Yeah the thing about Chanel is that it’s reifying the person (who’s indefensible), not the company, where you can wave hands & pretend.
(Realistically the nature of global capitalism is such that we all have to decide which former Nazi collaborators we don’t do business with. I’d avoid Bayer if it were possible to avoid Bayer & still, y’know, eat food. And I wish the world financial system treated Deutsche Bank the way Rick Blaine does https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BztF71vFpnE&t=28s)
I’m a bit uncomfortable with holding judicial persons responsible for something their management did 80+ years ago. Unless you can prove Deutsche Bank is still discriminating against Jews and confiscating their accounts, it’s not really useful to boycott them.
Should you avoid riding with DB, seeing that many of the train lines still in use were used to further the German war effort?
(I’m reminded of zealous FLOSS advocates who try to hold today’s IBM responsible for the company’s actions leading up to and during World War 2, simply because they really really dislike IBM).
Germany hasn’t entirely paid for its crimes during WW2, but they’ve done more to hold themselves to account than Japan, or France, for that matter.
Germany itself is a decent model of redress, though truth & reconciliation was hampered by the split. But private companies profited from slave labor or manufacturing zyklon b, then quietly reorged to avoid consequences. And yes I do think Dehomag should have been sold for reparations, not reabsorbed into IBM, & IG Farben should’ve been purged from the earth — Bayer AG appointing Fritz ter Meer as chairman after he got out of prison is a sign that they learned nothing & made no redress of harm.
In general I have no qualms about holding “judicial persons”, who are not human beings, responsible for the profits they made off genocide collaboration.
Yeah the thing about Chanel is that it’s reifying the person (who’s indefensible), not the company, where you can wave hands & pretend.
(Realistically the nature of global capitalism is such that we all have to decide which former Nazi collaborators we don’t do business with. I’d avoid Bayer if it were possible to avoid Bayer & still, y’know, eat food. And I wish the world financial system treated Deutsche Bank the way Rick Blaine does https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BztF71vFpnE&t=28s)
I’m a bit uncomfortable with holding judicial persons responsible for something their management did 80+ years ago. Unless you can prove Deutsche Bank is still discriminating against Jews and confiscating their accounts, it’s not really useful to boycott them.
Should you avoid riding with DB, seeing that many of the train lines still in use were used to further the German war effort?
(I’m reminded of zealous FLOSS advocates who try to hold today’s IBM responsible for the company’s actions leading up to and during World War 2, simply because they really really dislike IBM).
Germany hasn’t entirely paid for its crimes during WW2, but they’ve done more to hold themselves to account than Japan, or France, for that matter.
Germany itself is a decent model of redress, though truth & reconciliation was hampered by the split. But private companies profited from slave labor or manufacturing zyklon b, then quietly reorged to avoid consequences. And yes I do think Dehomag should have been sold for reparations, not reabsorbed into IBM, & IG Farben should’ve been purged from the earth — Bayer AG appointing Fritz ter Meer as chairman after he got out of prison is a sign that they learned nothing & made no redress of harm.
In general I have no qualms about holding “judicial persons”, who are not human beings, responsible for the profits they made off genocide collaboration.