Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Have you come far right?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #76
    Have you come far right?

    G-Man wrote:
    Originally posted by MsD
    I'm not on their side, nor defending their mindset, I'm trying to understand it.
    Oh, I didn't think for a minute that you were, and I get that you were trying to understand them without endorsing them.

    Regarding the final solution: My understanding is that Himmler was the driving force behind the idea.

    But even so, even if Hitler didn't come up with it, he wouldn't have diverted so much by way of human and material resources to the extermination of Jews (and others!) if he didn't fully and enthusiastically support it.

    So is it significant if the final solution didn't originate in Hitler's mind?
    No it isn't.

    I understood that 'The Final Solution,' both as term and concept, emerged from the Wannsee Conference in January 1942. It was presided over by Reinhard Heydrich, who had been tasked to do so by Hermann Göring, who, in turn, was having cosy conversations with Adolf at Berchtesgaden. There's enough hideousness to spread around, no one need feel deprived.

    And yes there were death camps before the conference, but there were also inconveniences like International Red Cross inspections that wasted precious time and resources. The whole process needed streamlining. That was the purpose of the meeting, and The Final Solution itself.

    Comment


      #77
      Have you come far right?

      It's certainly been mumbled about, but this seems a lot damning.

      Anyway, I'm a bit sloshed, and I might pick up on a few points tomorrow, but as far as I understand things, Hitler wasn't bent on The Final Solution, but was all about A Final Solution. The details weren't important, as long as it got done.

      But, as ever, he wasn't only about the Jews - he was banal in his monstrosity about a whole load of other groups too, and his lot saw to them starting in 1933.

      Which is what makes the Nazis a unique horror, irrespective of how many squirrels the Romans, Mongols, Belgians or British spotted.

      Comment


        #78
        Have you come far right?

        Sash08 wrote: I was also under the impression that it was common knowledge that the Queen Mother was rather fond of the Nazis.
        Is that based on any documentary evidence?

        Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, definitely. Never read anything regarding the Queen Mother, other than that she was a bit of an old bigot.

        Comment


          #79
          Have you come far right?

          I am genuinely intrigued as to whether Hitler knew about the death camps plan or not in advance and, without any great knowledge, am interested in the answer.

          However the idea that the final solution evolved later is somewhat proven by the fact that the Nazis were discussing with the Zionists the possibility of Jews going to Israel. I know that Hitler wasn't directly involved in those talks but forget who was. Actually I have no recollection of why that plan never happened which would have worked out better for all parties involved.

          Gypsies and Communists were in the camps well before the Jews, weren't they? I have never thought but was the phrase 'final solution' used because other solutions had been tried?

          Comment


            #80
            Have you come far right?

            Indeed Amor, worth tracking the excellent BBC movie about that meeting (Kenneth Brannagh was in it) it illustrated very well the banal, bureaucratic nature of the whole process. No cackling evil men, just managers brainstorming...

            Comment


              #81
              Have you come far right?

              Bored of Education wrote: However the idea that the final solution evolved later is somewhat proven by the fact that the Nazis were discussing with the Zionists the possibility of Jews going to Israel. I know that Hitler wasn't directly involved in those talks but forget who was. Actually I have no recollection of why that plan never happened which would have worked out better for all parties involved.
              It's been theorised by some WWII buffs that what turned out to be a longer, larger war than Germany had originally hoped - sort of got in the way.

              Comment


                #82
                Have you come far right?

                Bored of Education wrote: I am genuinely intrigued as to whether Hitler knew about the death camps plan or not in advance and, without any great knowledge, am interested in the answer.

                However the idea that the final solution evolved later is somewhat proven by the fact that the Nazis were discussing with the Zionists the possibility of Jews going to Israel. I know that Hitler wasn't directly involved in those talks but forget who was. Actually I have no recollection of why that plan never happened which would have worked out better for all parties involved.

