Subject: Re: natsien ja pelastajien kasvattamisesta viel�
From: Hannu T. Sepponen (hande.sepponen@luukku.com)
Date: Fri 03 Jun 2005 - 17:18:10 EEST
Oheistamassasi tekstiss� puhutaan ty�v�enluokan lasten kohtelusta. Saksa oli k�yh� ja lis�� tuli 1. maailmansodan ja sitten syv�n laman j�lkeen. K�yhyys tuskin parantaa lasten kohtelua. Jos Saksassa on oma erityinen kasvatustraditionsa sen lis�ksi tai pohjana, ei kokonaiskuva siit� muutu.
Min� puhuin siit�, ett� sivistyksest�, pitk�st� humanistisesta perinteest� huolimatta SIVISTYNEIST� tempautui mukaan natsismiin. Kenties heid�nkin kasvatuksessaan oli jokin saksalainen perinnelis� verrattuna ymp�r�iviin kulttuureihin, mutta verrattuna yleisiin el�m�nedellytyksiin sivistyneist�kodeissa oli varmasti paremmat oltavat ja nuorisoon my�s panostettiin.
Toisin sanoen kummastuttaa, miksi juuri ne jotka ovat koulutetumpia, niin massamitassa innostuvat fasismista. Kyll� ty�v�enluokastakin osa antoi tukensa natseille, mutta ennen 1933 enemmist� oli kyll� vasemmiston kannattajia.
Toi kasvatusteoria on yleisteoriana riitt�m�t�n, vaikkakin se tuo t�rke�� lis�valaistusta. Ilman h�vitty� maailmansotaa, Versaillesin rauhan yleisesti my�nnetty� n�yryytysvaikutusta, syv�� 30-luvun taitteen lamaa natsismilla ei olisi ollut mahdollisuuksia nousta valtaan edes Saksassa.
Lauleskelevat, perhekeskeiset italialaiset p��ttiv�t sit�paitsi kokeilla fasismia ensin. Mik� t�m�n selitt��. Jos t�m� juttu olisi suoraviivainen, se olisi keksitty jo 30-luvun alussa, kun viel� oli aikaa.
Meid�n on vaikea �kkip��t� alkaa kelata aikaa taaksep�in ja olla varmoja, ett� ymm�rr�mme kaiken, kun riisumme kaiken vaatteistaan. Aika oli toinen joka paikassa. Rotuopit ja juutalaisvastaisuus oli maan/maailmantapa. Samoin voiman ihannointi, joskaan ei se ole maailmasta nytk��n kadonnut. Sitten tulee joukkoilmi�itten tason efekti, jota ei voida palauttaa yksil�iden ominaisuuksien summaan. Helppohan meid�n on saarnata yksil�lle, ett� olepa siivosti, mutta todelliset ongelmat tulevat, kun olisi otettava vinosta yleisest� kehityksest� otetta.
Luonnollisesti tulee t�ss� p�iv�ss� itse tehd� osuutensa my�s kasvattajana ja pyrki� kasvattamaan omia ja naapurin kakaroita kunnolla. Huomioimaan toiset ja pit�m��n puoliaan. Samanaikaisesti. Toivotaan ett� muualla maailmassa ajatellaan samoin.
Joka paikassa tarvitaan my�s, ettei "noita toisia" aleta pit�� omasta tai yleisest� ihmisyydest� poikkeavina, jotka ansaitsevat tulla toisella tavalla kohdelluksi. T�m� on aapistotuus. Silti pysyv�sti h�mm�stytt��, kuinka �kki� toiseuden perustaminen, "poissulkeva peilaus" niin sanoakseni alkaa. Siit� voi tulla peli, jossa omaa osuutta huomaamatta olemme mukana.
Alemman v�est�n luominen ja alempana pit�minen on yksi houkutus osallistua peliin. Minusta on hyvin arveluttavaa, kuinka meik�l�ist� miesv�est�� tai sen osaa sys�t��n m�rk�rooliin yhteiskunnan hylki�osastolle, jatkuvalla ep�ilyll� ja syyllist�misell�.
