"Namibia says Germany ready to apologize for genocide" Topic

"In his state of the nation address last Thursday, President Hage Geingob suggested that Germany was about to apologize for colonial-era mass-killings of tens of thousands of people.

"The Federal Republic of Germany has agreed that the events of 1904—1908 can be termed genocide and they are ready to render an apology, at the highest level of German government," Geingob told lawmakers on June 4…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

…well the cycle begins…next Belgium for the Congo..Zulus for the cleansing in 1800's of all those not Zulu…Hereros/nama/Ovambos can apologize to the Bush people who ironically live in the Kalahari desert..(not by choice)..amd list goes on .Hutus/Tutsi;s..Not just European powers should apologize .but ALL..should.Zimbabwe most recently in the 1980;s..the list is endless.so lets get cracking…

It would be perverse indeed if a very recent monstrosity such as the well documented Herero and Namaqua genocide did not lead to an apology. It is the least that we should expect from a grown up democratic and responsible governemnt.

I think the Scandinavian countries should apologize to most of Europe for the horrible viking onslaughts and Rome should apologize to France (Gaul) and statues of Ceasar the killer torn down !!

Russ Dunaway

Breaking news: the Scandinavian polities that unleashed the Vikings and the polity known as the Roman Republic/Empire are no longer with us.

I do think there's an excellent case for Belgium to make reparations for the millions of Africans who died through the insane greed and megalomania of its former monarch. Modern Brussels was built on the proceeds of the crimes of he and his cronies. Just this week the possibility of demounting statues to that horrendous individual has been mooted widely in Belgium

I would like reparations for my Irish ancestors who came to America and were denied equal work opportunities. They often faced businesses with signs in windows which read "Irish need not apply".

I also think that Cain owes Abel an apology, or is that Abel owes Cain; I get them confused sometimes.

You just are not progressive enough with just very short and narrow vision, way to detailed and long winded to look back even deeper.
If we are going to start correcting the past, then let's correct the dam past.
No picking and choosing who, where,when,how just on a whim!!
Hell, you probably have some stuff you have gained unjustly -- perhaps we should look at you also??

I don't get how the reparations would work.

Belgium coffs up billions of dollars that then go to the modern Democratic Republic of Congo which is a failed state with endemic dysfunctionality, corruption, tribalism, warfare and general government ineptitude?

Literally you would just be lining the pockets of some truly horrid warlords.

"Thanks Belgians for all that money for killing my great, great, great grandfather…it has put my soul at ease that a great injustice has been made right. I would like the money to be deposited in my Swiss bank account.. Now excuse me whilst I sadistically murder these peasants for a.) being of the wrong tribe, b.) not paying sufficient protection money, c.) because it amuses me or d.) all of the above."

These perennial threads about past crimes and how they should be treated today always suffer from a lot of wilful misunderstanding and straw man attacks.

When dealing with these kind of things the perpetrators need to proceed as follows.

#1 – stop denying the events took place.
#2 – apologise sincerely to any surviving victims.
#3 – make reparations where this is practicable.
#4 – bring any surviving perpetrators to justice.

This is really the least we can do. The bare minimum.

The Germans are almost unique in their handling of their WW2 history. It's not perfect by any means but they have made sincere attempts to cover all 4 of the above points. There will always be more they could do of course.

The worst thing is to deny, diminish, deflect and dismiss past crimes. I call this the 4D approach.

When a crime is alleged, the first response is an outright denial – it never happened, wasn't us or the enemy did it to blame us, or fabricated the evidence.

When it can no longer be denied, the next step is to diminish the crime. If 500 victims are alleged, say it was only 50 or 100..etc.

Then they deflect. Perhaps the victims somehow deserved to suffer. Or the enemy/other countries do/did the same or even worse. Or look what some third party did to us – see how much more we suffered..

Finally they dismiss it as 'a long time ago' or 'nothing we can do about it now' and try to move on.

While the Germans have done well in this regard, I'd give them a B-, the Japanese are among the worst. A straight F. In dealing with their crimes against Korea and Koreans, they cynically paid compensation to the Korean Government knowing it would never reach the victims. The money was used to set up some industries [POSCO steel was one]. Meanwhile they still allow right-wing groups to deny their crimes.

