Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
That's not what was said. What was said is that it is invalid to examine a group's responsibility (not personal responsibility) if that group was oppressed, as that group cannot be responsible for its own circumstances, as all actions responsive to or following the oppression are still entirely the fault of the oppression.*
I agree with what you have said here, but it's a different point.
______
* ETA: This is wrong both because the "group" construct is invalid, and for the reasons your point makes. (If it's absurd to say no individual of a group bears any personal responsibility for his own circumstances, it's absurd to say no entire group bears any for its.)
ETA2: My bad... I just noticed I inadvertently included “personal” in the sentence to which you replied. It should just be “responsibility” alone. No group can have personal responsibility.
|
Let's just assume that you got through the Albanian quiz for all Albanian gypsies and did all your math for the group. You're at Nuremberg.
Prosecutor: General von Badguyberg ran a concentration camp and executed gypsies. He is responsible and should be serve the appropriate sentence.
Defense lawyer: Albanian gypsies as a group were also responsible (not personally responsible)* so their oppression is not fully the fault of General von Badguyberg and he is not fully responsible.
You're the judge. What do you do and why?
*WTF does this even mean?
