Hitler's birthplace to be demolished - Polidicks

Reminds me of that certain ideology that condoned erasing inconvenient history

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51217704]i don't understand why old buildings should be demolished when they are perfectly serviceable my town is slowly but surely bulldozing all of the original old west buildings that this entire town was built around which are all just fine, cheap to maintain, and historic they are being replaced with poor quality modern constructions that are intended to be torn down and replaced again in a few decades i do not see the point i don't care if hitler was born in the local saloon they just knocked down, it was a perfectly fine and unique building with storied walls[/QUOTE] One that's been constructed in accordance to significantly out of date building codes and has seen its fair share of wear and tear Your argument is WHY it should be brought down. Because of its perceived historic relevance, I'd make a very large bet that the place has had barely ANY modernization done to it. Get an inspector to run through the place and we'll see what's so 'perfectly serviceable' about it

lmao is it still standing? does it rain inside the building? you're one of those people that sues if the table fan doesn't tell you not to stick your fingers in it, aren't you?

[QUOTE=Fantastical;51217483]I bet the nazis will still come there, just to spite the authorities[/QUOTE] "I can still feel the power, flowing through my shaved head!"

Any resolution that doesn't end in turning it into a museum for Jewish heritage in Germany is a missed opportunity.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51217875]Any resolution that doesn't end in turning it into a museum for Jewish heritage in Germany is a missed opportunity.[/QUOTE] Turn it into a building for a Jewish heritage group, a homosexual support group, and a building that assists the old and the disabled. At the same time of course, preserve the rooms that are notably historical. I would FUND that

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51217875]Any resolution that doesn't end in turning it into a museum for Jewish heritage in Germany is a missed opportunity.[/QUOTE] either this or allow it to continue to be owned and used by private citizens with a historical footnote if necessary - nothing else is acceptable imo

[QUOTE=phaedon;51216800]Yeah, bad Germany, showing remorse for WW2 and teaching about the actual collective responsibility of previous generations.[/QUOTE] To be fair there's a pretty massive difference between acknowledging the guilt of past generations and submitting it onto newer ones. It's a fine line to walk and there's a lot of cases where people just fully indulge in blaming people [I]now[/I] for shit that went down sometimes centuries ago.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51217886]either this or allow it to continue to be owned and used by private citizens with a historical footnote if necessary - nothing else is acceptable imo[/QUOTE] Thankfully, your opinion won't have any influence There's nothing particularly unique about a birthplace, and if we saved every important figure's building of birth we'd have a ton of building hazards on our hands

[QUOTE=.Vel;51217952]Thankfully, your opinion won't have any influence There's nothing particularly unique about a birthplace, and if we saved every important figure's building of birth we'd have a ton of building hazards on our hands[/QUOTE] to add A birthplace is way different than lets say, the nazi underground headquarters, or Himmlers personal cab. just like Joe Smiths birthplace isn't nearly as important as the location where he met with revolutionists and helped take down the regime of John Doe.

[QUOTE=.Vel;51217952]Thankfully, your opinion won't have any influence There's nothing particularly unique about a birthplace, and if we saved every important figure's building of birth we'd have a ton of building hazards on our hands[/QUOTE] i don't care if it's hitler's birthplace, i care that a well maintained 150 year old building is in jeopardy because suddenly someone cares a lot about a total coincidence that happened there a long time ago

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51217996]i don't care if it's hitler's birthplace, i care that a well maintained 150 year old building is in jeopardy because suddenly someone cares a lot about a total coincidence that happened there a long time ago[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]For the last five years it has also stood empty, as she refused to allow renovation work to be done.[/QUOTE] "Well maintained"

A brick building doesn't need to be renovated every five years. It's still standing and still meets the regulations for the historic district in which it's located, so it's been well-maintained.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51218433]A brick building doesn't need to be renovated every five years. It's still standing and still meets the regulations for the historic district in which it's located, so it's been well-maintained.[/QUOTE] If there's no maintenance work done on a building then it's not "well maintained", it's left to disrepair. Doesn't matter if it takes 10 or 100 years for the building to start falling apart. As a property owner it's your responsibility to keep the place checked by professionals to make sure there's not more than meets the eye. Eyeballing the structural integrity of a building is exactly what leads to them falling apart and people dying or getting hurt.

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;51217583]It's insignificant history[/QUOTE] Yes, WW2 is insignificant history :buddy:

[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;51218726]Yes, WW2 is insignificant history :buddy:[/QUOTE] Hitler wasn't born in this house during WW2. The house itself has nothing to do with WW2 other than someone involved in it was born there.