                Gypsies and Communists were in the camps well before the Jews, weren't they? I have never thought but was the phrase 'final solution' used because other solutions had been tried?
                Well, it would have worked out better for all parties involved, except for the people who lived in Palestine, who were still going to be driven out of their homes.

                BTW, it wasn't just communists who were interred in concentration camps as political enemies. Social Democrats were sent there as well. The death of one, the politician and poet Erich Mühsam in 1934, received some attention. Interestingly, Mühsam died in a concentration camp not as a Jew, which he was, but as a political enemy.

                I also don't buy the suggestion, made a page ago, that Germany inevitably had to go totalitarian, communist or fascist. The latter was a distinct possibility, but in the November 1932 election, the NSDAP had actually lost 4% of the vote they had received in the July elections. They still led, with a third of the vote. With the 8% of the other fascist party, the DNVP, the Nazis still had no parliamentary majority.

                There was no way the communist KPD (at 17% in Nov '32) were going to win a majority, not even in a coalition. Had Hindenburg ordered another election after von Papen's failure, instead of appointing Hitler chancellor, who is to know how the NSDAP would have done. Given the fluidity of voting patterns at the time, their momentum might well have been lost further. We can't really know.

                In the March 1933 elections, when the NSDAP already had taken control of Germany and exercised widespread and violent intimidation, they got only 43% of the vote*, well below what they had anticipated. How might they have done without having control of the state?

                I'd say that it was probable that Germany would go brown, but I don't think it was inevitable.

                * Ironically, the only regions where the Nazis had majority support was in the eastern regions -- which after the war fell to Poland and Russia.

                Comment


                  #83
                  Have you come far right?

                  Still grumpy (just woken up this time) but I feel we should make the distinction between the concentration camps and the death camps (extermination camps) - the former were around in the 30s, and many people died in them, but the latter functioned like human processing plants, starting with the introduction of Zyklon B.

                  There's a cheery thought for a Sunday morning.

                  Comment


                    #84
                    Have you come far right?

                    This World War II history stuff is all very well, but I think it's now high time that we got back to the more serious business at hand.

                    Comment


                      #85
                      Have you come far right?

                      look at the fucking state of that pack of cunts. why doesn't charles dress up as the fucking widow twankey and be done with it.

                      Comment


                        #86
                        Have you come far right?

                        Charles is, at the same time, Admiral of the Fleet, Field Marshal and Marshal of the Royal Air Force. Not bad for someone whose active military career lasted five years and mostly involved him learning to fly a plane and then a helicopter.

                        Comment


                          #87
                          Have you come far right?

                          G-Man wrote:
                          Originally posted by Bored of Education
                          I am genuinely intrigued as to whether Hitler knew about the death camps plan or not in advance and, without any great knowledge, am interested in the answer.

                          However the idea that the final solution evolved later is somewhat proven by the fact that the Nazis were discussing with the Zionists the possibility of Jews going to Israel. I know that Hitler wasn't directly involved in those talks but forget who was. Actually I have no recollection of why that plan never happened which would have worked out better for all parties involved.

                          Gypsies and Communists were in the camps well before the Jews, weren't they? I have never thought but was the phrase 'final solution' used because other solutions had been tried?
                          Well, it would have worked out better for all parties involved, except for the people who lived in Palestine, who were still going to be driven out of their homes.

                          BTW, it wasn't just communists who were interred in concentration camps as political enemies. Social Democrats were sent there as well. The death of one, the politician and poet Erich Mühsam in 1934, received some attention. Interestingly, Mühsam died in a concentration camp not as a Jew, which he was, but as a political enemy.

                          I also don't buy the suggestion, made a page ago, that Germany inevitably had to go totalitarian, communist or fascist. The latter was a distinct possibility, but in the November 1932 election, the NSDAP had actually lost 4% of the vote they had received in the July elections. They still led, with a third of the vote. With the 8% of the other fascist party, the DNVP, the Nazis still had no parliamentary majority.

