Germans. Still Evil?

[Thundercrack85]

I think it's ridiculous to think the German people knew the Jews were being deported to camps for mass execution.

Of course hindsight is 20/20 but they had no idea at the time.

The Japanese were rounded up and put in camps in the USA. Americans didn't expect them to be executed, nor did the Germans who saw Jews rounded up.

I'm not really buying this analogy. First of all, not all concentration camps were built far away from population centers, in fact some of them were next to towns. Jews being used for slave labor was certainly common knowledge.

Also, the American public knew exactly what happened to the Japanese. The Japanese could talk to the press (didn't do them much good, since most of the country hated the Japanese, but they could communicate with the outside world).

Germans presumably knew that the Jews were being gradually exterminated (which most probably supported). The scope of the killing industry may have been beyond their imagination. At least until American troops gave them a first hand tour at gunpoint.

There's really two questions, one, did the Germans know about the genocide, and I think most had some idea, and the second is, did they support the genocide, which is the more controversial question.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I'm not really buying this analogy. First of all, not all concentration camps were built far away from population centers, in fact some of them were next to towns. Jews being used for slave labor was certainly common knowledge.

Also, the American public knew exactly what happened to the Japanese. The Japanese could talk to the press (didn't do them much good, since most of the country hated the Japanese, but they could communicate with the outside world).

Germans presumably knew that the Jews were being gradually exterminated (which most probably supported). The scope of the killing industry may have been beyond their imagination. At least until American troops gave them a first hand tour at gunpoint.

There's really two questions, one, did the Germans know about the genocide, and I think most had some idea, and the second is, did they support the genocide, which is the more controversial question.

If I had to guess, I would imagine it's much similar to the tacit approval of the trail of tears. It's hard to say whether or not most Americans did not have sympathy, in fact Indian culture back then was very similar to the way we adopt black culture today. They thought Natives were very chique.

But they didn't really have any reason to vote against it because "free land" and "we're not Native Americans, we're white" made it tough to sell it as a problem. Just like today most people are casually aware of where clothes are made, or the cruelty to animals that goes on in the food industry, but still support them simply out of convenience. I think that was probably true of non-Jewish Germans. If you weren't one of the 'suspect groups' it really did not affect you.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I think this excerpt says alot about the German public's attitude towards Jews a decade before the Holocaust.

On 1 April 1933, there occurred a boycott of Jewish businesses, which was the first national antisemitic campaign, initially planned for a week, but called off after one day owing to lack of popular support.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

If there wasn't enough public support for a simple business boycott against Jews, why would there be for genocide?

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I think this excerpt says alot about the German public's attitude towards Jews a decade before the Holocaust.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

If there wasn't enough public support for a simple business boycott against Jews, why would there be for genocide?

Gay marriage is an issue with huge public support but that couldn't convince people to boycott Chick-Fil-A.

General populations generally lack the organization and communication for such things, especially back then.

The fact that this idea was even floated out there flies in the face of your logic.

I'd stop making Wikipedia your go-to source. It's far too broad and not very deep. It's a well known fact this was casually known amongst mainstream Germany. It wasn't all carried out behind closed doors. There were plays and even public executions of Jews meant to inspire more hatred. You'd have to be mentally handicapped to believe otherwise were you living there at the time.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

There ya go: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/feb/17/johnezard

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Gay marriage is an issue with huge public support but that couldn't convince people to boycott Chick-Fil-A.

General populations generally lack the organization and communication for such things, especially back then.

The fact that this idea was even floated out there flies in the face of your logic.

I'd stop making Wikipedia your go-to source. It's far too broad and not very deep. It's a well known fact this was casually known amongst mainstream Germany. It wasn't all carried out behind closed doors. There were plays and even public executions of Jews meant to inspire more hatred. You'd have to be mentally handicapped to believe otherwise were you living there at the time.

I don't see a problem with using wikipedia for historical footnotes.

Plus my wikipedia links >>>> your non-existent sources/links

and I don't appreciate your indirect insult basically implying I'm mentally handicapped. Completely uncalled for.

but you completely missed my point. The public sentiment against Jews wasn't high enough to successfully get the public to boycott Jewish businesses.

What does Americans not boycotting Chick-Fil-A have to do with anything? There were people against gay marriage who went to Chick-Fil_a to offset any possible boycott. Lines around the block in fact.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I don't see a problem with using wikipedia for historical footnotes.

I do. It sucks as a resource unless you just want to know basics. This is past a "the basics" discussion. The fact you have to look up minor facts, which you haven't bothered to cross reference (I've pointed this out) against other facts, is precisely what I just said the problem with it was: it's broad and not deep. It's just concerned with an overview, not accuracy.

