America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Discussion of current events
neverfail
Posts: 5923
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by neverfail » Sat Oct 17, 2020 4:17 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:35 am

Thank you for your kind words, Neverfail. I don't usually go around drawing the attention for any good things my country may have done, but Ellen pissed me. Because she disagrees with my criticism of American policies - not American people -, and because she has no valid arguments to counter my views,she decided to swing at Portugal for its apparent passivity while the US was freeing people from concentration camps. She preferred to forget that many people did not need being freed by US forces, because they had been able to escape occupied Europe via Portugal. I would not be surprised if some of Ellen's relatives or acquaintances lived because of the help Portugal gave them, but Ellen is one of those persons who never remembers or ever apologizes...
:lol: It seems to me that you have become unduly reactive towards Ellen and her objections to your " slant" on US policy.

The US can afford to posture heroic. It was never even remotely in danger of being invaded and overrun by Nazi Germany or any of its other Axis partners in crime. It's unique combination of geographic location; size, demography and economic productivity made this country unassailable to would-be invaders while positioning it to "strike out" against enemy states once it had rid itself of isolationist hang-ups. But to defy Nazi policy when you are living in the shadow of the Third Reich would have required real guts.

Sertorio, the role played by Portugal can still be contraversial. While researching online I found this reference to Aristides de Sousa Mendes'; Portugal's now highly esteemed consul in Bordeaux in 1940:
When he was called back to Portugal in June 1940, Sousa Mendes was tried on 15 charges including violating Portugal's prohibition on visas for Jews and other stateless people. He was found guilty and dismissed from the diplomatic service. A father of 15, he was stripped of his pension and lived in poverty until his death in 1954.

Mendes was not thanked by his country for the common decency he demonstrated back in 1940..

It seems that at that early stage in WW2 it was not Portuguise government policy to assist Jewish and other refugees to escape the Nazis. (In mitigation though, no one knew about or foresaw the death camps at this time.)

However, Portugal's role as an escape route and embarkation point for escapees from the Third Reich was not and could not have been indivisable from that of its neighbour Spain. (After all, to reach Portugal from any part of Nazi occupied Europe you normally need to travel across Spainish territory.) The Spanish civil war had ended only a matter of weeks before WW2 began and Spain's economy and infrastructure would have been in utter ruins (at least Portugal escaped that fate). Despite that and despite the fact that Spain's dictator General Francisco franco was indebted to Berlin for helping him win that conflict Franco still stood up to Hitler:
Spain allowed almost 30,000 Jewish refugees to enter, primarily from 1939 to 1941. These refugees, mostly from France, were permitted to cross Spain on their way to Portugal. German pressure reduced the number of Jews admitted entry into Spain to fewer than 7,500 during the years 1942–44, although Spanish consuls distributed 4,000-5,000 identity documents (crucial to escape) to Jews in various parts of Europe. Portugal (a neutral country friendly to the Allies) permitted many thousands of Jews to reach the port of Lisbon. A number of American and French Jewish organizations helped the refugees, once in Lisbon, to reach the United States and South America.

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/ ... ied-europe

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4661
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by Doc » Sat Oct 17, 2020 5:32 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:35 am
neverfail wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 3:23 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 7:05 am

In 1945 we were enjoying the return of peace to Europe, but in 1940 we were staying away from the war and receiving Jewish refugees who were turned away by many countries, including the US.

A photo like many others:

Image
The number of refugees that escaped through Portugal during the war has estimates that range from one hundred thousand to one million; an impressive number considering the size of the country's population at that time (circa 6 million). "In 1940 Lisbon, happiness was staged so that God could believe it still existed," wrote the French writer Antoine de Saint-Exupéry. The Portuguese capital became a symbol of hope for many refugees. Even Ilsa and Rick, the star-crossed lovers in the film Casablanca, sought a ticket to that "great embarkation point". Thousands flooded the city trying to obtain the documents necessary to escape to the United States or Palestine. Not all found their way.