In regard to this Namibian genocide – it really seems the least the German government can do to acknowledge the historical record. Who can be compensated now and how exactly is more difficult.

It is in the interest of former colonial powers to do more for the countries and peoples they exploited in the past. If they don't China will fill the vacuum.

Skarper ..you are exactly right and on the Mark..most difficult indeed.,but it;s time.

Too late Skarper, China now owns most of Africa,

Tally Ho!

I will ask for apology but actually as usual the most important part would be money, or even make a job of it, to the Hungarian who no doubte have maltreated my ancestor in Burgundy 11 centuries ago. Maybe Marocco too if others came from the south coast. What about the Romans? What about the Turkish empire? Curilusly never mentioned. INCAS ?
Another ridiculous self bashing/ destroying pushed by always the same venom.
Few Belgians from 1904 nowadays.

JcFrog, nail hit on head

Just thinking about where I used to come form – Croatia.

Due reparations from

city of Rome
city of Venice
Byzantinium (make that city of Istanbul!)
Ottomans (Turkey)
Austria
Hungary
France
Italy
Serbia
Americans – for bombing of cities in WWII which would be a war crime under today's standards
United Kingdom – same as Americans
Russia

There's a ton of Slavic, Avar, Ostrogoths and other tribes but that's too messy so we'll give them a free pass.

Croatia would also have to pay reparations to:

Italy- for Ilyrian exodus after WW2
Serbia
Bosnia
Russia (Eastern Front)
Israel (treatment of Jews)

Given there was a shared Croat-Hungarian kingdom they would probably also wear some responsibility for whatever that entity did.

Where do I sign up for the cash payments for the wronging of my ancestors and myself, too?

Anyone know which form(s) I need to fill out?

Will the UN be spearheading this effort since clearly it is a global problem of epic proportions?

Which group(s) get priority for funds – are we going by calendar date(s) and centuries/years of oppression or using some other method for that?

#1 – stop denying the events took place.
#2 – apologise sincerely to any surviving victims.
#3 – make reparations where this is practicable.
#4 – bring any surviving perpetrators to justice.

#1. I'm not denying history, or trying to rewrite it like some here want.
#2. I'm not apologizing for something I had no part in.
#3. See my response to #2
#4. I agree. Here in America there is no one left alive from the era of slavery.

USAFpilot for the win !!

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

You missed the point entirely USAFpilot.

I'm not really talking to you about this – you seem like a lost cause.

You are entitled to your opinion, of course.

I agree with USAFpilot. Sweden abolished slavery about 1000 ys ago. Why should I apologize? We/you cannot have any guilt for what happened 150ys ago.

But Sweden really hurt Germany and Poland during the 30ys war. I mean we really hurt their civilians. Torture, massmurder, rape, you name it. Funnily enough Germany and Poland isnt asking for anything…

On the contrary we joke about it with them and they joke back.

Under the new ultra-PC paradigm, the descendants of those committing crimes, or non-PC actions must pay for the sins of their forefathers and foremothers, even if those occurred 150+ years ago.

Under the new ultra-PC paradigm, the descendants of those committing crimes, or non-PC actions must pay for the sins of their forefathers and foremothers, even if those occurred 150+ years ago.

Though this clearly applies only to western countries. Everyone else keep doing as you have always done.

For those arguing against the idea, does that apply to the Germans reparations to Israel and the Jewish community. After all Romans, Vikings, 30 Years War etc etc. Please lets not try and play it as another way the poor old white straight white man is getting taken for a ride by the more suntanned of the world

looking at the origin of the posts for and against, seems most in favour are probably Brits? Whereas those not from a variety of places but biggest single category is US. Like many differences 2 nations separated by a common language

Americans – for bombing of cities in WWII which would be a war crime under today's standards

Didn't the Marshal Plan in the ETO and MacArthur's leadership in Japan rebuilt much of those nations after WWII ?

Discussed something similar here … TMP link

LOL. EVERY country in the world COULD apologise for something that they or their ancestors did.
Maybe, ALL Heads of State should have a get-together in a room, apologise to each other for ANYTHING, EVER and have a Hug! Get it over with!
Absolutely ridiculous. It does NOT DO ANYTHING and is merely 'Grandstanding' for politicians and pressure groups.