[QUOTE=Tomo Takino;51218782]Hitler wasn't born in this house during WW2. The house itself has nothing to do with WW2 other than someone involved in it was born there.[/QUOTE] Yes, and for that reason it should be something historic, it doesn't matter if it was Hitler or Mussolini, we preserve important parts of history, not destroy it.

[QUOTE=Tomo Takino;51218306]"Well maintained"[/QUOTE] Seeing as how most century old buildings in Germany* built before the world wars were destroyed during said event, I would think it would more clearly demonstrate the living conditions of the time and the lack of modern renovations that most surviving buildings of that era have since added. I would say that it's more accurate to compare it to a tenement house built in New York City before the building code laws were rewritten by members of the 1900's Progressive Movement after a certain "incident" at a textile factory occurred. There's a former tenement house that is now a museum in New York City that is remarkable for having not changed at all since it was built. Many house museums in the U.S. in order to be historically accurate, usually have to tear out anything that was not in the house before a particular year. That goes for any renovations and everything all the way down to the wallpaper and the floor. *granted Hitler was born in Austria, but neighboring countries were not spared from destruction like Belgium in World War I or the Netherlands in World War II.

[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;51218865]Yes, and for that reason it should be something historic, it doesn't matter if it was Hitler or Mussolini, we preserve important parts of history, not destroy it.[/QUOTE] Okay but the house still has very little to do with WW2 unlike what you implied the other guy was saying to try and discredit him. [editline]18th October 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=adamsz;51218976]Seeing as how most century old buildings in Germany* built before the world wars were destroyed during said event, I would think it would more clearly demonstrate the living conditions of the time and the lack of modern renovations that most surviving buildings of that era have since added. I would say that it's more accurate to compare it to a tenement house built in New York City before the building code laws were rewritten by members of the 1900's Progressive Movement after a certain "incident" at a textile factory occurred. There's a former tenement house that is now a museum in New York City that is remarkable for having not changed at all since it was built. Many house museums in the U.S. in order to be historically accurate, usually have to tear out anything that was not in the house before a particular year. That goes for any renovations and everything all the way down to the wallpaper and the floor. *granted Hitler was born in Austria, but neighboring countries were not spared from destruction like Belgium in World War I or the Netherlands in World War II.[/QUOTE] The state of the house doesn't really matter. A house from 1900 made into a museum still has people cleaning it and taking care of it. A house that hasn't had anyone in it in the last 5 years is not well maintained. For something to be well maintained, you have to actually maintain it. Not just ignore it. Also the article seems to imply the renovations are necessary, renovating isn't necessarily adding brand new toilets and wallpaper. It can be necessary safety work. Since the article doesn't mention what the work is, I don't know how relevant it is. But then it's not right to assume they mean they want to make the house a modern 5 star hotel.

[QUOTE=SenhorCreeper;51218865]Yes, and for that reason it should be something historic, it doesn't matter if it was Hitler or Mussolini, we preserve important parts of history, not destroy it.[/QUOTE] [quote]Hitler was born in a rented room on the top floor of the building, near the Austro-German border, on 20 April 1889.[/quote] they literally just rented a room there because like many, many old german buildings you'd have the bottom floor be a storefront and upper floors a living space. It's not like some prized family estate that's been passed down through history or something that holds a lot of relevant stuff inside. They could even leave the little memorial out front. Under nazi reign they did take control of the house and did make it somewhat of a worship place with art and stuff, but that stuff went away long ago when the US took control of it. There's not much relevant in there

so it's like any other historic home. [I]Why bulldoze it[/I]

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51219053]so it's like any other historic home. [I]Why bulldoze it[/I][/QUOTE] Most birthplaces don't leave the towns with the reputation of having one of if not the most evil person born there. Given that the birthtown won't change with demolishing the building, they still mention the town as struggling with having the stigma of having Hitler come from there. As well as that, since they wanted to renovate it, it's possible the inside is dangerous in some fashion. The outside might look okay, but I can't find any photos or mention of what the interior is like. Being from that long ago it is possible it has some form of dangerous material inside? Possibly being exposed by the lack of renovation? Alot of assumptions, but not too out there in how believable they could be.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51217603]among my many antiques is a confederate $20 bill it is of a common grade, meaning it is insignificant and associated with a negatively regarded regime should i destroy this historic article on this basis y/n i leave its fate in your hands[/QUOTE] While the logic for not destroying historical locations may seem fine right now, if we're still here in a thousand years, or ten thousand years, or one hundred thousand years... what will we do then (I ask this genuinely; I'm not trying to be a dick here)? The argument seems to be sitting on shaky grounds when you take it to its logical conclusion and assess what will happen in the extreme long run. Do we eventually just let Earth be a museum planet? If we refuse to demolish anything with any historical importance eventually we'll have nowhere to build; it's not like we're not making history anymore, after all.