On 26 June 1940, four days after France's capitulation to Germany, Salazar authorised the main Office of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society ( HIAS-HICEM) in Paris to be transferred to Lisbon. According to the Lisbon Jewish community, Salazar held Moisés Bensabat Amzalak, the leader of the Lisbon Jewish community, in high esteem, allowing Amzalak to play an important role in getting Salazar's permission for the transfer.

In July 1940, the civilian population of Gibraltar was evacuated due to expected attacks expected from Germany and Italy. At that time, Portuguese Madeira agreed to host about 2,500 Gibraltarian evacuees, mostly women and children, who arrived at Funchal between 21 July and 13 August 1940 and who remained there until the end of the war. In 2010 a monument was commissioned in Gibraltar and shipped to Madeira where it was erected next to a small chapel at Santa Catarina park, Funchal. The monument was a gift and a symbol of ever-lasting appreciation from the people of Gibraltar to the people of Madeira.

The Portuguese consul general in Bordeaux, Aristides de Sousa Mendes, helped an undetermined number of refugees, and his actions were not unique by any means. Issuing visas in contravention of instructions was widespread at Portuguese consulates all over Europe, although some cases were directly supported by Salazar. The Portuguese Ambassador in Budapest, Carlos Sampaio Garrido, helped an estimated 1,000 Hungarian Jews in 1944. Along with Carlos de Liz-Texeira Branquinho, under Salazar's direct guidance, they rented houses and apartments to shelter and protect refugees from deportation and murder. On 28 April 1944, the Hungarian Gestapo raided the ambassador's home and arrested his guests. The ambassador, who physically resisted the police, was also arrested, but managed to have his guests released on the grounds of extraterritoriality of diplomatic legations. In 2010, Garrido was recognised as Righteous Among the Nations by Yad Vashem. Other Portuguese who deserve credit for saving Jews during the war include Professor Francisco Paula Leite Pinto and Moisés Bensabat Amzalak.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal_ ... r_refugees
Quite a laudable record Sertorio; especially considering that neither Salazar nor Portugal had anything to gain by arousing the ire of the Third Reich.

May I suggest that Portugal was helped by geography. The closest that German troops got to Portugal was the Franco-Spanish border - and that only in 1943 after the Third Reich overran and occupied Vichy France. In other words it had the girth of another neutral country bigger than itself to act as "padding" against the closest forces of arguably the most homocidally anti-Jewish power the world has ever seen.

If Portugal had German troops poised on its border throughout the war that may have curbed Salazar's apparent enthusiasm for rescuing Jews.
Thank you for your kind words, Neverfail. I don't usually go around drawing the attention for any good things my country may have done, but Ellen pissed me. Because she disagrees with my criticism of American policies - not American people -, and because she has no valid arguments to counter my views, she decided to swing at Portugal for its apparent passivity while the US was freeing people from concentration camps. She preferred to forget that many people did not need being freed by US forces, because they had been able to escape occupied Europe via Portugal. I would not be surprised if some of Ellen's relatives or acquaintances lived because of the help Portugal gave them, but Ellen is one of those persons who never remembers or ever apologizes...
When you act like a troll then do not expect people to not to treat you as one.
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4101
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by Sertorio » Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:13 am

Doc wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 5:32 pm

When you act like a troll then do not expect people to not to treat you as one.
Troll
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts flame wars or intentionally upsets people on the Internet by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, either for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.

(...)

Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. Like any pejorative term, it can be used as an ad hominem attack, suggesting a negative motivation.

(...)

At times the word is incorrectly used to refer to anyone with controversial, or differing, opinions. Such usage goes against the ordinary meaning of troll in multiple ways.

