Ronald Reagan

[amadeus]

FDR helped free Europe from the Nazis, and Asia from the Japanese... definitely commendable.

Will you volunteer to go to a prison camp the next time the U.S. starts a war?

 

[kochman]

Why the heck should I?

1) We didn't start WW2...
2) I never defended the internment camps, it is probably the biggest stain on FDR's legacy, but he was an amazing Commander in Chief, and his good work in this department completely justify a positive outlook on his time as president.

 

[Traitorfish]

Why the heck should I?

1) We didn't start WW2...
2) I never defended the internment camps, it is probably the biggest stain on FDR's legacy, but he was an amazing Commander in Chief, and his good work in this department completely justify a positive outlook on his time as president.

And about how many people can you say "Apart from the whole ethnic cleansing thing, he was a pretty swell guy"?

 

[kochman]

Temporary internment, as brutal and uncalled for as it was, is not "ethnic cleansing".

 

[Traitorfish]

Are you saying that because you don't think that it meets the criteria for ethnic cleansing (and if so, why not?), or is it because you know that ethnic cleansing is a Very Bad Thing and don't want to have FDR associated with it?

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

Come on, people. Ethnic cleansing invariably involves mass murder of a population in order to "cleanse" the population of that "ethnicity". Internment, however brutal and unjustified, is not ethnic cleansing.

 

[kochman]

Are you saying that because you don't think that it meets the criteria for ethnic cleansing (and if so, why not?), or is it because you know that ethnic cleansing is a Very Bad Thing and don't want to have FDR associated with it?

This type of post is precisely what I am talking about...
I already answered whether or not I think it meets the criteria for ethnic cleansing, AND why not, by my choice of words.
TEMPORARY INTERNMENT
To further break this down for you...

Temporary internment =/= ethnic cleansing, because it is 1) temporary, and 2) internment... if I meant ethnic cleansing, I would have used the words "ethnic cleansing".

 

[Traitorfish]

Come on, people. Ethnic cleansing invariably involves mass murder of a population in order to "cleanse" the population of that "ethnicity". Internment, however brutal and unjustified, is not ethnic cleansing.

No it doesn't. "Genocide", yes, but "ethnic cleansing" is a much broader category. Stalin's mass-deportations of Tartars, Chechens, Volga Germans, etc. weren't campaigns of mass-murder (although this being Stalin, half the poor sods died anyway), but they were still ethnic cleansing. It just means the removal of an ethnic group from a given geographic area by means of violence or terror, which accurately describes the Japanese-American internments. That it was temporary doesn't make it any less the case.

This type of post is precisely what I am talking about...
I already answered whether or not I think it meets the criteria for ethnic cleansing, AND why not, by my choice of words.
TEMPORARY INTERNMENT
To further break this down for you...

Temporary internment =/= ethnic cleansing, because it is 1) temporary, and 2) internment... if I meant ethnic cleansing, I would have used the words "ethnic cleansing".

This is begging the question. You can't begin with the premise that the temporary internment of an entire ethnic group is not ethnic cleansing, you have to demonstrate it. As I said above, it constituted the removal of an entire ethnic group by means of (the threat of) violence from a given geographic area, i.e. anywhere in the United States outside of the internment camps. That it was temporary doesn't mean that it wasn't ethnic cleansing, it just means it was "temporary ethnic cleansing". Less heinous, granted, but that doesn't put it another category altogether. (Unless perhaps you would argue that "borrowing without asking" is legitimately distinct from "stealing"?)

 

[Agarwaen]

Come on, people. Ethnic cleansing invariably involves mass murder of a population in order to "cleanse" the population of that "ethnicity". Internment, however brutal and unjustified, is not ethnic cleansing.

For mass murder of an ethinic group there is already "genocide". Ethinic cleansing just means removing a specific group of people from a certain territory. It says nothing about how the removal happens. It may be murder, rape, mass deportations, terror...

 

[bombshoo]

I really think calling Japanese internment an example of ethnic cleansing is a bit off base. It might fit some of the definitions of it, but the reasoning behind it and the fact it was only meant to be temporary make it a very unique case of it if it indeed is. I can't think of any other cases of "ethnic cleansing" like it (except for the other internments in Canada and the UK) and if you can, internment might just be a better word since it doesn't carry the same connotations of involving deportations to other countries, attempts to eradicate cultures and language, etc.

