Quote:
Originally Posted by Gebbeth
This talk of past sins is problematic. On the one hand, I get it. That period of time was one of the darkest in history. Pure hate leading to the deaths of tens of millions of people, approximately 6 million of which (and there was probably more) due to their ethic backgrounds, religious beliefs, and/or mental capacity or sexual orientation. There were labor slaves and other victims as well.
In the Pacific, there was also untold number of atrocities committed against soldiers and civilians alike, from biological warfare testing, to forced prostitution, torture, and mass killings.
However, where do you draw the line between the past and present and what was truly their involvement in these atrocities?
There were a handful of watchmakers that made timing instruments for the Axis, but could one say they "contributed" to actual killing? I don't know about that. I would say Porsche, Mercedes Benz, and the progenitor to Volkswagen probably had a more direct connection with killing. Bayer had a closer connection to killing. Mitsubishi had a more direct connection with killing. Not sure if providing watches and timing instruments make you that much more culpable.
If you are focusing on timing instruments, I'm sure Panerai, JLC, IWC, Stowa, Laco, or Seiko are not immune to these arguments.
So I'm not saying no one has the right to object to a brand because of their history or past. I think that's legitimate, but problematic, because there are a lot of companies who's hands are very unclean in that respect, and yet we buy from them.
Fast forward to today, how many products are made in China that we buy? We seem to be okay with that balance of cost vs "morality." The companies that made naplam and agent orange, they are giants of industry today.
Who doesn't like a Porsche or Audi or MB in their garage?
I must admit, if I could get my hands on a ALS Zeitwerk, I'd buy it in a heartbeat, and I would be happy in the knowledge that the current company and owners have had nothing to do with WWII, but that's not why I would want to get one. It's a damn beautiful piece of watchmaking and engineering and a keepsake for many generations of my family...hopefully.
|
I was gone for a while from this forum. Extremely well said. Objective, balanced views on past and present. Arguments you made has great basis on how and why one should look at things using today's lens while being critical to the past.
Using products made in Japan today does not mean you condone what Japan has done in WW2 at all. Just because designation of Holy Trinity involves history, it does not mean history of anything related to human kind must be considered when considering Lange. It is the horology history that we are discussing here today. Strawman arguments were attempted to discredit ALS haute horology using its country of origin during the time when the WW1 and 2 had nothing to do with watches.
It simply does not make sense to use similar argument - US ancestors died fighting British for the independence, therefore Rolex should not be purchased by Americans.
Focus on the watch alone and don't be woke.
Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk