NationStates

Imperial Union of America wrote:
I think, first of all, not only is it a disgrace to Austria and a smack in the face of the National Socialist movement, but it is also a crime against history and anyone who loves history. We simply cannot demolish the house of the most important and influential leader of the 20th century and the founder of the national socialist movement!

I love history, and I say bulldoze it.

Lady Scylla wrote:

Imperial Union of America wrote:
I think, first of all, not only is it a disgrace to Austria and a smack in the face of the National Socialist movement, but it is also a crime against history and anyone who loves history. We simply cannot demolish the house of the most important and influential leader of the 20th century and the founder of the national socialist movement!

I love history, and I say bulldoze it.

It's not being torn down.

Source is here: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37690981

Lady Scylla wrote:

Imperial Union of America wrote:
I think, first of all, not only is it a disgrace to Austria and a smack in the face of the National Socialist movement, but it is also a crime against history and anyone who loves history. We simply cannot demolish the house of the most important and influential leader of the 20th century and the founder of the national socialist movement!

I love history, and I say bulldoze it.

Thank you. The coincidence of Hitler's birth doesn't rate this building being preserved as a shrine to the man. And if the building is not being preserved in complete historical accuracy (which, again, it absolutely shouldn't be), the building has no particular historical significance.

Lady Scylla wrote:

Imperial Union of America wrote:
I think, first of all, not only is it a disgrace to Austria and a smack in the face of the National Socialist movement, but it is also a crime against history and anyone who loves history. We simply cannot demolish the house of the most important and influential leader of the 20th century and the founder of the national socialist movement!

I love history, and I say bulldoze it.

Why?

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Valcouria wrote:And yet imagine the furor if it were MLK jr's house, or Stalin's house, or Mandela's house. Got to love the hypocrisy of those here that are saying 'good riddance' to a piece of history, however odious it may seem to a fair number of people.

Good or bad, history shouldn't be destroyed like this. Period.

Leaving Stalin aside, did you just compare MLK Jr. and Mandela to Adolf Hitler?

Merely to prove a point; no one in today's society would dare entertain the idea of repurposing or destroying the birthplaces of 'visionary' or 'popular' people, but many seem perfectly happy doing so to someone that was, despite any and all benefits performed, a genocidal dictator.

Like I said, this blasted cultural stigma and whitewashing is almost as bad as whatever was done in the past that was the reason why this or any individual is so despised and loathed today. You can't gloss over history and simply remove or change the bad while putting the good on God-tier levels; you disservice not only those that actually lived and experienced the bad, but also insult the intelligence of everyone that doesn't know about it and wants to learn of it.

I'm not in favor of this building being torn down just for the sake of tearing it down, but I recognize that it could be occupying valuable real estate which could be put to another use and change is just part of the process for a city or town. I think if it is torn down, neo-Nazis could well keep visiting the location anyways. The building itself might not exist anymore, but the GPS coordinate they'll have a spiritual attachment to.

Drayxaso wrote:

Dushan wrote:Turn it into a Meseum, completly with originally restored rooms, Gift, Beverage and Souvenir Shop alike.

And use the revenues for some educative and charity work. ;^)

Correction: Educative and chairty work towards Jews, LQBTQ+ people, Roma, and the disabled. Then, we get a laugh and we make it clear that we don't support what Hitler has done.

A splendid idea.

I thought it was already a Museum? Either way, anything that pisses off Fascists is fine by me, I'd just rather it wasn't done by tearing down a historical site. Think they might consider turning it into a Synagogue instead?

Minzerland II wrote:

Lady Scylla wrote:
I love history, and I say bulldoze it.

Why?

It's not really historically significant. He was born there, alright, big whoop. Anyway, they're not tearing it down, so my point's redundant.

Well, Hitler's not around to complain, and I love hearing the cries of 'foul' from the Fascists!

I'm 'meh' personally, I really don't care, although generally I err on the side of preserving historical sites, I fail to see why Hitler's house qualifies as such.

Lady Scylla wrote:

Minzerland II wrote:Why?

It's not really historically significant. He was born there, alright, big whoop. Anyway, they're not tearing it down, so my point's redundant.

Even so, why not use it for educational purposes?

Grand Britannia wrote:What happened to "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it"?

Demolishing his birthplace hardly qualifies. There are plenty of other sites that are more historically useful.

I would post my opinion on the matter but it would be ignored by the OP and this post already summed it up.

