The US also turned away plenty of Jewish refugees. US and the UK refused to let Black Free French soldiers take part in the freeing of Paris since they wanted it to be a "white victory". The US also put Japanese Americans in internment camps.

Its ridiculous to single out the Swiss as shameful in WW2, looking at norms 70 years ago would make all people "shameful" in some way.

>Its ridiculous to single out the Swiss as shameful in WW2, looking at norms 70 years ago would make all people "shameful" in some way.

Are you actually equating all acts of 'shamefulness' during the 30s/40s at the same level? Your statement is tantamount to equating the actions of the allies with the axis, which is obviously ludicrous. The Swiss acted uncharacteristically selfishly and shamefully, even when compared to the record of the US. There's no need to jump to some half-baked defense of the Swiss, they deserve every bit of criticism leveled at them for their actions during WW2.

I was only replying specifically to the two claims that you made.

The first of which was exactly the same in the US (and possibly less justified; given it's size, the US could have absorbed Jewish refugees much more easily than the Swiss).

The second was almost certainly done at a smaller scale by US banks, and is mostly just because the US didn't have the opportunity since fewer Holocaust victims had their Gold in American banks than Swiss banks. It's ridiculous to think that Americans were so much more moral than the Swiss just because they had fewer opportunities to steal.

If there are other things that the Swiss did that were so shameful, I am interested in knowing.

>I was only replying specifically to the two claims that you made.

Well, that's not really true. Your post acted as a rebuff of the criticism of Switzerland, based on the logic that the US undertook similar actions. You said Switzerland "shouldn't be singled out" for criticism, yet OP wasn't singling Switzerland out but merely adding information to the topic at hand, which was Switzerland's record during WW2. So why even bring the US up? Nothing they did eliminates the need to remind people of Switzerland's abhorrent actions during WW2, and yet you still state this shouldn't be done ("Its ridiculous to single out the Swiss as shameful in WW2.")

Secondly, the statement that I quoted of yours made quite a specific argument that you didn't mention most recently, regarding how Switzerland's actions should be viewed in perspective of the times. I argued it was fallacious to say that flattening the morality of the issue just because standards were lower during the war results in less of a need to discuss Switzerland's crimes during this time. You haven't attempted to refute this point, yet your latest post still made the statement that "I was only replying specifically to the two claims that you made [Swiss rejection of refugees and theft from Holocaust victims]" (which is aside from the fact that I am not the original author of the post you first responded to.)

So it's still curious why you felt the need to rebuff gadders criticism of the Swiss during WW2 given that it was on topic, even acknowledging similar actions take by the US.

I understood the original post as implying that the Swiss were effectively Nazi sympathizers since they turned away people fleeing the Holocaust; the statement is very misleading when stated alone. I mention the US did the same and they are very unlikely to be accused of being Nazi collaborators.

The reason I bring up the context of other countries at the same time period is not to say the actions are admirable, I am providing context of what else was happening at the same time. I think many people don't fully realize that actions that used to be routine would be reviled through the lens of today's politics and norms; examine any one country and you can easily condemn anyone.

I assumed the response most readers would have with that knowledge is to vilify the Swiss while still holding the Allies in high esteem.

I want to point out, bad behavior doesn't excuse other bad behavior, and I wish people wouldn't argue using that tenet. Also, the fact that something was a norm at one time doesn't excuse it either.

The turning away of refugees by the UK and USA is bad as well.

However, in the credit column, they have that whole "Defeating Nazi Germany" thing, which Switzerland does not.

Except the US did not go to war against Nazi Germany to close the concentration camps, but for their own self interest. Every single nation acted in their self interest during WW2, and excluding the single outlier of the Holocaust, I haven't heard of any actions by any nation that were any more or less moral than that.

Edit: My apologies, there were clearly plenty of other atrocities (eg Rape of Nanking if you consider that as part of WW2), but it is simply is not accurate to claim that Swiss were evil and the US were shining knights.

It is a common Americanism to talk like we singlehandedly defeated the Nazis, as if no other nation really contributed. I've discussed it with a few foreign friends. I am not in any shape to discuss it intelligently at the moment. Just thought I would note that this egomaniacal hero complex is one of this nation's foibles.

I stopped talking to foreign friends about the United States long ago because, frankly, they don't know what they're talking about.

For some subjects, that often seems true. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4935567

I don't have some across the board policy, perhaps because friends have been scarce of late. Since basically no one speaks to me, I don't currently have any need to make judgement calls of that sort. But my personal history suggests I am disinclined towards sweeping judgements of any sort. (shrug)

and thats why the US has such an insular mindset.

Hitler had absolutely no chance of long-term victory against UK and USSR, and Swiss also saved untold amounts of people who otherwise would have nowhere to go. They turned away plenty of refugees (IMO needlessly), but they saved plenty who otherwise would have no hope. And while they could make a stand, ultimately they wouldn't make that much on an offensive. Seriously, they were surrounded, the most they could do was make transport expensive. Which they did anyway, just without sacrificing a lot of people for some pompous reasons.

This is not to say all they did was right, and the fact that they still keep making and selling weapons is not exactly great as well, and a lot of Swiss were unhappy with sheltering any refugees, but the general idea of keeping neutrality and protecting as much as they could — which was, basically, people already there — was good. Remember, also, that Switzerland helped many troubled countries in later years.

Their neutrality lasted from 1945 until, depending on what you count, the 1970s, the 1990s, or the 2000s. Are you suggesting that they would have had a harder time holding off Hitler than holding off the US and USSR, who were the guys that beat Hitler?

(I have nothing new to say about the Holocaust.)

Oh my good God, your post could be the Wikipedia example for "Hindsight Bias".

>Their record during WWII is shameful.

It's not like the US welcome Jewish refugees either.