                          There was no way the communist KPD (at 17% in Nov '32) were going to win a majority, not even in a coalition. Had Hindenburg ordered another election after von Papen's failure, instead of appointing Hitler chancellor, who is to know how the NSDAP would have done. Given the fluidity of voting patterns at the time, their momentum might well have been lost further. We can't really know.

                          In the March 1933 elections, when the NSDAP already had taken control of Germany and exercised widespread and violent intimidation, they got only 43% of the vote*, well below what they had anticipated. How might they have done without having control of the state?

                          I'd say that it was probable that Germany would go brown, but I don't think it was inevitable.

                          * Ironically, the only regions where the Nazis had majority support was in the eastern regions -- which after the war fell to Poland and Russia.
                          I agree with your analysis here, but would add the crucial point that Hitler was leveraged into power by a small cadre of politicians headed by von Papen. The politicians themselves were part of a political, business, Junker and military elite who although not a unified class with one unified aim, could be brought under the umbrella of Von Papen’s admission to the British Ambassador Sir Horace Rumbold:

                          “It would be a disaster if the Hitler movement collapsed or was crushed for, after all, the Nazis were the last remaining bulwark against Communism.”

                          The jumped up corporal may not have been to the taste of the refined bourgeoisie, industrialists or military high command but for them he represented the best opportunity to be rid of party politics, to crush the working class movement (a constant source of angst since 1918-1919) and to install some vague form of authoritarianism. On Hitler’s succession to power, von Papen famously said, “We have hired him”.

                          It should also be remembered that the Nazis had been conducting a war on the streets for a number of years against the left with the German state, police and court system by and large letting it happen, indicative of attitudes within Weimar bureaucratic structures.

                          The easy accommodation of business with the Nazis saw their reward during the 1930’s.



                          It should also be noted as well that “privatization” comes from reprivatisierung, a neologism coined during the Nazi period which meant exactly what it said. State owned steel, mining, banking, local public utilities, shipyards, ship-lines and railways as well as some social services and other State functions were passed on to the private sector. Nazism and Capitalism were mutually rewarding and a classic case study against the trope that the market requires a small state. Capitalism and the market cannot survive without a strong state fighting its interests and history shows that capitalists aren't really fussy the form the State takes, as long as its rate of return is guaranteed by the State.

                          Comment


                            #88
                            Have you come far right?

                            Typically excellent stuff, G.

                            One wonders if the Koch Brothers are familiar with that graph.

                            Comment


                              #89
                              Have you come far right?

                              Spot on, I would just add that the Treaty of Versailles and the hardships and humiliations heaped onto Germany therefrom, gave Hitler (in particular) and the Nazis a strong feeling of German resentment to tap into. That was key in fostering extremism of left and right, so moderates didn't stand much of a chance. Weimar was seen as weak and the "November criminals" who accepted Versailles, as traitors.

                              Comment


                                #90
                                Have you come far right?

                                Franz von Papen was a puppet of General von Schleicher (sp) who sought power, effectively by coup, himself.

                                They all under estimated Hitler whose coalition government was legitimised by the flawed (in historical hindsight)1919 German constitution.

                                Article 48 was the enabler if I remember correctly, something to do with emergency decrees and what not.

                                Going back to the final solution, I believe it wasn't just about just exterminating Jews, but any poor unfortunate soul in the way of German eastward expansion.

                                Synder gives plenty of examples of non Jewish villages being wiped out, under the guise of anti partisan operations, and being resettled with Germans.

                                Comment


                                  #91
                                  Have you come far right?

                                  G-Man wrote:
                                  Originally posted by Bored of Education
                                  I am genuinely intrigued as to whether Hitler knew about the death camps plan or not in advance and, without any great knowledge, am interested in the answer.

                                  However the idea that the final solution evolved later is somewhat proven by the fact that the Nazis were discussing with the Zionists the possibility of Jews going to Israel. I know that Hitler wasn't directly involved in those talks but forget who was. Actually I have no recollection of why that plan never happened which would have worked out better for all parties involved.