 

[Traitorfish]

I really think calling Japanese internment an example of ethnic cleansing is a bit off base. It might fit some of the definitions of it, but the reasoning behind it and the fact it was only meant to be temporary make it a very unique case of it if it . I can't think of any other cases of "ethnic cleansing" like it (except for the other internments in Canada and the UK) and if you can, internment might just be a better word since it doesn't carry the same connotations of involving deportations to other countries, attempts to eradicate cultures and language, etc.

Why do the connotations matter? If we're having a discussion with any depth at all, then we should understand what it is we're talking about, and what we mean when we use specific terminology. The American government, through the threat of violence, forcibly removed an entire ethnic group from a given geographical area; the Pacific Coast was "cleansed" of a the Japanese-American "ethnicity". That this was temporary doesn't change that, any more than, to use my previous example, taking somebody's car without permission is "borrowing without asking" rather than "stealing".

Honestly, given the fact that we're talking about the forcible internment of over one hundred thousand people for a period of three years, I can't help but feel that worrying that we might be using terms that can be inferred in an overly-harsh manner is a bit First World Problems...

 

[bombshoo]

Why do the connotations matter? If we're having a discussion with any depth at all, then we should understand what it is we're talking about, and what we mean when we use specific terminology. The American government, through the threat of violence, forcibly removed an entire ethnic group from a given geographical area; the Pacific Coast was "cleansed" of a the Japanese-American "ethnicity". That this was temporary doesn't change that, any more than, to use my previous example, taking somebody's car without permission is "borrowing without asking" rather than "stealing".

Honestly, given the fact that we're talking about the forcible internment of over one hundred thousand people for a period of three years, I can't help but feel that worrying that we might be using terms that can be inferred in an overly-harsh manner is a bit First World Problems...

I probably used the term "connotations" too lightly, because I find a lot of definitions do actually include that it must be permanent and that it does also involve attempts to eradicate the history of the targeted group in the area. Certainly every case of ethnic cleansing I can think of (besides the internments) basically fits this criteria. Just curious what definition are you using?

 

[Cutlass]

How does this explain all the non-republicans that think he was great?!

There's an organized campaign to make Reagan look great. many people are an easy sell. Other people just have a skewed view of reality.

 

[Cutlass]

Yeah, he wasn't perfect. But that wasn't his idea. And most of the rest of what he did expanded both prosperity and freedom.

 

[Tycho Brahe]

Moderator Action: Moved kochman's and Ajidica's most recent posts on the subject from this thread. Please confine the discussion to this thread or the 'Why Communism Failed' thread.


_________________



Saying that Reagan caused the collapse of the USSR due to Star Wars strikes me as kinda like saying Jimmy Carter caused the collapse of the USSR due to the grain embargo. Sure, an escalation of the arms race by Reagan had the inadvertent effect of allowing Gorbachev to more easily shift doctrine, but so did the grain embargo. Both were factors. Doesn't mean Reagan or Carter can take the credit for the collapse. It could've been any President sitting in the chair when things really hit the fan. It just so happened to be Reagan.

It's important to note that Reagan's aggressiveness early on, if anything, actually delayed the transition from the old guard to the new. It made Andropov and then Chernenko far more wary of the changes that would inevitably result in collapse. That seems to have been Reagan's main direct impact on proceedings.

Reagan definitely didn't look like he was trying to disarm the nucleare race in the begining of his term. He looked more like he was trying to put more misiles in Europe. Which was quite scary for people living in Europe at the time. People like me. People like Sting who made the song "the russians love their children too". Reagans gamble paid off, but it shure looked like it was Gorbatjov who was the rewasonable, peace-seeking part.

 

[Quackers]

Hitler wasn't perfect but at least he expanded both prosperity and freedom for your average ethnic german.

(sorry i couldn't resist godwin)

 

[Agent327]

Hitler wasn't perfect but at least he expanded both prosperity and freedom for your average ethnic German right up til the point that they were destitute and occupied.. .

(sorry i couldn't resist Quackers)

Corrected that one for you.

 

[Cutlass]

Hitler wasn't perfect but at least he expanded both prosperity and freedom for your average ethnic german.

(sorry i couldn't resist godwin)

So he accomplished more than Reagan.

 

[Dachs]

FDR helped free Europe from the Nazis, and Asia from the Japanese... definitely commendable.

you're being far too modest

he freed california from the japanese too

 

[REDY]

FDR hasnt prevented WWII and nazist crimes when he should and later he gave half of europe to commies. He failed.