(...)
I don't think I am a troll. I often do have differing opinions, but I never get personal and my intent is drawing people's attention to facts, ideas or opinions often kept hidden because they disrupt certain interests. In a forum with several Americans I have dared to criticize the US, but I think I have always done it based on facts, and I have never attacked Americans per se. Rather than wanting to harm Americans or the US, my desire is that the US moves towards a more civilized form of international relations, so that the world gets more peaceful. Some of you have realized this, but others are too upset at the idea that I may be right and react in an unfriendly manner. Too bad. I wish all subjects could be discussed without acrimony, but that may be beyond the possibilities of many of our species...

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4661
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by Doc » Sun Oct 18, 2020 9:48 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:13 am
Doc wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 5:32 pm

When you act like a troll then do not expect people to not to treat you as one.
Troll
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts flame wars or intentionally upsets people on the Internet by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, either for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.

(...)

Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. Like any pejorative term, it can be used as an ad hominem attack, suggesting a negative motivation.

(...)

At times the word is incorrectly used to refer to anyone with controversial, or differing, opinions. Such usage goes against the ordinary meaning of troll in multiple ways.

(...)
I don't think I am a troll. I often do have differing opinions, but I never get personal and my intent is drawing people's attention to facts, ideas or opinions often kept hidden because they disrupt certain interests. In a forum with several Americans I have dared to criticize the US, but I think I have always done it based on facts, and I have never attacked Americans per se. Rather than wanting to harm Americans or the US, my desire is that the US moves towards a more civilized form of international relations, so that the world gets more peaceful. Some of you have realized this, but others are too upset at the idea that I may be right and react in an unfriendly manner. Too bad. I wish all subjects could be discussed without acrimony, but that may be beyond the possibilities of many of our species...
RT And Sputnik are propaganda sites. Russia state Media. My Definition of Troll is not so broad as above. But yours is not to bad.


I don't think you are intentionally trolling. Whether or not your intent is to troll there are four different things you can do besides just read. You can make people think, you can make people laugh, you can illicit an emotional response, or you can illicit no response at all. You are not questioning your own sources nor explaining why they make sense. Most often than not you are simply saying "Orange America Bad", with the circular links to RT or Spunik etc.

Sometimes those sites get the story right. But a broken clock gets the time right twice a day every day. Out of the four possible things above you can do in a forum which of the above do you most often accomplish? Either "Me too" responses from someone of dubious motivation, or people that have gotten upset with you. THis is not to say that all of your posts are such. Just too many of them.
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4101
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by Sertorio » Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:26 am

Doc wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 9:48 am
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:13 am
Doc wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 5:32 pm

When you act like a troll then do not expect people to not to treat you as one.
Troll
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts flame wars or intentionally upsets people on the Internet by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, either for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.

(...)

Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. Like any pejorative term, it can be used as an ad hominem attack, suggesting a negative motivation.

(...)

At times the word is incorrectly used to refer to anyone with controversial, or differing, opinions. Such usage goes against the ordinary meaning of troll in multiple ways.

(...)
I don't think I am a troll. I often do have differing opinions, but I never get personal and my intent is drawing people's attention to facts, ideas or opinions often kept hidden because they disrupt certain interests. In a forum with several Americans I have dared to criticize the US, but I think I have always done it based on facts, and I have never attacked Americans per se. Rather than wanting to harm Americans or the US, my desire is that the US moves towards a more civilized form of international relations, so that the world gets more peaceful. Some of you have realized this, but others are too upset at the idea that I may be right and react in an unfriendly manner. Too bad. I wish all subjects could be discussed without acrimony, but that may be beyond the possibilities of many of our species...
RT And Sputnik are propaganda sites. Russia state Media. My Definition of Troll is not so broad as above. But yours is not to bad.


I don't think you are intentionally trolling. Whether or not your intent is to troll there are four different things you can do besides just read. You can make people think, you can make people laugh, you can illicit an emotional response, or you can illicit no response at all. You are not questioning your own sources nor explaining why they make sense. Most often than not you are simply saying "Orange America Bad", with the circular links to RT or Spunik etc.