                                  Gypsies and Communists were in the camps well before the Jews, weren't they? I have never thought but was the phrase 'final solution' used because other solutions had been tried?
                                  Well, it would have worked out better for all parties involved, except for the people who lived in Palestine, who were still going to be driven out of their homes.
                                  I meant the parties directly involved but I expect you know that. The point deserves clarifying though.

                                  Comment


                                    #92
                                    Have you come far right?

                                    You'll all have seen this picture of Philip at a Nazi funeral, I am sure



                                    Interestingly, it appears to be the MAil and the Express running with this. Perhaps in praising tones.

                                    Comment


                                      #93
                                      Have you come far right?

                                      Stumpy Pepys wrote:
                                      Originally posted by Sash08
                                      I was also under the impression that it was common knowledge that the Queen Mother was rather fond of the Nazis.
                                      Is that based on any documentary evidence?

                                      Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, definitely. Never read anything regarding the Queen Mother, other than that she was a bit of an old bigot.
                                      Wouldn't point you towards anything off the top of my head but over my 20+ years in the UK, I noticed that whenever Appeasement is discussed her name is right in the mixer.

                                      Comment


                                        #94
                                        Have you come far right?

                                        Geoffrey de Ste. Croix wrote:
                                        Originally posted by G-Man
                                        Originally posted by Bored of Education
                                        I am genuinely intrigued as to whether Hitler knew about the death camps plan or not in advance and, without any great knowledge, am interested in the answer.

                                        However the idea that the final solution evolved later is somewhat proven by the fact that the Nazis were discussing with the Zionists the possibility of Jews going to Israel. I know that Hitler wasn't directly involved in those talks but forget who was. Actually I have no recollection of why that plan never happened which would have worked out better for all parties involved.

                                        Gypsies and Communists were in the camps well before the Jews, weren't they? I have never thought but was the phrase 'final solution' used because other solutions had been tried?
                                        Well, it would have worked out better for all parties involved, except for the people who lived in Palestine, who were still going to be driven out of their homes.

                                        BTW, it wasn't just communists who were interred in concentration camps as political enemies. Social Democrats were sent there as well. The death of one, the politician and poet Erich Mühsam in 1934, received some attention. Interestingly, Mühsam died in a concentration camp not as a Jew, which he was, but as a political enemy.

                                        I also don't buy the suggestion, made a page ago, that Germany inevitably had to go totalitarian, communist or fascist. The latter was a distinct possibility, but in the November 1932 election, the NSDAP had actually lost 4% of the vote they had received in the July elections. They still led, with a third of the vote. With the 8% of the other fascist party, the DNVP, the Nazis still had no parliamentary majority.

                                        There was no way the communist KPD (at 17% in Nov '32) were going to win a majority, not even in a coalition. Had Hindenburg ordered another election after von Papen's failure, instead of appointing Hitler chancellor, who is to know how the NSDAP would have done. Given the fluidity of voting patterns at the time, their momentum might well have been lost further. We can't really know.

                                        In the March 1933 elections, when the NSDAP already had taken control of Germany and exercised widespread and violent intimidation, they got only 43% of the vote*, well below what they had anticipated. How might they have done without having control of the state?

                                        I'd say that it was probable that Germany would go brown, but I don't think it was inevitable.

                                        * Ironically, the only regions where the Nazis had majority support was in the eastern regions -- which after the war fell to Poland and Russia.
                                        I agree with your analysis here, but would add the crucial point that Hitler was leveraged into power by a small cadre of politicians headed by von Papen. The politicians themselves were part of a political, business, Junker and military elite who although not a unified class with one unified aim, could be brought under the umbrella of Von Papen’s admission to the British Ambassador Sir Horace Rumbold:

                                        “It would be a disaster if the Hitler movement collapsed or was crushed for, after all, the Nazis were the last remaining bulwark against Communism.”