Plus my wikipedia links >>>> your non-existent sources/links

I just cited a source there bucco. I've already, ya know, read actual books on the subject.

and I don't appreciate your indirect insult basically implying I'm mentally handicapped. Completely uncalled for.

Ummm, yeah, I didn't say you were mentally handicapped, I said if you were living in Germany at that time you'd have to be mentally handicapped to miss what was going on.

So, next time you get ******** about being called mentally deficient, make sure someone actually implied you were. I did no such thing. Unless you're typing all this from Germany circa 1940 through some sort of a time machine as well.

What does Americans not boycotting Chick-Fil-A have to do with anything? There were people against gay marriage who went to Chick-Fil_a to offset any possible boycott. Lines around the block in fact.

That's not why people went there. Most just went because they liked their chicken and didn't appreciate people implying they couldn't go there because the owner said not nice things about gays. Which is precisely the problem with organized boycotts; most fail because they fail to recognize what actually drives consumer choice. It's product driven. Most of us couldn't tell you anything about the person or people behind the counter.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I think it's ridiculous to think the German people knew the Jews were being deported to camps for mass execution.

Of course hindsight is 20/20 but they had no idea at the time.

The Japanese were rounded up and put in camps in the USA. Americans didn't expect them to be executed, nor did the Germans who saw Jews rounded up.

I'm sure that some Germans knew, but not all of them. We have the stories of ash falling like snow around the camps and falling in nearby villages. I have no doubt that the people near the camps noticed trains full of people being taken inside but never leaving. The camps never grew, despite the loads of people being taken there. That must have raised some questions.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I do. It sucks as a resource unless you just want to know basics. This is past a "the basics" discussion. The fact you have to look up minor facts, which you haven't bothered to cross reference (I've pointed this out) against other facts, is precisely what I just said the problem with it was: it's broad and not deep. It's just concerned with an overview, not accuracy.

You still need to cite sources. Unless you expect us to just believe that you've done a flawless job cross-referencing world-class historical resources.

I just cited a source there bucco. I've already, ya know, read actual books on the subject.

Yes, I believe it was your first cited source on a ten+ page thread.

Congrats. That means you backed up one thing you've said.

Ummm, yeah, I didn't say you were mentally handicapped, I said if you were living in Germany at that time you'd have to be mentally handicapped to miss what was going on.

Yeah, seemed like an indirect insult, implying someone would have to be mentally challenged to share my position even if you were referring to an earlier period.

So, next time you get ******** about being called mentally deficient, make sure someone actually implied you were. I did no such thing. Unless you're typing all this from Germany circa 1940 through some sort of a time machine as well.
That's not why people went there. Most just went because they liked their chicken and didn't appreciate people implying they couldn't go there because the owner said not nice things about gays.

I'm ******** because I won't gladly allow you to insult me? lol

and regardless of why people countered the Chic-Fil-A boycott doesn't matter. The point is many Americans did counter the boycott so it failed for reasons different from the Jewish business boycott in Germany.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I'm sure that some Germans knew, but not all of them. We have the stories of ash falling like snow around the camps and falling in nearby villages. I have no doubt that the people near the camps noticed trains full of people being taken inside but never leaving. The camps never grew, despite the loads of people being taken there. That must have raised some questions.

Why would people assume that falling ash came from burned bodies.

and I'm not sure how many German's lived close to the concentration camps which had isolated locations. Plus if any German discussed the possibility of Nazi wrong-doing in during this time they would've been black bagged by the Gestapo. I'm sure this was far more obvious than any possible genocide outside the cities.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Why would people assume that falling ash came from burned bodies.

and I'm not sure how many German's lived close to the concentration camps which had isolated locations. Plus if any German discussed the possibility of Nazi wrong-doing in during this time they would've been black bagged by the Gestapo. I'm sure this was far more obvious than any possible genocide outside the cities.

Would the falling ash have proven anything? No, but it would have raised questions. Trains full of noisy people going in, silent trains leaving? Sounds suspicious to me. And yes, people need to keep in mind that this was Nazi Germany that these people were living in, not 21st century America. Asking questions was a bad idea.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

I think this excerpt says alot about the German public's attitude towards Jews a decade before the Holocaust.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

If there wasn't enough public support for a simple business boycott against Jews, why would there be for genocide?