Esa Palosaari kirjoitti 03.06.2005 kello 14:57:
> > Mun huomautukseni idea on, ett� psykologisoivat tulkinnat, joita tehd��n
> > esimerkiksi natsien johtohenkil�iden el�m�nkerran tai kasvatuksen
> > perusteella, eiv�t mitenk��n riit� tavoittamaan sit�, kuinka tuollainen
> > j�rjestelm� ja historian vaihe oli mahdollinen.
> > - - Kasvatuksesta huolimatta yhteiskunnassa voi tapahtua kamalia asioita.
> > Saksalainen sivistyneist� oli varmaan hyvin kasvatettua sen ajan
> > mittapuilla.
>
> Saksalaisten kasvatusta vuosisadan vaihteessa on tutkittu ja vertailtu
> muihin maihin empiirisestikin. Alice Millerin teoksen "Alussa oli
> kasvatus" lis�ksi voisivat kiinnostaa mm. psykohistorijoitsija Lloyd
> deMausen tutkimukset (http://www.psychohistory.com/htm/eln06_war.html):
>
> THE SOURCES OF WWII AND THE HOLOCAUST IN GERMAN CHILDREARING
> If German childrearing practices are not considered as the cause of
> German
> mass violence, there is no way to avoid Goldhagen's conclusion that the
> war and the Holocaust must be due to "something monstrously
> Germanic...at
> bottom unexplainable [and not] a product of human decisions."274 But if
> German childhood around 1900 is recognized as a totalitarian
> nightmare of
> murder, neglect, battering and torture of innocent, helpless human
> beings,
> then the restaging of this nightmare four decades later in the Holocaust
> and war can be understood as explanatory.
>
> Historians have avoided researching German childrearing at the end
> of the
> nineteenth century. The few that have begun to do the research have
> found
> German childhood uniformly more brutal than French and British
> childhood.
> A comparison by Maynes of 90 German and French autobiographies of late
> nineteenth-century working class childhoods found German far more brutal
> and unloving, with the typical memory of home being that "No bright
> moment, no sunbeam, no hint of a comfortable home where motherly
> love and
> care could shape my childhood was ever known to me."275 In contrast,
> "French workers' autobiographies tell somewhat different childhood
> tales.
> To be sure, there are a few French accounts of childhoods marked by
> cruelty, neglect, and exploitation."276 Yet "much more common are
> stories
> of surprisingly sentimental home loves and warm relationships with
> mothers
> (and often fathers), even in the face of material deprivation."277
> Maynes
> found unrelenting child labor, sexual molestation and beatings at
> home and
> at school were consistently worse in the German accounts.
