It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Morality Question on Hitler Memorabilia

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
I just read a CNN Article that reminded me of an interesting personal story and I've always wondered what other people would do if in the same position.

Art by Hitler attracts big money at auction (Link to Article at CNN)

So, say hypothetically your Great-Grandmother is traveling through Vienna in 1910 and comes upon a starving artist selling his watercolor paintings by the Danube riverside. Feeling sympathy for the young man she buys one of his paintings for a couple of Heller.

Upon returning home she never hangs it on the wall but tosses it in the attic.

30 years later the young boy has grown up, seized power in Germany, already has invaded Poland, and begun the Holocaust.

Another 55 years go by and after both she and her children have passed, her grandchildren are cleaning out the family home and stumble across the painting by a young Hitler discarded in the attic. The children heatedly debate over what should be done with the painting.

The choices are:

A.) Keep it hidden in secret and shame to preserve the family name.
B.) Burn it and never speak of it again.
C.) Sell it at auction and divide the spoils.
D.) Sell it at auction and donate the proceeds to the Survivors of the Holocaust.
E.) Donate it to the Survivors of the Holocaust and let them decide what to do with it.

What would you do?

I'm curious because that's what my mother and her siblings had to do. They chose either B or E. I know not which, but in the end, those were the two choices they were dead-locked on.

(And no, my family isn't Jewish, although they've always been strong proponents of Human Rights since the Salem Witch Trials and the American Civil War.)

[edit on 23-4-2009 by fraterormus]

[edit on 23-4-2009 by fraterormus]




posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
To your option D:

There are almost no survivors of the Holocaust left because not many people live up to 90 or 100 years of age. So, I wouldn't choose that option!




[edit on 23-4-2009 by thegreatobserver]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegreatobserver
To your option D:

There are almost no survivors of the Holocaust left because not many people live up to 90 or 100 years of age. So, I wouldn't choose that option!


Actually there are currently 350,000 Holocaust Survivors still alive today. Almost all of them were very young children when the Holocaust happened. A list of the more famous living Survivors can be found at List of Holocaust Survivors (Wikipedia)

And, this debate actually happened in my family a decade ago, so there were probably a lot more still alive back then.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Personally, if you want my Honest Opinion.

I'd of sold it and kept the spoils.

Actually, I had never even considered the other options.

I might of actually kept one of them. He was a very bad person, putting it lightly, but he was still a War Mastermind unlike anything seen before. That values alot of his stuff. Especially something he created, gives you a certain viewpoint into the mans mind. Quite honestly I'm surprised they sold that cheap!

I know this makes me sound like a bad person, and i'm sure those give everything and take nothing, martyrs will flame me, but i'm just being honest.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
I imagine I would have the price evaluated, sell it and donate the proceeds to a human rights organization (or divide it among a few).

I don't envy the position your relatives were in. I suspect I would be so thunderstruck by the discovery that complete thought or movement would be impossible for a little while. What a shock that must have been.

Edit to add: I wouldn't consider it immoral to sell it for profit. The creation of the paintings was not a venue through which he committed atrocities, so I think you can reasonably distinguish between the two. Arguing that it is immoral touches upon the question of whether it is immoral to purchase art created by individuals who are themselves of ill character. I think it is immoral only if the artist is utilising the profits of such sales for the funding of criminal behavior.


[edit on 23/4/09 by paperplanes]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Hitler's paintings give insigh into his mind?

The paintings are quite beautiful. His landscapes peaceful.

pics of paintings



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by fraterormus
 


I would DEFINITELY NOT EVER donate to any survivors of anything. When was the last time donations actually saved somebody or helped a cause?

NEVER!

I would definitely either keep the painting or sell it for money.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
i'd probably like give the money to a synagogue or something.

i love jews, i just don't like the people who think israel should be shielded from criticism.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by bobbylove321
reply to post by fraterormus
 


I would DEFINITELY NOT EVER donate to any survivors of anything. When was the last time donations actually saved somebody or helped a cause?

NEVER!

I would definitely either keep the painting or sell it for money.


Right on!

Why give it to survivors? Everybody is a survivor of something? Does it change the past? NOT to my knowledge. So, please get over it!



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by bobbylove321
reply to post by fraterormus
 


I would DEFINITELY NOT EVER donate to any survivors of anything. When was the last time donations actually saved somebody or helped a cause?

NEVER!


Really? I think you should tell us more, because I have charities I support...I know others do, too, so you really need to pass along this secret of yours.

All this time I thought I was helping folks out...silly me!



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Sell it for profit or keep it.

Original torture devices sell for alot of money, they are even more expensive if you can prove that it was used.

I think I can keep a couple of pretty paintings by Hitler.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Well, if you want to know my opinion - do whatever you want with it. It should not be a moral issue. This is a painting. So it was done by someone ,emm, not very nice. I would not buy it. Someone else might.
There are millions of copies of Hitler's book being sold - and it did a lot of damage. Painting does no damage. Maybe if he had a little more talent, 20th century would not be as bloody as it was. But painting is not the problem anyway.
Think of it as if it was Stalin's painting. What would you do with it and if you sold it - what you would do with money. Stalin was just as evil.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   
I'd keep it. I find his landscapes beautiful. I would probably pass it through my family and let them decide what to do with it when I'm dead.



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Republican08
Personally, if you want my Honest Opinion.

I'd of sold it and kept the spoils.

Actually, I had never even considered the other options.

I might of actually kept one of them. He was a very bad person, putting it lightly, but he was still a War Mastermind unlike anything seen before. That values alot of his stuff. Especially something he created, gives you a certain viewpoint into the mans mind. Quite honestly I'm surprised they sold that cheap!

I know this makes me sound like a bad person, and i'm sure those give everything and take nothing, martyrs will flame me, but i'm just being honest.


I wouldn't say that selling a piece of Hitler's art and keeping the money makes you a bad person. It's not as though you commissioned the piece, or were planning on giving the cash to your local neo-Nazi group.

I do take issue with your characterization of Hitler as a "War Mastermind". For a genius (as he's often given credit for being), he made some really serious mistakes (fighting a war on two fronts, starting an offensive into Russia in late June and not preparing for winter conditions, and his failure to understand preservation of force come to mind without much effort...there are plenty of others). He was charismatic, beyond a doubt...but the three best things he could have done for the German military, he repeatedly proved unable to do. Sit down, shut up, and leave it to the professionals.

Then again, I guess we should be grateful...if he really *had* been a military genius, Europe might look much different now. Probably well-dotted with craters, and a romantic glow at night.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join