What was the Nazis' planned Lebensraum going to be used for?

[Futurist]

Frankly, what I am curious about is this--how much of the Nazis' planned Lebensraum was going to be used for agriculture and rural settlement and how much of the Nazis' planned Lebensraum was going to be used for urban and suburban expansion?

Does anyone here know the answer to this question? After all, I am certainly very curious as to how much of a agricultural/rural vs. urban/suburban emphasis there was going to be in the Nazis' planned Lebensraum.

[michael mills]

Primarily for the provision of food and raw materials, which would make Germany invulnerable to blockade.

As is well known, there was a lot of blue-skying about settling large numbers of Germans in the "Lebensraum in the East", but it is unlikely that any such mass colonisation could have occurred since there simply was not enough of a surplus German population to provide settlers.

It is noteworthy that Hitler often talked about the conquered Soviet territories as constituting Germany's "India", which he saw as a place where a small number of Europeans ruled over hundreds of millions of Indians. No doubt he conceived of the "Lebensraum in the East" as something similar, a place where a small number of Germans would rule over a very large number of natives, and, as in British India, would extract a huge amount of resources, using the natives as cheap labour.

[Boby]

http://historiker-zitelmann.de/wp-conte ... hauung.pdf

[Futurist]

http://historiker-zitelmann.de/wp-conte ... hauung.pdf

Do you and/or anyone else here have an English language version of this article? After all, while this article certainly looks very interesting, I myself unfortunately don't speak German.

[Futurist]

Primarily for the provision of food and raw materials, which would make Germany invulnerable to blockade.

Yes, this appears to be correct:

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaste ... khardt.htm

"Everything I undertake is directed against Russia. If the West is too stupid and too blind to comprehend this, I will be forced to reach an understanding with the Russians, turn and strike the West, and then after their defeat turn back against the Soviet Union with my collected strength. I need the Ukraine and with that no one can starve us out as they did in the last war."

As is well known, there was a lot of blue-skying about settling large numbers of Germans in the "Lebensraum in the East", but it is unlikely that any such mass colonisation could have occurred since there simply was not enough of a surplus German population to provide settlers.

What about having Nazi Germany try to Germanize millions or tens of millions of non-Germans and then having some of these people settle in the East, though? After all, didn't Hitler and the Nazis dream of gradually Germanizing millions or even tens of millions of "worthy" non-Germans?

It is noteworthy that Hitler often talked about the conquered Soviet territories as constituting Germany's "India", which he saw as a place where a small number of Europeans ruled over hundreds of millions of Indians. No doubt he conceived of the "Lebensraum in the East" as something similar, a place where a small number of Germans would rule over a very large number of natives, and, as in British India, would extract a huge amount of resources, using the natives as cheap labour.

Yes, this appears to be correct:

https://books.google.com/books?id=9_pZC ... ia&f=false

Of course, another important question here is this--did most of the ethnic Germans from the Baltic states and elsewhere who were resettled in western Poland starting from 1939 resettled in cities, suburbs, or the countryside? Indeed, do you have any data in regards to this, Michael?

[Boby]

http://historiker-zitelmann.de/wp-conte ... hauung.pdf

Do you and/or anyone else here have an English language version of this article? After all, while this article certainly looks very interesting, I myself unfortunately don't speak German.

Here is the text in russian. You can read it with an online translator.
http://www.pereplet.ru/history/Author/E ... elman.html

Boby

[Futurist]

http://historiker-zitelmann.de/wp-conte ... hauung.pdf

Do you and/or anyone else here have an English language version of this article? After all, while this article certainly looks very interesting, I myself unfortunately don't speak German.

Here is the text in russian. You can read it with an online translator.
http://www.pereplet.ru/history/Author/E ... elman.html

Boby

Merci beaucoup, Boby!

[Piotr Kapuscinski]

As is well known, there was a lot of blue-skying about settling large numbers of Germans in the "Lebensraum in the East", but it is unlikely that any such mass colonisation could have occurred since there simply was not enough of a surplus German population to provide settlers.

The number of Germans depended on what criteria were used to define who was German.

There is a good book about this - "Mapping the Germans...", by Jason D. Hansen:

https://books.google.pl/books?id=d9XhBQ ... &q&f=false

[sarahgoodson]

The Nazis intended Lebensraum to be for not only Germans but for all Germanic peoples.

[starr]

Hitler wished for whole of Europe to be 100% germanics with blonde hair, blue eyed .

DNA came out In the 80's, how on earth would Hitler know exactly who is Germanic and who wasn't? I know one had to prove by family tree documents on whether they're Germanic or not. But Come on now, just because a piece of paper traces back ur family and where they were born all within Western Europe doesn't mean your Germanic.western and Eastern Europeans had been migrating throughout Europe since the dawn of time.

