"Stalin's War of Extermination", by Joachim Hoffma

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
michael mills
Member
Posts: 8820
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by michael mills » 10 Dec 2002 03:27

Roberto wrote:

Do you attribute the same relevance, by the way, to Hitler's being an Austrian, Himmler's and Goebbels' being Germans, Stalin's and Beria's being Georgians, etc., or is ethnicity/nationality of world-historical relevance only when if comes to Jews, and are one individual's actions deemed by you to be emblematic of his ethnic/national group's behavior and attitudes only in that case?


As a matter of fact, a number of historians have noted the fact that Austrians were over-represented in the Nazi German police apparatus, and particularly in the anti-Jewish actions, eg Eichmann, Kaltenbrunner, Globocnik, Stangl, and have wondered whether that was pure chance, or whether there was some cultural factor that caused that phenomenon.

It has been suggested that Austrians were more anti-Semitic than Germans proper, for historical reasons, including the presence in Vienna of a large, unassimilated group of "Eastern Jews" that had immigrated from Galicia. Hitler himself, in "Mein Kampf", distinguished between the assimilated Jews of Linz and the caftan-wearing "Ostjuden" he encountered in Vienna ( or claimed he did), and directed his anti-Jewish prejudice against the latter.

The situation was different in Germany, where the Jewish population was largely assimilated, and anti-Jewish prejudice tended to take the form of social discrimination, rather similar to that which existed in Britain.

If it is true that Austrian culture had a greater tendency to anti-Semitism than that of Germany proper, then it is entirely legitimate to speculate whether the presence of Austrians in the ranks of the National-Socialist Party, including of course Hitler himself as leader, gave it a more strongly anti-Semitic nature than would have been the case if it had arisen in North Germany and been led by the Strasser brothers, for example.

In the same way, it is entirely legitimate to speculate as to whether the Jewish origin of Erenburg, and his self-identity as a Jew, which became stronger in the course of the war, was a determining factor in the extreme nature of the anti-German propaganda he produced. If so, that would not have been due to some innate anti-German prejudice in Jewish culture, but rather to the fact that at that particular point in time, Germany was seen, objectively and subjectively, as the main enemy of the Jewish people. At the beginning of the 20th Century, Jews everywhere saw Russia and the Tsar as the main enemy of the Jewish people, and Jewish propaganda against Russia, for example in the Yiddish-language press in the United States, showed many of the extreme and brutal features that appeared 40 years later in Erenburg's anti-German propaganda.

An example of Jewish cultural influences on Erenburg's propaganda occurs in the documentation section of Hoffmann's book "Stalin's War of Extermination". On page 405, Erenburg's article "Wolves they were - wolves they remain", published in the Soviet News Weekly of 15 March 1945, is reproduced. The image of the gentiles among whom the Jews of Eastern Europe lived as "wolves" was a part of Jewish tradition, which taught that the Jews were surrounded by seven tribes of ravening wolves. That image was traditionally applied to the Polish and Russian peasants in the midst of whom the Jews lived, and even today is used by the traditionalist Hassidic Jews of Brooklyn, except that they have transferred the image to the Afro-Americans who surround them. Erenburg simply transferred that traditional image of gentile as wolf to the Germans.

As to Stalin's Georgian origin, I have read histories that attribute certain elements in his modus operandi, eg his extreme clannishness, vindictiveness and secrecy, to the residual influence of aspects of Caucasian tribal culture. Of course, Stalin did not openly identify as a Georgian, but rather as a Russian; however, the Georgian culture in which he was initially raised probably left its mark, for good or ill.

As I pointed out in my original post, part of Erenburg's viciousness may have been due to a personal pathology rather than cultural factors, as Hoffmann believed. Hoffmann compares Erenburg with Streicher, which I think particularly appropriate. Streicher's anti-Semitism had its origin in cultural factors, and was shared with many individuals in Germany and Austria, but the particularly vicious and obscene form it took must surely have been a result of his own perverted sexuality. So it may also have been with Erenburg.

j.north
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: 02 Sep 2002 14:33
Location: England

Post by j.north » 10 Dec 2002 10:58

Goodness me, what nonsense.

Montgomery told his troops to 'Kill Germans!'; he was probably Jewish, you know. They applauded him, they were probably Jewish too.

