• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Shoud the US follow the example of socialist East Germany?

Sim

Registered Member
It's amazing time and again how many nuts there are among professional politicians:

Joe Miller On Securing The Border: 'If East Germany Could, We Could' (VIDEO) | TPMDC

Remember his name: Republican candidate for US Senate in Alaska Joe Miller.

He said concerning illegal immigration:

"East Germany was very, very able to reduce the flow" from one side of the border to the other. "Now, obviously, other things there were involved. We have the capacity to, as a great nation, obviously to secure our border. If East Germany could, we could."

I had already come to accept that Hitler was evil because he introduced public health insurance, and not because he ordered extralegal renditions, torture and unprovoked preemtive strikes on countries that posed no threat.

But I guess I have to rethink my image of East Germany too. I already accept they were not bad because of extralegal renditions, torture and illegal wiretappings, but because they had public health insurance. Now it seems I have to learn they weren't bad because they shot people attempting to cross the border and at the Berlin Wall. How long do you think it will take me, until I have thoroughly internalized that?

Maybe until November 4th (or when is the election)?
 

SmilinSilhouette

Registered Member
So is Joe Miller evil because he thinks that we should secure our border or is he evil because he used Germany as an example? I don't get it. If you say something about Germany does that automatically make you a Nazi?
 

Sim

Registered Member
So is Joe Miller evil because he thinks that we should secure our border or is he evil because he used Germany as an example? I don't get it. If you say something about Germany does that automatically make you a Nazi?
I don't know. If someone says "we should follow the example of Nazi Germany!", does that sound weird to you?

Of course, East Germany was not as bad as the Nazi regime, but still pretty bad. It was a socialist dictatorship that oppressed its people. And the major reason why people condemned and still condemn that system of communist East Germany is because they secured their borders for that nobody could cross them, thus tearing apart families, denied their own citizens the right on free travelling, even made it a crime when people attempted to leave GDR territory -- and because they even shot hundreds of people who still attempted to cross the border.

You know, that is why people complained about the Berlin Wall, and why this Reagan guy melodramatically asked the Soviet leader to "tear down this Wall".

Does it make someone evil when he proposes we should mimick this example of the communist GDR?

Maybe not necessarily. But it allows severe doubts about the question whether such a person actually understands what freedom is, what human rights are and if he really knows what a democratic, republican political system is.
 
Last edited:

SmilinSilhouette

Registered Member
It should be obvious that Miller was saying that the US should secure our borders. If a backwards country can secure it's border then surely the US can.

But if you can point me to where Miller has been advocating that the US should become a socialist dictatorship then I would see your point.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I think it's a horrible example, the wall in East Germany was not only to keep people out but to keep people in. Securing the southern border doesn't keep people out, it's trying to stop the violence and the drugs coming from the south. I understand the point he was trying to make but the example is poor.
 

Sim

Registered Member
It should be obvious that Miller was saying that the US should secure our borders. If a backwards country can secure it's border then surely the US can.

But if you can point me to where Miller has been advocating that the US should become a socialist dictatorship then I would see your point.
Probably CO is right and this guy just made a very poor choice of words that invites misunderstanding. It also makes wonder if this guy knows his history (well possible he doesn't even know anything about East Germany).

If you agree, for example, that the army should be expanded, wouldn't you find it a poor choice of words if a politician then said "See, Nazi Germany had a fine army and it was so effective! When Nazi Germany could do it, we can do it too!" ?

After all, it's well known that Nazi Germany's army was not only known for its effectiveness, but also for mass murder on the Polish and Russian civil populations and immense war crimes. When you just mention this example without being more precize, that leaves room for the interpretation that you A) don't know about this historical fact, which is pretty poor, B) suggest the US army should mimick this disregard for war law and human rights as well, or C) that these war crimes at least were no big deal, and as long as the army was effective, it doesn't matter when they commit war crimes.


The same for this example. "Securing the borders" of course isn't a wrong thing to do. But we live in a free, constitutional republic. That means we usually want to hold us to a higher standard than ugly communist or fascist dictatorships. And that means that when we protect our borders, effectiveness isn't the only yardstick, but moral standards are another.

East Germany was an evil regime because it did not respect any human rights standards when "protecting" their border: They simply shot everybody who attempted to cross, and those who were wounded were ignored and denied help until they had bled out to death. Several hundred desperate people motivated by the hope to escape oppression and poverty died that way.

The way this guy says it, that makes me wonder if he thinks the US should really follow this example, just because it's effective.


Also, SS, I really wonder why you defend such an obviously ridiculous statement. May that be because this guy as an "R" attached to his name? Something tells me, if it was a "D", you'd already be in the first line to mock him. (And just for the record: I don't think it is very important it's an "R" in this case. This statement is just stupid, no matter which party this man belongs to, and there are obviously nuts in all parties).
 
Last edited:
Top