Anti-Semitism existed in Germany as far back as the mid-19th century. Richard Wagner, a famous German composer, was an anti-Semite and even wrote an essay on the subject called "Judaism in Music." In his opera, Siegfried (based on Norse mythology), he interpreted the character of Mime as being a Jew because of his lust for wealth. There was also sentiment that Jews were evading military service during WWI. This was a false accusation but the evidence was never released. During the Weimar Republic, there were nationalist groups (e.g. Jungdeutscher Orden, German Nationalist People's Party) that excluded Jews and defined them in racial terms.

In a 1922 speech (specifically Sept 18 in Munich), Hitler accuses Jews of undermining German Society and calls for their expulsion from the state (alluding to concentration camps). A failed boycott in 1933 is not evidence of a lack of anti-Semitism or support of it in Germany. It was not a new phenomenon, it existed for hundreds of years. Hitler didn't even pull a "bait-and-switch" and reveal his anti-Semitism before becoming Chancellor, it was a well known fact decades before.

If want my source on this, it's from Nazi Germany and the Jews, Vol 1 by Saul Friedlander. I read it in a class three years ago.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Anti-Semitism existed in Germany as far back as the mid-19th century. Richard Wagner, a famous German composer, was an anti-Semite and even wrote an essay on the subject called "Judaism in Music." In his opera, Siegfried (based on Norse mythology), he interpreted the character of Mime as being a Jew because of his lust for wealth. There was also sentiment that Jews were evading military service during WWI. This was a false accusation but the evidence was never released. During the Weimar Republic, there were nationalist groups (e.g. Jungdeutscher Orden, German Nationalist People's Party) that excluded Jews and defined them in racial terms.

In a 1922 speech (specifically Sept 18 in Munich), Hitler accuses Jews of undermining German Society and calls for their expulsion from the state (alluding to concentration camps). A failed boycott in 1933 is not evidence of a lack of anti-Semitism or support of it in Germany. It was not a new phenomenon, it existed for hundreds of years. Hitler didn't even pull a "bait-and-switch" and reveal his anti-Semitism before becoming Chancellor, it was a well known fact decades before.

If want my source on this, it's from Nazi Germany and the Jews, Vol 1 by Saul Friedlander. I read it in a class three years ago.

It's one thing to suggest the German public were comfortable deporting Jews and another that they were comfortable exterminating them from the face of the planet.

To me, there's a world of difference. There were plenty of Americans comfortable with sending Japanese Americans to camps during WW2 but the majority of the American public wouldn't support genocide.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Anti-Semitism existed in Germany as far back as the mid-19th century. Richard Wagner, a famous German composer, was an anti-Semite and even wrote an essay on the subject called "Judaism in Music." In his opera, Siegfried (based on Norse mythology), he interpreted the character of Mime as being a Jew because of his lust for wealth. There was also sentiment that Jews were evading military service during WWI. This was a false accusation but the evidence was never released. During the Weimar Republic, there were nationalist groups (e.g. Jungdeutscher Orden, German Nationalist People's Party) that excluded Jews and defined them in racial terms.

In a 1922 speech (specifically Sept 18 in Munich), Hitler accuses Jews of undermining German Society and calls for their expulsion from the state (alluding to concentration camps). A failed boycott in 1933 is not evidence of a lack of anti-Semitism or support of it in Germany. It was not a new phenomenon, it existed for hundreds of years. Hitler didn't even pull a "bait-and-switch" and reveal his anti-Semitism before becoming Chancellor, it was a well known fact decades before.

If want my source on this, it's from Nazi Germany and the Jews, Vol 1 by Saul Friedlander. I read it in a class three years ago.

Hitler wasnt an anti-Semite until after the First World War.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

It's one thing to suggest the German public were comfortable deporting Jews and another that they were comfortable exterminating them from the face of the planet.

To me, there's a world of difference. There were plenty of Americans comfortable with sending Japanese Americans to camps during WW2 but the majority of the American public wouldn't support genocide.

You suggested that anti-Semitism either didn't exist or wasn't popular due to a failed boycott. However, this is an incorrect assumption.

Hitler wasnt an anti-Semite until after the First World War.

In the sentence you bolded of my post, I mistyped "after" and not "before." I don't know if you were correcting this or specifically refering to my statement that he was an anti-Semite for decades before, in which case the issue is more my choice of phrasing than factual.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Read up. Most of them were being tortured by the Gestapo, they named multiple people (they did arrest 7,000 people). The people who brought the charges against Rommel had old scores to settle (SS vs Wehrmacht).

He actually rejected the plot outright (according to one of the key conspirators), since he thought it would result in a civil war (he was probably right, since it nearly did).

