Cannibalistic Nazis

Status
Not open for further replies.

gaijin

Banned
Mao killed millions. People still wonder what would have happened if the great leap forward was a "success".

If you find the thread so distasteful don't post in it.

There was literally no limit to the depravity and satanic-level evil of Nazis and Nazi doctrine--I'm actually surprised they didn't do this (that we know of).

Bullshit.

The limit was were the Nazis themselves considered to be "bad taste". Vile evil fucktards that they were they did have some standards. Killing "untermenschen" was ok in their philosophy b cause they thought it would lead to a better faith for the "German race". This was of course nonsensical arse shot, however, from their point of view it made sense.

Cannibalism however has not been part of mainstream culture in Europe for 5000 plus years (and besides of Aztec Mexico and certain tribes on Papoua New Guineu never wear anywhere).

More importantly, industrial scale cannibalism with the goal of food (and not for some religious ceremony) is as far as I k ow unheard of in human history.

The OP should have actually looked at the history and asked himself one question; why would the Nazis (evil as they might be) do something that is completely in contrast to the cultural background they are working from. Simply put: killing people was (and is) accepted in many cultures, Europe included. Eating people is extremely rare.
 
Bullshit.

The limit was were the Nazis themselves considered to be "bad taste". Vile evil fucktards that they were they did have some standards. Killing "untermenschen" was ok in their philosophy b cause they thought it would lead to a better faith for the "German race". This was of course nonsensical arse shot, however, from their point of view it made sense.

Cannibalism however has not been part of mainstream culture in Europe for 5000 plus years (and besides of Aztec Mexico and certain tribes on Papoua New Guineu never wear anywhere).

More importantly, industrial scale cannibalism with the goal of food (and not for some religious ceremony) is as far as I k ow unheard of in human history.

The OP should have actually looked at the history and asked himself one question; why would the Nazis (evil as they might be) do something that is completely in contrast to the cultural background they are working from. Simply put: killing people was (and is) accepted in many cultures, Europe included. Eating people is extremely rare.

This, basically
 
And those situations are?

Well, perhaps "justifiable" was the wrong word there - more like "not reprehensible." Primarily I'm thinking of safe post-mortem endocannibalism, which isn't any worse than cremation or burial and actually better in terms of conserving land or fuel while acquiring protein (again assuming safety - FYI for all the fuss people make about kuru no Amazonian people or any Papuan people except virtually one has had it occur, and even for that one group kuru as we know it began only a hundred years ago)

Consuming Grief: Compassionate Cannibalism in an Amazonian Society is an academic ethnography on endocannibalism that portrays the "other side" of the fence pretty well if you're interested.
 
One thing I don't understand is why mass murder is conidered less repungnant than mass cannibalism, yet killing for sport is considered less moral than killing to eat when it comes to animals.
 

Lateknight

Banned
One thing I don't understand is why mass murder is conidered less repungnant than mass cannibalism, yet killing for sport is considered less moral than killing to eat when it comes to animals.
Somehow relevant

image.jpg
 

Polemarchos

Banned
One thing I don't understand is why mass murder is conidered less repungnant than mass cannibalism, yet killing for sport is considered less moral than killing to eat when it comes to animals.

The illusion of human primacy must be maintained. The ultimate game requires skill and subterfuge. Cannibalism necessitates a trivializing of one's competitor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top