[sarahgoodson]

Hitler wished for whole of Europe to be 100% germanics with blonde hair, blue eyed .

What is your source for this statement?

Hitler's New Order for Europe was not to include the whole continent but the Greater Germanic Reich which was not to include the Mediterranean/South as that was to be left for Mussolini's empire, Hitler was interested in German expansion in the East and also the idea that the Nazis wanted everyone to be blonde hair and blue eyed is propaganda rubbish.

DNA came out In the 80's, how on earth would Hitler know exactly who is Germanic and who wasn't? I know one had to prove by family tree documents on whether they're Germanic or not. But Come on now, just because a piece of paper traces back ur family and where they were born all within Western Europe doesn't mean your Germanic.western and Eastern Europeans had been migrating throughout Europe since the dawn of time.

DNA and race are separate things, a DNA test will tell someone where their ancestors came from but not their race. A simple Google search will clarify for you the difference between the two.

Obviously people could put the wrong father on a birth certificate, etc, but back then that was sufficient enough proof for one's ancestry. There is plenty of cases of false papers given to Jews so they could pretend to be Aryans (Poles, Russians, etc) to avoid persecution as a Jew during the war.

The Nazis also went further for applicants of the SS, applicants had to undergo racial testing where they were determined by what was known as racial science back then whether or not they were Nordic enough to be accepted and they also had to prove their ancestry back to 1800 (much further than the ordinary citizen did for the Nuremberg Laws).

The Nazis also used the same method of racial science when it came to Germanising Czechs, Poles, etc. Their Nordic appearance was apparently proof of their Germanic descent.

[Piotr Kapuscinski]

a DNA test will tell someone where their ancestors came from

Certainly not, because DNA is not preserved in the soil. I already told you this in another thread.

For example - DNA of children of Michael Mills will not tell us, that their parents come from Australia.

DNA came out In the 80's, how on earth would Hitler know exactly who is Germanic

Yes, you are absolutely right here.

Objectively - there was (at that time) no scientific way he could tell if someone was of Germanic origins or not.

Their Nordic appearance was apparently proof of their Germanic descent.

Once again I must repeat, that Nordic appearance has nothing to do specifically or exclusively with Germanic people.

Blonde Nordic people could be found from Xinjiang and the Altai, all the way to Canary Islands already in Ancient times.

People of the Andronovo culture of Kazakhstan (who spoke an IE, Indo-Iranic language) had many blondes among them:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronovo ... thropology

Alexander the Great - ethnically Greek - was blonde. All Indo-Europeans (and not just them) have occurrence of blonde hair.

Even 5000 years old Cave Paintings of the Tassili in North Africa show a blonde-haired Proto-Berber woman (on the right):

http://www.deschamp-jean-marie.com/the- ... n-art.html

http://museevirtuel.canalblog.com/archi ... 28658.html



My naturally blonde cousin has a Nordic phenotype, she has not even one drop of Germanic blood:



She has a phenotype known as Corded Nordic - common in prehistoric Indo-European Corded Ware culture:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corded_Ware_culture

Apart from my cousin, other examples of this phenotype are e.g. Sharapova and Dementieva:

http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/rg-eastnordic.htm



This Pamiri Tajik, Indo-European speaking woman, who lives in the Xinjiang Province of China, is also blonde:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tajiks_of_Xinjiang

Larger photo: http://www.goatsontheroad.com/wp-conten ... 47-001.jpg



Blonde hair - a recessive trait as it is (disappears upon mixing with dark hair) - was more common in the past than now. Visit Sweden several decades from today, and you might have a hard time finding a blonde - they are now intensely mixing with dark migrants.

[sarahgoodson]

@Peter K

I've attempted to have a rational debate with you before on another thread but trying to debate with you is like trying to get blood out of a stone so I'm not even going to bother responding to anything you have say in this thread or any other for that matter.

[Piotr Kapuscinski]

Sarah,

I think that you must actually be referring to yourself (not to me) with that "blood out of a stone" quote.

As for the history of racial science, I recommend you to read this book first, before posting more on this topic:

Richard McMahon, "The Races of Europe: Anthropological Race Classification of Europeans 1839-1939"

You might also want to read this one:

Jon Røyne Kyllingstad, "Measuring the Master Race: Physical Anthropology in Norway, 1890-1945"

Both are available online for free.

[Piotr Kapuscinski]

These fraternal twins are racially almost identical (both are mixed: ca. 75% Europid plus ca. 25% Negroid):

There can be a small difference between them in relative proportions of Euro/Afro ancestry, but no more than few percent.

However, their phenotypes are very different (and - as I have already explained - phenotype =/= race):