Oh no Hitler's house is being destroyed, guess I can't be a nazi anymore.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51219053]so it's like any other historic home. [I]Why bulldoze it[/I][/QUOTE] Because it's old as shit, not being utilized for anything sinxe 2011, and the owner won't let modifications be made to the house period, the house very likely needs some work and I really doubt its structural integrity at this point. probably cheaper to bulldoze the thing with the added bonus of not having visitors to Hitler's birth place.

[QUOTE=sltungle;51219127]While the logic for not destroying historical locations may seem fine right now, if we're still here in a thousand years, or ten thousand years, or one hundred thousand years... what will we do then (I ask this genuinely; I'm not trying to be a dick here)? The argument seems to be sitting on shaky grounds when you take it to its logical conclusion and assess what will happen in the extreme long run. Do we eventually just let Earth be a museum planet? If we refuse to demolish anything with any historical importance eventually we'll have nowhere to build; it's not like we're not making history anymore, after all.[/QUOTE] Time alone is cruel enough to historic places and articles without people actively trying to destroy things just because "its old it must be useless junk :DDD"

[QUOTE=phaedon;51216800] Yeah, bad Germany, showing remorse for WW2 and teaching about the actual collective responsibility of previous generations.[/QUOTE] Yes, show remorse by censoring any talk of it and pretending like the event never happened. That sounds more like denial and shame than responsibility and remorse. [editline]18th October 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=InvaderNouga;51219152]Because it's old as shit, not being utilized for anything sinxe 2011, and the owner won't let modifications be made to the house period, the house very likely needs some work and I really doubt its structural integrity at this point. probably cheaper to bulldoze the thing with the added bonus of not having visitors to Hitler's birth place.[/QUOTE] Preserving history isn't cheap. Can't really go into any sort of historical profession with the thought of being cheap and saving money. Demolishing the building because it's dangerous and disused isn't a horrible reason to demolish a building, even if it has some historical significance. But demolishing a building because you think it will become a shrine to Neo Nazis is a silly reason.

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51219218]Yes, show remorse by censoring any talk of it and pretending like the event never happened. That sounds more like denial and shame than responsibility and remorse. [/QUOTE] Germany and Austria will literally throw you in jail if you deny what the Nazis did, I don't think that's their problem here. The man was just born in the house, isn't really anything relevant behind, it might be falling apart, and neo-nazis are evidently worshiping it, leaving the town with something of a reputation for being Hitler's birthplace rather than a nice little city on a river. Really isn't surprising they would rather replace it.

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51219218]Yes, show remorse by censoring any talk of it and pretending like the event never happened. That sounds more like denial and shame than responsibility and remorse. [editline]18th October 2016[/editline] [b]Preserving history isn't cheap.[/b]Can't really go into any sort of historical profession with the thought of being cheap and saving money. Demolishing the building because it's dangerous and disused isn't a horrible reason to demolish a building, even if it has some historical significance. But demolishing a building because you think it will become a shrine to Neo Nazis is a silly reason.[/QUOTE] I feel like this proves my point, historical places need renovation to not fall into disrepair and could be very expensive for this Austrian town and seems like the Government doesn't want to keep up with it.

Some people really seem to have a weird fetishisation of the historical 'object' in this thread. A historical object doesn't have inherent properties through which value is derived. Historical value and importance is imbued into objects by people and communities. So maintaining historical and heritage sites is only useful if there is significant meaning attached to it from individuals, communities or societies. Seeing as no-one really uses this place to define their identity or their history, as they are embodied in other sites, very little importance can be found in it (This is of course excluding neo-nazi's claims to heritage, which are purposefully excluded) So why is there a problem? Because of its association with Hitler? Association can only go so far in creating historical value. Especially when the community and the Government are actively trying to control the meaning of the site to prevent it becoming a neo-nazi site. Is this a bad thing? You may think it is, but its part and parcel with the maintenance of heritage and historical sites. I'm certainly not batting my eyelids over an attempt by a community to control its hertiage, it happens all the time. Just because the worst criminal of the 20th century is involved doesn't mean we have to do anything differently than we already do.