volvoxvsmarla

Again - there is and must be a distinction between the blame, responsibility and guilt of an 18 year old uneducated soldier, nurse etc and a political leader. But this does not automatically absolve the former from all responsibility and guilt. You should and hopefully do focus on the latter’s guilt and responsibility, as it is much larger than the others’. Focussing on the people who follow orders is not what I would advertise for and this isn’t the intent, it is actually the exact opposite. By differentiating different aspects and kinds of guilt you have tools and language at hand to talk about it without putting everyone in the same boat.

It is not a black and white issue. Everyone got blood on their hands - you and me included - just in different amounts, in different ways.

Very honestly - I’ve still not read the book entirely and I have started because I felt some feeling of guilt myself for being a Russian living outside Russia. I think that’s actually exactly what Jaspers, along with his students (the book is basically a dialectic lecture written down with results of work of his class from one semester), was trying to figure out. So I am not the best person to lecture you about that.

From as far as I have read these distinctions are exactly what allow people to talk about guilt, responsibility, trauma, the past, etc, without judging everyone by the same standards. Like, a criminal is judged by the court who defines for a crime they committed. A politician who took part in ordering crimes will be judged by the victor of a war. A soldier (just like a secretary) will be judged in dialogue with others and by his conscience for their individual actions, even if they were following orders. And a normal person who looked away or didn’t actively do their best to stop the atrocities that happen in the world, well, this person’s metaphysical guilt can basically only be judged by a metaphysical instance itself, be it God or another undefined transcendence. Basically all of us bear the latter.

They are very distinct and do not have the same repercussions. It is without doubt that political leaders have a much different, much more facetted responsibility for crimes committed. And we should focus on that. But this does not clean the people who followed their orders from all guilt, and their responsibility and crimes (against humanity) will be judged, just in a different way.

Edit: I’ve added a better phrased summary in my original comment above, since I have realized that translating German political philosophy isn’t my strength exactly.

In the aftermath of World War II, Carl Jaspers formulated in Die Schuldfrage that there are four types of guilt (/responsibility). Criminal guilt, political guilt, moral guilt, and metaphysical guilt. It is a great distinction in general. Yes, political leaders bear a different kind of guilt for the actions than the soldiers, but acting on clearly morally wrong commands do not obliterate guilt from the soldiers. Just like everyone who basically didn’t give their life in pursuit of the good and the right bears some metaphysical guilt for what is happening in the world.

Edit: I realized that, since I am neither an English native, nor very articulate in philosophy or politics, I would rather ask perplexity for a summary. So here it is: Karl Jaspers, in his work The Question of German Guilt, distinguishes four categories of guilt and assigns specific instances to each:

1. Criminal Guilt:

   Definition: Violations of objectively provable laws that are legally considered crimes.

   Instance: The court, which determines the facts and applies the laws in formal proceedings.

2. Political Guilt:

   Definition: Arises from the actions of statesmen and the shared responsibility of every citizen for the government of their state.

   Instance: The power and will of the victor, especially after a lost war, as in the case of Germany after World War II.

3. Moral Guilt:

   Definition: Refers to individual actions for which every person is morally responsible, even if carried out under orders.

   Instance: One’s own conscience and dialogue with others.

4. Metaphysical Guilt:

   Definition: A shared responsibility for all injustice in the world, based on human solidarity. It arises when one does not do everything possible to prevent injustice.

   Instance: God or transcendence.

Jaspers emphasizes that this differentiation is meant to avoid simplistic or generalized accusations of guilt. He rejects the idea of collective criminal or moral guilt for an entire people, arguing that guilt is always individual.

In a way, you just took my virginity. It’s the first time it’s genuinely happened to me, I didn’t see this coming. This is a great feeling but I also feel a bit ashamed.

When my husband moved to Germany from Russia, he had no idea whether he was vaccinated as a child or not (he very likely was, but there weren’t records he was aware of and his mom died early). So he went to the doctor’s to ask for titers. They said they could test that but he would have to pay out of pocket, and offered to just vaccinate him again for free. He went through all the children’s vaccines - including chicken pox, which wasn’t around when we were kids (90s). It is the simpler, more accessible, and cheaper alternative to titers.

Yeah now try being absolutely unknowledgeable when it comes to tech and very much into makeup, skincare, 90 day fiance and parenting content. Lemmy, it’s been nice, but after one and a half years I started lurking to Reddit every once in a while again.