Sometimes those sites get the story right. But a broken clock gets the time right twice a day every day. Out of the four possible things above you can do in a forum which of the above do you most often accomplish? Either "Me too" responses from someone of dubious motivation, or people that have gotten upset with you. THis is not to say that all of your posts are such. Just too many of them.
It's true that RT and Sputnik are propaganda sites, which doesn't mean that what they publish cannot be true. Like good propaganda sites they try to stay as close to the truth as possible, just bending it a little bit to serve their propaganda purposes. But I would say that 80% of what they publish is reliable enough and may be used in fair argumentation. I try to use only what I think is reliable, but I may be fooled sometimes.

My posts either are factual - and mostly truthful as far as I can assess -, or they are quotes from opinion articles which I choose because their authors are credible or their positions seem to me as being fair. Mostly I try to bring to you facts and opinions which are seldom published by the media most likely to be used by you, so that your opinions are not formed exclusively by your own propaganda tools.

Actually arguing against American foreign policy is not very hard, as most of it blatantly disrespects other countries rights and sovereignty. Drawing your attention to it is my way of defeating it. Not through force but by convincing Americans that it would be in their interest to stop supporting those policies and electing more honest politicians. A doubtful goal, seeing that you insist on choosing some of the worst people in America as candidates for office. I only wish you were more open to discussing different points of view, but you sometimes seem to prefer defending your governments positions, even when they are wrong, due maybe to misplaced patriotism. But I do not plan giving up - even if I upset some of you - because I think that we are all responsible for peace in the world.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4661
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by Doc » Sun Oct 18, 2020 8:53 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 11:26 am
Doc wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 9:48 am
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:13 am
Doc wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 5:32 pm

When you act like a troll then do not expect people to not to treat you as one.
Troll
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts flame wars or intentionally upsets people on the Internet by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, either for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.

(...)

Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. Like any pejorative term, it can be used as an ad hominem attack, suggesting a negative motivation.

(...)

At times the word is incorrectly used to refer to anyone with controversial, or differing, opinions. Such usage goes against the ordinary meaning of troll in multiple ways.

(...)
I don't think I am a troll. I often do have differing opinions, but I never get personal and my intent is drawing people's attention to facts, ideas or opinions often kept hidden because they disrupt certain interests. In a forum with several Americans I have dared to criticize the US, but I think I have always done it based on facts, and I have never attacked Americans per se. Rather than wanting to harm Americans or the US, my desire is that the US moves towards a more civilized form of international relations, so that the world gets more peaceful. Some of you have realized this, but others are too upset at the idea that I may be right and react in an unfriendly manner. Too bad. I wish all subjects could be discussed without acrimony, but that may be beyond the possibilities of many of our species...
RT And Sputnik are propaganda sites. Russia state Media. My Definition of Troll is not so broad as above. But yours is not to bad.


I don't think you are intentionally trolling. Whether or not your intent is to troll there are four different things you can do besides just read. You can make people think, you can make people laugh, you can illicit an emotional response, or you can illicit no response at all. You are not questioning your own sources nor explaining why they make sense. Most often than not you are simply saying "Orange America Bad", with the circular links to RT or Spunik etc.

Sometimes those sites get the story right. But a broken clock gets the time right twice a day every day. Out of the four possible things above you can do in a forum which of the above do you most often accomplish? Either "Me too" responses from someone of dubious motivation, or people that have gotten upset with you. THis is not to say that all of your posts are such. Just too many of them.
It's true that RT and Sputnik are propaganda sites, which doesn't mean that what they publish cannot be true.1
Like good propaganda sites they try to stay as close to the truth as possible, just bending it a little bit to serve their propaganda purposes. But I would say that 80% of what they publish is reliable enough and may be used in fair argumentation. I try to use only what I think is reliable, but I may be fooled sometimes.

My posts either are factual - and mostly truthful as far as I can assess -, or they are quotes from opinion articles which I choose because their authors are credible or their positions seem to me as being fair. Mostly I try to bring to you facts and opinions which are seldom published by the media most likely to be used by you, so that your opinions are not formed exclusively by your own propaganda tools.

