern China finishing my dissertation at UCB, I > have to chime in and say that the often invoked Mao example when > talking about Nazi atrocities is based almost entirely on > misconceptions and misinformation. > > The people who died under Mao were almost all the result of > misguided policies (economic and political) in the context of a very > complex political situation. To put it in the same terms as the > holocaust and Hitler's military aggression in Europe is to > completely obscure the distinction between deliberate attempts at > extermination and poor policy-making, between intention and > unintended consequences, as well as to misread the actual operation > of power in communist China when compared to the Nazi dictatorship. > Mao was rarely in control of his own party, nor even fully informed > as to the conditions in the countryside that led to the famine and > death tolls in the Great Leap Forward and the violence in the > Cultural Revolution. Whatever his follies, mistakes, and lust for > personal power, Mao was not a monster out to exterminate millions of > people. Rhetorically it sounds good, but it does violence to > historical understanding to imply that the actions and motivations > of Mao and the CCP/PRC were analogous to Hitler's and the Nazi Party/ > Government. > > I would be happy to supply a "starting point" bibliography for > anyone who would actually take the time to read some well researched > analyses of the GLF and GPCR, instead of just spouting "common > knowledge", which is common mainly in the sense of being based on > very superficial, and often outright wrong, information. (Sadly, > the state of education on China is abysmal in most of the world and > as a result such sloppy comparisons between Hitler-Mao or Stalin-Mao > are made often, even in places like the NYT and other venues that > should have better research staffs). > > The larger point Jayanand is trying to make, however, I agree with. > As a historian (again), I find it painful to see anyone advocating > the destruction of historical traces just because they have > negative associations as it only hastens historical amnesia. This > seems especially dangerous because we selectively ignore all sorts > of other items that are blotted with their past on a daily basis: > are all people who collect Vietnam era memorabilia suspect because > of, and complicit with, the napalming of Vietnamese villages carried > out by the US Air Force? How about WW2 era items from the US > bombing command, since they deliberately firebombed Japanese cities > killing tens of thousands of civilians, even children? If my > grandfather was involved in those raids and I wanted to collect a > bomber captain's pistol would that make me complicit in those > actions? How about the virtual extermination of native Americans in > California (which also had a death toll in the millions)? Anyone > who collects items from this segment of the past is morally > suspect? Where does this end? > > I find it ironic that one of the most misguided policies of the > Cultural Revolution was precisely the same kind of judging of > people's motives for having possessions as I see in this discussion: > having bourgeois items (or even things produced by a capitalist > country) meant, a priori, one was a capitalist and hence > discriminated against. > > And then, it seems to me that there are plenty of far more pressing > issues (some mentioned by Jayanand) involving real tyranny and > oppression today that we can be outraged over, rather than a few > cameras with a swastika on them from half a century ago. > > To keep this somewhat photography related: I do have a small gallery > on the LUG site that I am slowly adding to. It's mainly > conventional street stuff shot on film with an M4 (and a mix of > Zeiss/CV/Canon glass) here in San Francisco. :-) > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/shudaizi/ > > > respectfully (from a LUG newb), > > Kevin Landdeck > > ============= > Only connect. > ============= > bamboozld at gmail.com > > shudaizi photography: > http://www.flickr.com/photos/shudaizi/ > > > > > > > > On Jun 30, 2009, at 8:25 PM, Jayanand Govindaraj wrote: > >> Douglas, >> I am sure that an ordinary Hindu would not mind carrying a camera >> with a >> swastika at all - in all probability, he will be totally ignorant >> of the >> Nazi connection. There are a lot of Hindus, Buddhists and Jains in >> the >> world! >> >> Its all a question of the winners who write history and influence the >> thinking of the succeeding generations - the 'good' guys and the >> 'bad' guys >> is only your point of view, it is seldom very clear cut, except to a >> propaganda machine. Mao killed a lot more of his citizens than >> Hitler did, >> but none of us think twice about buying Chinese made goods, >> essentially made >> under the same regime. Don't you have the same revulsion when you >> walk into >> Wal Mart? >> >> Multinational firms have traditionally been remarkably free of >> ethical >> considerations relative to the boss' bonus, i.e. the bottom line. A >> lot of >> the consumer items you buy have been made in Gulag like working >> conditions >> all over the world. There are companies who have marketed infant >> food in >> Asia & Africa that had been banned in Europe and the USA. Food >> grains are >> destroyed and burnt to keep prices up for farmers, rather than send >> it free >> to the hungry all over the world. Is that not revolting? Will you >> boycott >> such companies/regimes? Or just pay lip service? >> >> Cheers >> Jayanand >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Douglas Nygren <dnygr at cshore.com> >> wrote: >> >>> In an age when people wear labels as if they were branded, why >>> would any >>> sane person want to be seen holding a camera with a Swaktika on it? >>> >>> These cameras are damaged goods pure and simple. It's not the >>> cameras' >>> fault. Cameras made at the same time but do not bear bear the >>> Swastika don't >>> bear the burden of the symbol as much. >>> >>> Doug >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information