What’s the true story on South American Nazis?
I would suggest that another factor was the strong German influence in many South American countries. There were significant minorities of German and German-descended residents from decades of German immigration (Stroessner isn’t a Spanish name!) many of whom had been or still were Nazi sympathizers or just sympathetic to their refugee countrymen, as well as long-standing trade relations in Argentina and other countries. Lufthansa, the German national airline, had a wide-spread network of airline routes serviced by Condor, Lloyd Aereo Boliviano and other subsidiary companies, amongst other business ties.
Cecil mentioned that the brazilian dictator was very pro-nazi. How does this tie in with the fact that brazil sent troops to fight alongside the allies?
Right before Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice did the musical “Evita,” thereby bringing Juan and Eva Peron’s story to the world, they did the soundtrack for the movie of “The Odessa File.”
Hmmmmmm…
More importantly, Cecil didn’t answer why there are all these young boys popping up around the world who bear a strange resemblence to Hitler, nor did he cover where they are coming from.
Can you provide a link or site for this?
The short answer to why Brazil fought on the Allied side is that President Getúlio Vargas saw that the Axis could not win the war outright, and that the United States and Britain would cut off Brazil if they won the war, and he did not support them. Germany and Italy certainly had influence in Brazil, but not enough transatlantic pull to maintain control after the war (The loss of the Graf Spee ended any hope of German presence in the South Atlantic).
In short Vargas became an ally for much the same reason as the leaders of certain countries in the “Coalition of the Willing” did, in spite of popular opposition at home.
You were just whooshed. He refers to the novel by Ira Levin, Boys from Brazil, which was later made into a movie starring Gregory Peck.
I’ve been wondering about something along these lines for awhile. About 7 years ago I spent a significant amount of time in the Philippines and heard some very interesting tales about Nazis who made it their home. Some of the stories included details about people having Nazi flags and symbols on their cars with no real idea what the meanings of them are. I was not able to track down any evidence of this before I left but the stories came from difference individuals and most were people I would expect to be honest. Has anyone heard such tales or know that they are true/untrue?
Well, in all seriousness (props to Guinatasia) here’s a lil bit of info which may or may not be useful.
Now, I’m now expert on the culture of the Philippines. Specifically, I don’t know what the common Philippine religions and philosophies are. But in terms of Nazi symbols, the swatzitca (sp?) is a common symbol in Eastern religion/philosophy, though it doesn’t represent the same thing. Although I’m aware the Phillipines lie in the East, so to speak, I’m also aware that I’m mostly ignorant of Phillipine culture. Just thought I’d share that.
Funny story… while grocery shopping in Chinatown with a Taiwanese friend, I came across a packet of ramen soup with a swastika on it. I asked her what it meant, and she said it was a symbol of Buddha, and had been for a long time before the Nazis got hold of it. On a package of food, it means the food is vegetarian. So basically in that context it meant What would Buddha eat? 
I did a little research afterwards and came up with this:
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/courses/tyamashi/relig/sauvastika.htm
Yes, although the part about the Nazi symbol being at a 45-degree angle is lame. What matters is that it’s an arbitrary symbol, no matter who uses it, and signifies what the user chooses, and not something else.
In an Eastern Philosophy course I learned that the difference between the two swaztikas is what direectiob the lines are pointed. Couldn’t remember which is which for the life of me though, not that anyone would care nowadays either.
Saying “the two swastikas” is an oversimplification. It is a simple and visually distinctive design, and consequently, was independently discovered and used by many cultures in widely seperated geographical areas over the course of history, appearing in many variants - clockwise, counterclockwise, tilted, untilted, with curved or angled arms, and with various embellishments.
To pre-Nazi western culture, it had essentially become a “good luck” emblem, and appears as such on postcards, “lucky coins”, etc dating from the late 19th / early 20th century. The 45th infantry division of the US Army used it, discontinuing it for obvious reasons in the late 1930’s.
Some more background:
http://www.hostultra.com/~Exidor/Swastika/Swastika.html
(See some of the pre WWII swastikas near the bottom of the page, including the 45th infantry patch)
The fact I find moderately surprising is that no large scale political use was made of the emblem in modern times BEFORE the Nazis adopted it. It would seem to have been a “natural”.
Share what? The Philippines is mostly Catholic with a large Muslim minority(other religions exist obviously but all of that can be found online). I did not specifically say swastikas, I said Nazi symbols, such as an eagle holding a swastikas which is only associated with the Third Reich as far as I know. What I am referring to is not Western ignorance about the swastika. I am talking about a group of Nazis making their home in the Philippines and the locals adopting their symbols without knowing the true meaning.
So to complete your analogy, you’re saying that it was really right to go after Saddam (although supposedly some countries did so for the wrong reason, at least in your humble opinion), and that the people who opposed it were wrong?
[Administrator hat on] Whoa!Hold it right there! Stop! Cease and desist!
A discussion of the Iraq War is NOT appropriate in this thread, in this forum. Kindly keep comments here limited to Cecil’s column, to Nazis fleeing to South America. Understood?
Well, not really. The short answer is that Brazil was attacked, directly. Between November 1942 and May 1943 there were a half dozen sinkings of Brazillian flag vessels inside Brazilian territorial waters. In May 1943 a German submarine torpedoed a passenger ferry off a popular pleasure beach. It was a Sunday. When the survivors were taking to the boats, the sub surfaced and started shooting at the boats. In a short while they started shooting up the beach. All of this occoured within a half mile of the beach, and the submarine was unmistakably German (U-71 I think; anyway she was sunk by the Brits a few months later).
Brazil didn’t have a great deal of choice after that, regardless of economic interpretations, which are certainly compelling but are not the whole story.
That was 1939. Brazil joined the war in 1943.
“Popular opposition” had pretty much vanished by May of 1943. Any comparison to recent events is specious and false. There is literally no comparison.
The Brazilian Expeditionary Force of 25,000 or so (an infantry division, a service brigade and a fighter squadron) fought in Italy from 1943 to 1945 under British command. They suffered in the vicintity of 10.000 casualties and were never at a loss for replacements. Indeed, they were one of the few armies that could always be considered at full strength.
The history channel is having a special file on "the odessa file " i think its tonight or tomorrow …