Actually arguing against American foreign policy is not very hard, as most of it blatantly disrespects other countries rights and sovereignty. Drawing your attention to it is my way of defeating it. Not through force but by convincing Americans that it would be in their interest to stop supporting those policies and electing more honest politicians. A doubtful goal, seeing that you insist on choosing some of the worst people in America as candidates for office. I only wish you were more open to discussing different points of view, but you sometimes seem to prefer defending your governments positions, even when they are wrong, due maybe to misplaced patriotism. But I do not plan giving up - even if I upset some of you - because I think that we are all responsible for peace in the world.
[/quote]

1As I said above. I think most people judge the truthfulness based on what they perceive the motivation of the source is.

If you want to tell how truthful an article is then take a sentence of the text of the article and run it through a search engine and see if any other web sites have the same information. See if the article reference each other, a common source, and or have the same information format(Same sentences, same presentation) That will tell you much of the time if the information in the article is real. Otherwise you are getting confirmation bias which is the biggest tool of propaganda. I find most often that this is not so hard to do. All that has to be done to create confirmation bias is taking things out of context.

The US has been the leading power in the world since the cold war ended. Bill Clinton and the democrat claimed there was a peace dividend. What they did not say was they were putting it in their pockets.



So which is preferable to you? Trump, with all of his warts who is trying to end the establishment of the US government or the trash establishment like the Biden and the Clinton's who are profiting off of the trash of other countries?

The Democrats and the MSM are claiming Giuliani's evidence is "Russian propaganda" The thing they are not saying is the hard disk was turned over to the FBI before Trump's Impeachment hearings. The FBI forgot to mention that. DO not say whether or not they found it as legitimate, Russian disinformation or they did nothing with it(Like Weiner's computer)

Anyway what is your take on this?
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 4101
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by Sertorio » Mon Oct 19, 2020 1:55 am

Doc wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 8:53 pm

So which is preferable to you? Trump, with all of his warts who is trying to end the establishment of the US government or the trash establishment like the Biden and the Clinton's who are profiting off of the trash of other countries?

The Democrats and the MSM are claiming Giuliani's evidence is "Russian propaganda" The thing they are not saying is the hard disk was turned over to the FBI before Trump's Impeachment hearings. The FBI forgot to mention that. DO not say whether or not they found it as legitimate, Russian disinformation or they did nothing with it(Like Weiner's computer)

Anyway what is your take on this?
If I were American I would vote for the candidate of the Green Party or for the one of the Libertarian Party, as a form of protest, as I would find it revolting voting either for Trump or for Biden. I admit that Trump might rather want to get rid of all American wars, but neither the Pentagon nor the military-industrial complex would allow him. And Trump knows that what happened to Kennedy could happen to him... As to Biden, he doesn't even try to convince anybody that he would not continue the US bellicist foreign policies. Having to live with either one will be as bad for Americans as for the rest of us...

neverfail
Posts: 5923
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by neverfail » Mon Oct 19, 2020 2:52 am

Sertorio wrote:
Mon Oct 19, 2020 1:55 am


If I were American I would vote for the candidate of the Green Party or for the one of the Libertarian Party, as a form of protest, as I would find it revolting voting either for Trump or for Biden. I admit that Trump might rather want to get rid of all American wars, but neither the Pentagon nor the military-industrial complex would allow him. And Trump knows that what happened to Kennedy could happen to him... As to Biden, he doesn't even try to convince anybody that he would not continue the US bellicist foreign policies. Having to live with either one will be as bad for Americans as for the rest of us...
Hey Sertorio: silly Cassowary believes that their Democratic Partyu is some kind of Commie trojan horse plotting to impose a Communist one party dict6atorship on the USA. :lol: What do you thinmk of that?

beatnik
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2020 12:22 pm

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by beatnik » Mon Oct 19, 2020 3:03 am

Sertorio wrote:
Mon Oct 19, 2020 1:55 am
Doc wrote:
Sun Oct 18, 2020 8:53 pm

So which is preferable to you? Trump, with all of his warts who is trying to end the establishment of the US government or the trash establishment like the Biden and the Clinton's who are profiting off of the trash of other countries?