>
> Most of the research into primary sources on the history of German
> childrearing has been done by psychohistorians connected with the
> Deutsche
> Gesellschaft f�r psychohistorische Forschung, the German branch of The
> Institute for Psychohistory.278 The two main studies covering
> nineteenth-century German childrearing were those published in The
> Journal
> of Psychohistory by Aurel Ende and Raffael Scheck; both found uniform
> cruelty and neglect in their detailed review of 154 German
> autobiographies
> studied. Child battering was so common in German families that Scheck
> concludes, "There is virtually no autobiography which doesn't tell
> something about violence against children and almost no author who
> has not
> been beaten as a child."279 And Ende's massive study concludes that
> "nowhere in Western Europe are the needs of children so fatally
> neglected
> as in Germany," where "infant mortality, corporal punishment, cruelties
> against children, the exploitation of working children and the
> teacher-pupil relationship" were so brutal that he feels he has to
> apologize "for not dealing with the �brighter side' of German childhood
> because it turns out that there is no �bright side.'"280
>
> Visitors to German homes at the end of the nineteenth century also found
> that in general "one feels sorry for these little German children; they
> must work so hard and seem to lack that exuberance of life, spirits, and
> childish glee that make American children harder to train but leave them
> the memory of a happy childhood."281 In particular, visitors noted the
> German preference for boys and their maltreatment of girls. Whereas in
> France and England beginning in the eighteenth century there was "an
> increasing appreciation of girl children," with parents often openly
> expressing their preference of having a girl,282 in Germany even at the
> end of the nineteenth century girls were resented and uniformly
> neglected:
> "From childhood on, the lives these women led were exceedingly
> harsh...dominated by memories of paternal brutality or
> negligence...drunkenness and violence was a routine part of life
> [including] a father's incestuous advances...[and] abuse with sexual
> overtones at the hands of her mother...beatings and other forms of
> violent
> punishment."283 Germany in general was historically far behind the
> rest of
> Western Europe in the education of girls and in woman's rights, so that
> innovative mothers and hopeful daughters were found far less than in
> other
> countries.284
>
> German family maxims described the lack of love of mothers toward their
> children, saying tenderness was "generally not part of the mother's
> character...Just as she kept her children...short on food and clothing,
> she also was short on fondling and tenderness...[feeling] the children
> should...regard themselves as useless weeds and be grateful that
> they were
> tolerated."285 Children were expected to give love to their parents, not
> the parents to their children: "We always appeared trembling before our
> parents, hoping that our official kiss of their hands would be
> accepted..."286 One boy reported his mother once dropped a word of
> praise,
> saying to someone that "He is good and well-liked," so that the boy
> remembered it all his life "because the words were totally new sounds to
> my ear."287 But kind words were rare in German homes, so most Germans
> remembered "no tender word, no caresses, only fear"288 and childhood was
> "joyless," "so immeasurably sad that you could not fathom it."289
> Yet this
> hatred of children in German families was not something that they felt
> guilty about. German parents endlessly impressed upon the children their
> pride in their family atmosphere of hatred. "I don't want to be loved,"
> said one typical father, "I want to be feared!"290 Another father summed
> up his feelings about family discipline as follows:
>
> It is good to hate. To hate is strong, manly. It makes the blood
> flow.
> It makes one alert. It is necessary for keeping up the fighting
> instincts. To love is feebleness. It enervates. You see all the
> nations that talk of love as the keynote of life are weak, degenerate.
> Germany is the most powerful nation in the world because she hates.
> When you hate, you eat well, sleep well, work well, fight well.291
>
>
>
> > Me emme p��se koko totuuteen pureutumalla yksil�itten
> > kasvatuksen ja psyyken sopukoihin. Heikki Turunen totesi minulle kerran,
> > ett� pahimmat asiat syntyv�t sakilla ja joskus jopa vahingossa. H�n k�ytti
> > esimerkkin� jalkapallostadion-tallautumisia, joka tietysti oli rajallinen
> > tapaus, mutta viittasi siihen kuinka asiaa kannattaisi pohtia. Suoralla
> > pahaksi ilmoittautumisella harva pahuus saapuu maailmaan, se voi tulla
> > my�s puhtauden, terveyden, elinkelpoisuuden tunnuksilla.
>
> Mielenkiintoista silti, ett� keskitysleireist� juutalaisia oman henkens�
> menett�misen uhalla pelastaneet erosivat tutkimusten mukaan ilmeisesti
> vain lapsuutensa ja kasvatuksensa kohdalta (eiv�t yhteiskunnallisen
> aseman, uskonnon tms). V�hemm�n tottelevaisuuden painottamista, ja
> pyydettiin anteeksi jos oltiin satuttu fyysisesti satuttamaan..
>
> Esa
>
>
>
...................................................................
Luukku Plus paketilla p��set eroon tila- ja turvallisuusongelmista.
Hanki Luukku Plus ja helpotat el�m��si. http://www.mtv3.fi/luukku
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Thu 25 May 2006 - 22:05:15 EEST