                                        The jumped up corporal may not have been to the taste of the refined bourgeoisie, industrialists or military high command but for them he represented the best opportunity to be rid of party politics, to crush the working class movement (a constant source of angst since 1918-1919) and to install some vague form of authoritarianism. On Hitler’s succession to power, von Papen famously said, “We have hired him”.

                                        It should also be remembered that the Nazis had been conducting a war on the streets for a number of years against the left with the German state, police and court system by and large letting it happen, indicative of attitudes within Weimar bureaucratic structures.

                                        The easy accommodation of business with the Nazis saw their reward during the 1930’s.



                                        It should also be noted as well that “privatization” comes from reprivatisierung, a neologism coined during the Nazi period which meant exactly what it said. State owned steel, mining, banking, local public utilities, shipyards, ship-lines and railways as well as some social services and other State functions were passed on to the private sector. Nazism and Capitalism were mutually rewarding and a classic case study against the trope that the market requires a small state. Capitalism and the market cannot survive without a strong state fighting its interests and history shows that capitalists aren't really fussy the form the State takes, as long as its rate of return is guaranteed by the State.
                                        Oooh, like that graph.

                                        IMHO the problem with arguing against the inevitability of a dictatorship in Germany by 1933/34 is that pretty much all those at the top were actively working towards one*. Unfortunately for them, in the process of trying to outmanoeuvre each other, they managed to promote a 3rd party they couldn't control.

                                        Given that the Nazis came across as complete and utter morons, it is sorta understandable why they weren't taken seriously until it was too late. Given the fear of the Reds & the benefits of having a "friendly" government in charge it was fairly predictable what position the business leaders were going to take.

                                        *since mid-20s, probably.

                                        Comment


                                          #95
                                          Have you come far right?

                                          NickSTFU wrote: Franz von Papen was a puppet of General von Schleicher (sp) who sought power, effectively by coup, himself.
                                          ---
                                          Synder gives plenty of examples of non Jewish villages being wiped out, under the guise of anti partisan operations, and being resettled with Germans.
                                          IIRC von Papen & von Schleicher fell out by the end. Von Schleicher is a fascinating old goat who ultimately tied himself in knots with his politicking. Arguably, instrumental in making sure that the German military didn't have to start from scratch in the 1930s as he got together with the Soviets and got up to all sorts of shit out East, away from the eyes of the Versailles inspectors.

                                          ---

                                          These "anti-partisan operations" were probably at their grotesque in Belarus, where up to 2.5 million people were killed.

                                          Comment


                                            #96
                                            Have you come far right?

                                            Geoffrey de Ste. Croix wrote:

                                            It should also be remembered that the Nazis had been conducting a war on the streets for a number of years against the left with the German state, police and court system by and large letting it happen, indicative of attitudes within Weimar bureaucratic structures.
                                            Attitudes that persist in Germany to the present day.

                                            https://viewpointmag.com/2014/09/11/the-deep-state-germany-immigration-and-the-national-socialist-underground/

                                            Comment


                                              #97
                                              Have you come far right?

                                              Geoffrey de Ste. Croix wrote:
                                              It should also be noted as well that “privatization” comes from reprivatisierung, a neologism coined during the Nazi period which meant exactly what it said. State owned steel, mining, banking, local public utilities, shipyards, ship-lines and railways as well as some social services and other State functions were passed on to the private sector. Nazism and Capitalism were mutually rewarding and a classic case study against the trope that the market requires a small state. Capitalism and the market cannot survive without a strong state fighting its interests and history shows that capitalists aren't really fussy the form the State takes, as long as its rate of return is guaranteed by the State.
                                              Quite possibly the best thing I've ever read on OTF. (Also, clearly the case now in the UK...)
                                              #
                                              EDIT: the bit in bold is the bit I meant is clear in the UK

                                              Comment

                                              Working...
                                              X