The Democrats and the MSM are claiming Giuliani's evidence is "Russian propaganda" The thing they are not saying is the hard disk was turned over to the FBI before Trump's Impeachment hearings. The FBI forgot to mention that. DO not say whether or not they found it as legitimate, Russian disinformation or they did nothing with it(Like Weiner's computer)

Anyway what is your take on this?
If I were American I would vote for the candidate of the Green Party or for the one of the Libertarian Party, as a form of protest, as I would find it revolting voting either for Trump or for Biden. I admit that Trump might rather want to get rid of all American wars, but neither the Pentagon nor the military-industrial complex would allow him. And Trump knows that what happened to Kennedy could happen to him... As to Biden, he doesn't even try to convince anybody that he would not continue the US bellicist foreign policies. Having to live with either one will be as bad for Americans as for the rest of us...

I voted for a write-in candidate in 2008 when it was Obama vs. McCain. McCain didn't represent me on a policy level while with Obama it was clear that he sells out his friends and allies to attract his enemies (at that point of time, just domestically but it later proved true in foreign policy as well). I couldn't vote for either of them and I'm glad I didn't.

The US hasn't had good presidential candidates for decades.

Ellen
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:02 pm

Re: America's Anti-Asian Pandemic

Post by Ellen » Mon Oct 19, 2020 4:44 am

"The number of refugees that escaped through Portugal during the war has estimates that range from one hundred thousand to one million; an impressive number considering the size of the country's population at that time (circa 6 million). "In 1940 Lisbon, happiness was staged so that God could believe it still existed," wrote the French writer Antoine de Saint-Exupéry. The Portuguese capital became a symbol of hope for many refugees. Even Ilsa and Rick, the star-crossed lovers in the film Casablanca, sought a ticket to that "great embarkation point". Thousands flooded the city trying to obtain the documents necessary to escape to the United States or Palestine. Not all found their way."
-----------------------------------------

Alright, here I will say a good word for Portugal. Its role is WWII is not widely known (including by myself) because apparently it wasn't really involved very much, which is quite understandable. Why get involved in a merciless bloodbath if you don't have to and don't have the resources or strength to contribute much to the more righteous side. Switzerland was another small country that did not get involved much except in evil ways which were revealed after the war. Their so-called neutrality was not real neutrality, and in fact was heartless and cruel. And, unlike Portugal, they DID have many resources which could have been helpful to the Allied side (like bank accounts of Nazis and Jewish refugees handed over to the Germans, and a small but very good army).

The availability of Lisbon as an embarkation point to the Americas is widely known thanks to the great and memorable movie mentioned above (Casablanca). When one looks at the broader picture of Europe's complicity with the Nazis - actively helping them, passively helping them, or pretending to be neutral instead of helping the right side, certainly one thing stands out very prominently. This has always struck me as an interesting point.

Which countries, on their own small but symbolic ways, actually tried to fight the Nazis or help their Jewish citizens or refugees trying to flee? Only Denmark, Bulgaria, and Portugal. These were 3 small countries, quite weak militarily, and 2 of them were relatively backward economically. Certainly, none were a match for the German war machine. And yet, they stuck their necks out, risking a German invasion. The Germans didn't bother to retaliate against any of these three, because they couldn't afford the diversion of resources, so none of these brave, small countries paid a price. But compare that to much larger countries that did nothing to help their own Jewish and other citizens pursued by the Nazis when they had much greater means to do so.

Sometimes, the powerful are the biggest cowards, and the weaker countries are the braver ones. It has nothing to do with geographical location or resources or any factual advantages they might possess. It's a matter of character and culture, I think.

Post Reply