Mefpan wrote:Your frankly deeply disturbing near-religious reverence for an insane genocidal dictator makes the idea of bulldozing a historical "artifact" far less unpleasant, for some reason.

Valcouria wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Leaving Stalin aside, did you just compare MLK Jr. and Mandela to Adolf Hitler?

Merely to prove a point; no one in today's society would dare entertain the idea of repurposing or destroying the birthplaces of 'visionary' or 'popular' people, but many seem perfectly happy doing so to someone that was, despite any and all benefits performed, a genocidal dictator.

Bulldoze those places to if need be. I've never understood how one's birthplace could be 'historically significant', they've likely not done anything memorable at such a place other than coming into existence.

Minzerland II wrote:

Lady Scylla wrote:
It's not really historically significant. He was born there, alright, big whoop. Anyway, they're not tearing it down, so my point's redundant.

Even so, why not use it for educational purposes?

What educational purposes? I have a hard time picturing any way it's historical significance can be used which doesn't make it into a Hitler shrine.

Minzerland II wrote:

Lady Scylla wrote:
It's not really historically significant. He was born there, alright, big whoop. Anyway, they're not tearing it down, so my point's redundant.

Even so, why not use it for educational purposes?

What would you educate people on? How a child is born? How an Inn works?

Cedoria wrote:

Grand Britannia wrote:What happened to "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it"?

Demolishing his birthplace hardly qualifies. There are plenty of other sites that are more historically useful.

Exactly. The "those who forget history line" applies to preserving Dachau, not Hitler's crib

Ogrien wrote:

Cedoria wrote:Demolishing his birthplace hardly qualifies. There are plenty of other sites that are more historically useful.

Exactly. The "those who forget history line" applies to preserving Dachau, not Hitler's crib

Precisely. Him coming into the world is hardly a memorable or important event.

As for it being a slap in the face to the National Socialist Movement, I have one word in reply.

Good.

Lady Scylla wrote:

Minzerland II wrote:Even so, why not use it for educational purposes?

What would you educate people on? How a child is born? How an Inn works?

Perhaps, I don't know, Hitler maybe.

How about turning it into a synagogue?

Lady Scylla wrote:

Valcouria wrote:Merely to prove a point; no one in today's society would dare entertain the idea of repurposing or destroying the birthplaces of 'visionary' or 'popular' people, but many seem perfectly happy doing so to someone that was, despite any and all benefits performed, a genocidal dictator.

Bulldoze those places to if need be. I've never understood how one's birthplace could be 'historically significant', they've likely not done anything memorable at such a place other than coming into existence.

Well, if they hadn't come into existence, then they wouldn't have existed for us to know about them, for one. And it just so happens many people like to visit that place where they came into existence to connect with that person and see their origins. Crazy, I know, but history buffs enjoy that sort of thing frequently. And it can also be done for patriotic purposes; just look at the birthplaces of Washington and Lincoln.

Minzerland II wrote:

Lady Scylla wrote:
What would you educate people on? How a child is born? How an Inn works?

Perhaps, I don't know, Hitler maybe.

So you create a shrine to one of the most vilified human beings in history?

That is a shame. It really should have been turned into a holocaust museum or a refugee center.

Either one would be a slap to the face for the nazis, which would be a nice thing to see happen.

Valcouria wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
Leaving Stalin aside, did you just compare MLK Jr. and Mandela to Adolf Hitler?

Merely to prove a point; no one in today's society would dare entertain the idea of repurposing or destroying the birthplaces of 'visionary' or 'popular' people, but many seem perfectly happy doing so to someone that was, despite any and all benefits performed, a genocidal dictator.

Like I said, this blasted cultural stigma and whitewashing is almost as bad as whatever was done in the past that was the reason why this or any individual is so despised and loathed today. You can't gloss over history and simply remove or change the bad while putting the good on God-tier levels; you disservice not only those that actually lived and experienced the bad, but also insult the intelligence of everyone that doesn't know about it and wants to learn of it.

They're proposing to remodel his house, not destroy the remnents of Auschwitz, Christ get a grip people, this is not a place of significance.

Your general point is certainly valid, but it's not relevant to this example.

Minzerland II wrote:

Lady Scylla wrote:
What would you educate people on? How a child is born? How an Inn works?

Perhaps, I don't know, Hitler maybe.

There's plenty of other sites, and a plethora of information online and in books about the man, including innumerable documentaries from his battle-plans, to if he was truly missing his left-bollock. I can understand Dachau being preserved so we don't forget, but I can't see any justification for his birthplace being preserved.