Anyone who has the intelligence to rise to a position of power, (Qualified! re. Tony Blair! ;)), knows that sometimes horrific acts 'have' to be done in the present…and also in the past…as an act of government.

Apologising for that is just 'FAKE'.

As A Brit, I, Personally, DO NOT apologise for: The Boudiccan Rebellion, Chevauche's in France, the slave trade, Shelling Copenhagen, multiple Colonial occurrences, sinking The Vichy French Fleet, Bombing German Cities, supressing Mau Mau, 'Bloody Sunday', sinking the Belgrano or actions in Afghanistan/Iraq… And ALL the OTHERS! It is a ENDLESS list.
(Copenhagen/ French fleet were Very Sad acts…BUT…?)

ALL of these events had terrible horror and grief for those concerned and for their families/loved ones.

I REGRET that they happened…but they did…AND THAT IS HISTORY. You cannot 'deny' it…although a 'take' on history depends on the viewpoint…and things can look VERY different from different views. You should not suppress it either…given the present BLM activities, some seem to think that, that is 'ok by them'…just remove it.

There have always been acts by individuals/groups, which are abhorrent…the State MAY recognise this…but WHAT IS THE POINT of a State apologising for it? The State may/may not have condoned it/may not have known/recognised it or it's effects at the time. Apologising for such is up to the State…BUT 'Witch-hunts' are another 'foulness' of another kind. 'Accountability…or 'The Buck Stops Here' is another False concept…damage limitation or sacrifice to the cause?

If a 'view' of an event CHANGES…then, that change of view is SUBSEQUENT to the event…so, the event does NOT require an apology…which WOULD MEAN NOTHING…because it should have been recognised as requiring an apology…AT THE TIME.

Reparations are a totally different 'Ball game'. EVERYONE wants whatever they can get, by whatever means.

On a 'jokier' side: Imagine walking up to someone in a bar and saying:
"I am so Sorry about what I said about your Dad in 1986".
"You SAID WHAT? !!!"

Leave things be…

Given the way the Germans are these days, they will probably just open up the border to Namibia and say all Namibians are free to relocate to Germany and access German social welfare indefinitely (I note Politico was recently bragging how well refugees in Germany integrate that even 5 years after arrival, a massive 35% are in paid employment or government mandated training. The other 65% were not mentioned but obviously are on welfare).

To fund this they will probably sign a new energy agreement with Russia and scrap another battalion or seven.

Tens of thousands of people is not genocide. Better use of the proper term is needed to be creditable.

EVERY country in the world COULD apologise for something that they or their ancestors did.

So very true !

(I note Politico was recently bragging how well refugees in Germany integrate that even 5 years after arrival, a massive 35% are in paid employment or government mandated training. The other 65% were not mentioned but obviously are on welfare).

IMO that last thing any nation that I can think of needs is more on the "dole". Sucking up tax payer money and further being a burden on their economy. While many/most don't do anything to be productive[money making, self sufficient, etc.] members of society … Which in some cases will effect other nations' economies including their neighbors, etc.

You can only fit so many in a life boat, AFAIK …

And again it all comes down to the …

If apologies are needed, they should be made by the people who committed the wrongful acts to the people who were wronged. I am of Scottish highland descent, from a clan who were well known for their cattle lifting and attacks on their neighbors, should I go back and offer to pay for the cattle and rebuilding of burned homes

All I'll say is I worked with a MacDonald from Assynt for a number of years, an all round lovely and truly decent person. One day the conversation got round to Scottish history and the Campbell's got mentioned. The temperature in the room dropped by couple of degrees….

oldjarhead. Yes…BUT if they accepted, smile, then do it again…before THEY do it back! LOL! :) Best, just have a Drink together!

As a Northumbrian, (well, sort of), we LIKE the Scots…so long as they are 'not too SCOTtish'. We can , usually, UNDERSTAND Scots better than the 'southerners', :(
Just… we have learned that Scots need careful watching…around wifies/coos/yows, (women/cattle/sheep)…( !).

A while back, a Glaswegian and girlfriend, managed to create more Bar Room Destructon than I have ever seen…whiles't visiting a relative doon here! :)
(But, He was a Coke Heed…and a knacker to boot.)… (It got Fettled!)! :(
Ah, Well, Past times.