I'm not saying don't give the man his due, he was a villain with some noble qualities, but he's still a villain.

I think I should have been clearer. When I meant I didn't hate Rommel, I meant that I don't hate him as much as others. I dislike him on a level that he was an enemy general for Nazi Germany, but I don't hate him as much as others and he's one of the few guys I have some respect for as a military genius and the fact that he was probably the most sane guy for Nazi Germany.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

You suggested that anti-Semitism either didn't exist or wasn't popular due to a failed boycott. However, this is an incorrect assumption.


.

I suggested the German public's anti-semitism may not have been strong enough to fully endorse mass genocide and I stand by that.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Read up. Most of them were being tortured by the Gestapo, they named multiple people (they did arrest 7,000 people). The people who brought the charges against Rommel had old scores to settle (SS vs Wehrmacht).

He actually rejected the plot outright (according to one of the key conspirators), since he thought it would result in a civil war (he was probably right, since it nearly did).

I'm not saying don't give the man his due, he was a villain with some noble qualities, but he's still a villain.

Thanks. I kept getting confused because when I looked it up, I kept getting different responses from different sources. Plus, my friend from middle school and high school was a huge World War II buff to the point that he knows literally everything about World War II and he used to tell me that Rommel was in on the assassination attempt.

 

[Schlosser85]

If Rommel was the "best" Nazi (if there was such a thing) then Himmler was the worst.

Rommel, like many Wehrmacht officers, wasn't a Nazi in the first place, and as a person, I don't think he was any more "villainous" than the likes of Patton or Montgomery, maybe less.

Patton was extremely anti-Semitic, ironically far more than Rommel seems to have personally been.

Now the side he was on, obviously, was the wrong one. But that's the moral dilemma for military men. My country, right or wrong, etc.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Rommel, like many Wehrmacht officers, wasn't a Nazi in the first place, and as a person, I don't think he was any more "villainous" than the likes of Patton or Montgomery, maybe less.

Patton was extremely anti-Semitic, ironically far more than Rommel seems to have personally been.

Now the side he was on, obviously, was the wrong one. But that's the moral dilemma for military men. My country, right or wrong, etc.

I do take issue with that last bit. He was leading a war of aggression on the behalf of a genocidal madman. They leveled entire cities for no other purpose than to conquer them. He'd probably have a lot more blood on his hands if France had put up something resembling a fight.

When you're waging a purely aggressive war, you're a villain.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Thanks. I kept getting confused because when I looked it up, I kept getting different responses from different sources. Plus, my friend from middle school and high school was a huge World War II buff to the point that he knows literally everything about World War II and he used to tell me that Rommel was in on the assassination attempt.

A lot of people want to heroize Rommel. And don't get me wrong, I'm sure he was a stand-up guy as far as conquerers go... like say Napoleon. But yeah, he's turned into the one guy Germans can kind of like in an otherwise morally black and white war. So, sometimes, people exaggerate his good qualities.

For what it's worth Hitler thought he sympathized with the conspirators... so there's that, to his credit. You can't be all bad if Hitler hates your guts.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I suggested the German public's anti-semitism may not have been strong enough to fully endorse mass genocide and I stand by that.

Hmm. Perhaps. In East Europe (Lithuania for example), it was... which is quite disturbing (and rarely talked about thanks to decades of Soviet censorship).

Obviously the Nazis felt they had to be at least a bit subtle about it (but not too subtle). On the other hand, the German public clearly wasn't too upset when all their Jewish neighbors lost their rights, their property, and then... simply disappeared.

So, I'd say that overall Germans were fine with getting rid of the Jews. But seeing the actual graphic process, might have been problematic for them (assuming they have any decency).

The more you read about the holocaust the more disturbing it gets.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Hmm. Perhaps. In East Europe (Lithuania for example), it was... which is quite disturbing (and rarely talked about thanks to decades of Soviet censorship).

Obviously the Nazis felt they had to be at least a bit subtle about it (but not too subtle). On the other hand, the German public clearly wasn't too upset when all their Jewish neighbors lost their rights, their property, and then... simply disappeared.

So, I'd say that overall Germans were fine with getting rid of the Jews. But seeing the actual graphic process, might have been problematic for them (assuming they have any decency).

The more you read about the holocaust the more disturbing it gets.

In Germany, even in Berlin, they would applaud the removal of Jews because it would save "good gentile girls from being raped in the streets", because, ya know, Jews just randomly do that. They can't help it, on account of them being Jewish

Some of the caricatures you dig up from then also are pretty obvious and those were all over the place.