Iranian IPs are blocked here, due to your decision to arm Russia with drones so that they can indiscriminately massacre civilians.
I always find amusing how the west always blames the people of the rivals "iranians", the "chinese", etc but when something is wrong with their side they blame an entity to detach themselves "the american government", "this administration", "nazi germany", etc
In everyday speech, people don’t carefully separate “the people” from “the state.” A French person talking about the U.S. usually says les Américains. A German talking about the French will just say die Franzosen — or, if they’re in the mood to tease, die Froschfresser. It’s only in news or diplomatic language that you see “the American government,” “the French government,” or “London” when referring to Britain.
The phrase “this administration” is mostly used domestically, by citizens talking about their own rulers. In Portugal you’d hear "este governo é uma merda", and in Spain the exact same sentiment — give or take a letter or two.
And “Nazi Germany” is only used when distinguishing regimes — Weimar vs. Federal Republic, Estado Novo vs. the Portuguese Republics, the French Fourth vs. the Fifth Republic, and so on.
>In everyday speech, people don’t carefully separate “the people” from “the state.” ...
That might make sense if the email stopped at "Iranian IPs", but it continued with "... due to your decision ..." (emphasis mine). That makes it sound like the author is personally responsible.
The occupying powers very much did not assign collective responsibility to Germans after WW2. Material reparations were massively reduced in scope compared to WW1 (and the norms of the previous century), and the Allies actually poured substantial resources into Germany’s reconstruction (far in excess of the reparations).
Also, collective punishment is literally as old as written history. I’m not sure if there are writings that provide a coherent moral theory of why it’s acceptable that you could call “collective responsibility” from those times, but it was the norm for thousands of years of warfare.
> The occupying powers very much did not assign collective responsibility to Germans after WW2. Material reparations were massively reduced in scope compared to WW1 (and the norms of the previous century), and the Allies actually poured substantial resources into Germany’s reconstruction (far in excess of the reparations).
Mostly because the USSR was the new enemy and Germany had to be an ally after WW2.
While the war was still ongoing there was carpet-bombing of German civilians, and some of the plans for after the war originally included complete destruction of industrial capacities, forced displacement of the population of formerly industrialized areas and forced labour for the whole population (google Morgenthau plans).
There was also a more general worry that depriving Germany would push the country towards communism. General Clay is reported as having said that "there is no choice between being a communist on 1,500 calories a day and a believer in democracy on a thousand."
The Morgenthau plan was also unpopular in Britain. Churchill only really considered it because he knew he had to keep the Americans happy to win, and Eden hated it. Remember that humiliating the defeated enemy had been tried before in 1918, and it didn't end well.
Also, collective punishment is literally as old as written history. I’m not sure if there are writings that provide a coherent moral theory of why it’s acceptable that you could call “collective responsibility” from those times, but it was the norm for thousands of years of warfare.
Notice how I didn't say "collective punishment" yet you put those words into my mouth and argue with that. Collective responsibility was was most definitely enforced on German* culture where it still echoes throughout the norms of education and political systems.
* West German really, as the East remained unreformed: which you can clearly see in the voting patterns today.
I didn’t put those words in your mouth - I drew the contrast with “collective responsibility” in the sentence right after I mentioned collective punishment. I even put it in quotes and didn’t for collective punishment.
Also, while we’re laser-focused on 20th century Germany, we might as well look at it just before WWII. The Treaty of Versailles (in addition to being practically punitive) had a clause that is commonly referred to as the “War Guilt Clause” that justified their onerous treatment after the war, and the Weimar Republic had public debate of what they called the Kriegsschuldfrage (literally War Guilt Question) before the Nazis even came on the scene.
I don’t know if the literal term “collective responsibility” was first used later, but I don’t see how the concept is so different. Sure, the Allies did a better job of driving the concept into public consciousness the second time around via prolonged occupation - but they clearly felt justified in holding the German people responsible the first time.
I always find amusing how the west always blames the people of the rivals "iranians", the "chinese", etc but when something is wrong with their side they blame an entity to detach themselves "the american government", "this administration", "nazi germany", etc