Politically… I Really hope that things don't change. :)

It would be perverse indeed if a very recent monstrosity such as the well documented Herero and Namaqua genocide did not lead to an apology. It is the least that we should expect from a grown up democratic and responsible governemnt.

+1, bruntonboy

Finally they dismiss it as 'a long time ago' or 'nothing we can do about it now' and try to move on.

While the Germans have done well in this regard, I'd give them a B-, the Japanese are among the worst. A straight F. In dealing with their crimes against Korea and Koreans, they cynically paid compensation to the Korean Government knowing it would never reach the victims. The money was used to set up some industries [POSCO steel was one]. Meanwhile they still allow right-wing groups to deny their crimes.

In regard to this Namibian genocide – it really seems the least the German government can do to acknowledge the historical record. Who can be compensated now and how exactly is more difficult.

+1, Skarper

Tens of thousands of people is not genocide. Better use of the proper term is needed to be creditable.

Germany committed genocide against the Herero and Nama peoples. The crime of genocide does not require that the number of victims be in the hundreds of thousands or millions.

Genocide is defined as:
"any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

from "The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide" (the Genocide Convention), as agreed to by Germany, Namibia, and a total of 152 nations including Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and Vietnam (i.e., the countries represented by participants in this TMP thread).

So, this is the internationally recognized definition of genocide. The crime of genocide does not require that the number of victims be in the hundreds of thousands or millions. All that is required are acts committed with an intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.

And destroying the Herero and Nama peoples, in whole or in part, was exactly the intent and effect of Germany's genocidal policies in Namibia (the colony of German Southwest Africa at the time).

THE GENOCIDE AGAINST THE HEREROS

Under the infamous "Vernichtungsbefehl" (extermination order) of Generalleutnant Lothar von Trotha, the Herero people – men, women, and children – were driven from their homeland out to the Omaheke desert to die of thirst and hunger. Any Herero – man, woman, or child – returning from the Omaheke to 'German' territory would be shot on sight even if unarmed! von Trotha later amended the order so the new policy for women and children was to shoot over their heads – in order, in his own words, to make them run faster back towards the desert. And of course, back towards death (a fact von Trotha conveniently omitted):

"Within the German border every Herero, with or without a rifle, with or without livestock, will be shot. I will receive no more women and children; drive them back to your people or let them be shot at. These are my words to the Herero people, [from] the great General of the mighty German Emperor.

This decree is to be communicated during the mustering of the troops with the addition, that those troops who capture one of the [Herero] Captains [i.e., Chiefs] will receive a correspondingly [large] reward and that shooting at women and children is understood to be shooting over them to force them to run way.

Proclamation to the Herero People, October 2, 1904"

(Translation by Roy Jones)

"Innerhalb der Deutschen Grenze wird jeder Herero mit oder ohne Gewehr, mit oder ohne Vieh erschossen, ich nehme keine Weiber und Kinder mehr auf, treibe sie zu ihrem Volke zurück oder lasse auf sie schießen. Dies sind meine Worte an das Volk der Hereros.
Der große General des mächtigen deutschen Kaisers.

Dieser Erlaß ist bei den Appells der Truppen mitzuteilen mit dem Hinzufügen, daß auch der Truppe, die einen der Kapitänen fängt, die entsprechende Belohnung zuteil wird und das Schießen auf Weiber und Kinder so zu verstehen ist, daß über sie hinweggeschossen wird, um sie zum Laufen zu zwingen.

Aufruf an das Volk der Herero, 2. Oktober 1904"

65,000 Hereros – at least 60% and perhaps as many as 80% of the Herero people – would die. The total military manpower of the Hereros was 7,000 – 8,000, which means the overwhelming majority of those 65,000 deaths were NOT combat casualties. They were victims of a genocidal German campaign explicitly directed to ignore the distinction between armed and unarmed, and to shoot at women and children to drive them into the desert.

THE GENOCIDE AGAINST THE NAMA

The Nama were also victims of genocide.

There had been approximately 20,000 Nama in 1904. By 1911 – only seven years later – the Nama numbered under 10,000. The Nama population had been cut in half.

This devastation was, for the most part, not the result of combat casualties: soldiers dying on the battlefield fighting other soldiers. It was not even the result of the incidental diseases that have accompanied warfare since the dawn of man.

No, these deaths occurred for the most part as a result of the deliberately inhumane conditions in the German prison camps. There were camps around the colonial capital of Windhoek, but the Shark Island concentration camp (full name "Shark Island Concentration Camp off Lüderitz Bay", i.e. "Konzentrationslager auf der Haifischinsel vor Lüderitzbucht") was especially brutal.

At Shark Island prisoners were starved, whipped, raped, and used as forced labor. To give one a perspective on how terrible the Shark Island concentration camp was, consider the following numerical example: in the summer of 1906, 1800 Nama prisoners were sent to Shark Island. By April of 1907, only 245 of them were still alive.

65,000 Hereros died (60% to 80% of the Herero population) and the Nama population was reduced from 20,000 to 10,000 (50% of the Nama). This was genocide, and in fact, these were the first genocides of the twentieth century.

If killing 50% to 80% of a population does not count as "in part" (per the Genocide Convention), then words have no meaning. If a glass has only one drop of water in it, is that glass partially filled? Arguably it is not except in the most literal definition of the word "filled". But if half the volume of a glass is filled with water, much less 80% of the glass, that glass is most definitely partially filled with water.

Thus claiming that murdering 75,000 Hereros and Nama (50% to 80% of the population) doesn't count as genocide because the death toll is in the tens of thousands has no foundation in international law or in the definition of genocide, and for that matter no foundation in logic or history. Consider the following example.

The Jewish population of Belgium numbered 65,000 – 75,000 before the German occupation in World War II. 25,000 of those Jews were deported to Auschwitz and other camps. Less than 2,000 of those deported Jews survived.

RudyNelson, intellectual consistency is a key logical component of the truth. You've asserted that since the 75,000 Herero and Nama dead counted in the tens of thousands, this slaughter does not qualify as genocide.

So, if Germany in World War II had decided to murder Jews in Belgium, but not Jews in the rest of Europe, would you then argue that those 23,000 Belgium Jews who died in Auschwitz would no longer be victims of an Antisemitic genocide because the total number of deaths was now in the tens of thousands instead of the millions?

Heedless Horseman, it's aye easier tae understand a "geordie" than yon sassanach s frae the south

Well without a doubt if for no other reasons than historical accuracy and knowing what happened and why. So as hopefully it won't happen again. All these incidents of genocide/mass murder, etc., should be brought to light. I never knew of the massive levels/numbers of acts of genocide committed in Africa colonies by the European occupiers.

Just like after the War Crime Trials at the end of WWII, the thought was "Never again" … Well we saw what happened in the former Yugoslavia in the '90s, across Africa, the Mid East, etc., etc.

Even the Turks won't admit their barbaric medieval genocide of the Armenians during WWI. And again that was simply over religious differences. With the Turks being muslims and the Armenians being Christians. Not that it really matters, as we see today it can be simply over tribal and ethnic differences, warlord/mullah affiliations, etc.,.

And we see this continued on today as well as before. The most recent being the crimes against humanity committed to the Yazidis, Christians and of course other muslims.

Africans today are being sold as slaves in Libyan, etc., slave markets even today … right now …

As well as what happened when Europeans landed on the shores of the "New World" …

Too many fingers to be pointed in too many directions when it comes to man's inhumanity to man …

Sorry for revive this old thread … but the news deserves the image of a named African "country"…

Man Named Adolf Hitler Wins Election in Namibia, Promises He's An OK Guy

link

Incredible!….

Armand

but the news deserves the image of a named African "country"

Dear Raùl,

There's no need to put quotation marks around the word country.

Namibia has been an independent country since 1990.

And since independence, Namibia has not murdered 9,000 to 30,000 people by "disappearing" them, unlike certain countries – for example, Argentina.

Similarly, since independence Namibia has had democratic governments, with no coups, military dictatorships, or juntas, unlike certain countries – for example, Argentina.

So, since independence Namibia has been a country in Africa that deserves and has had democratic governance, unlike some of the murderous and dictatorial regimes that have ruled a certain "country" in South America – namely, Argentina.

Roy

So … that will be counted as a no vote …