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 15:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Post by Roberto » 10 Dec 2002 11:18

michael mills wrote:If so, that would not have been due to some innate anti-German prejudice in Jewish culture, but rather to the fact that at that particular point in time, Germany was seen, objectively and subjectively, as the main enemy of the Jewish people.


Yeah, sure.

[…]The Einsatzgruppen profited from the assistance of the military and they made what use they could of local help. More important than the cooperation of the army and the attitude of the civilian population, however, was the role of the Jews in their own destruction. For when all was said and done, the members of the Einsatzgruppen were thousands. The Jews were millions.
When we consider that the Jews were not prepared to do battle with the Germans, we might well ask why they did not flee for their lives. We have mentioned repeatedly that many Jews had been evacuated and that many others fled on their own, but this fact must not obscure another, no less significant phenomenon: most Jews did not leave. They stayed. What prompted such a decision? What chained the victims to cities and towns that were already within marching reach of the approaching German army? People do not voluntarily leave their homes for uncertain havens unless they are driven by the acute awareness of coming disaster. In the Jewish community that awareness was blunted and blocked by psychological obstacles.
The first obstacle to an apprehension of the situation was a conviction that bad things came from Russia and good things from Germany. The Jews were historically oriented away from Russia and toward Germany. Not Russia but Germany had been their traditional place of refuge. Such thinking was not entirely extinguished in October and November 1939, when thousands of Jews moved from Russian-occupied to German-occupied Poland. The stream was not stopped until the Germans stopped the border. Similarly, one year later, at the time of Soviet mass deportations in the newly occupied territories, the Attaché Division of the OKH and Amt Ausland Abwehr of the OKW received reports of widespread unrest in these areas. “Even Poles and Jews,” read the reports, “are waiting for the arrival of the German army.” When the army finally arrived in the summer of 1941, old Jews in particular remembered that in World War I the Germans had come as quasi-liberators. These Jews did not expect that now the Germans would come as persecutors and killers.
The following note was handed by a Jewish delegation of the little town of Kamenka in the Ukraine to a visiting German dignitary, Friedrich Theodor Prince zu Sayn und Wittgenstein, in the late summer of 1941:

We, the old established residents of the town of Kamenka, in the name of the Jewish population, welcome your arrival. Serene Highness and heir to your ancestors, in whose shadow the Jews, our ancestors and we, had lived in the greatest welfare. We wish you, too, long life and happiness. We hope that also in the future the Jewish population shall live on your estate in peace and quiet under your protection, considering the sympathy which the Jewish population has always extended to your most distinguished family.


The prince was unmoved. The Jews, he said, were a “great evil” in Kamenka. Although he had no authority to impose any solutions (final or interim) upon his greeters, he instructed a local mayor to mark the Jews with a star and to employ then without pay in hard labor.
Another factor that blunted Jewish alertness was the haze with which the Soviet press and radio had shrouded events across the border. The Jews of Russia were ignorant of the fate that had overtaken the Jews in Nazi Europe. Soviet information media, in pursuance of a policy of appeasement, had made it their business to keep silent about Nazi measures of destruction. The consequences of that silence were disastrous. A German intelligence official reported from White Russia on July 12, 1941:

The Jews are remarkably ill-informed about our attitude towards them. They do not know how Jews are treated in Germany, or for that matter in Warsaw, which is not so far away. Otherwise, their questions as to whether we in Germany make any distinctions between Jews and other citizens would be superfluous. Even if they do not think that under German administration they will have equal rights with the Russians, they believe, nevertheless, that we shall leave them in peace if they mind their own business and work diligently.


We see therefore that a large number of Jews had stayed behind not merely because of the physical difficulties of flight but also, and perhaps primarily, because they had failed to grasp the danger of remaining in their homes. This means, of course, that precisely those Jews who did not flee were less aware of the disaster and less capable of dealing with it than those who did. The Jews who fell into German captivity were the vulnerable element of the Jewish community. They were the old people, the women, and the children. They were the people who at the decisive moment had failed to listen to Russian warnings and who were now ready to listen to German reassurances. The remaining Jews were, in short, physically and psychologically immobilized.
The mobile killing units soon grasped the Jewish weakness. They discovered quickly that one of their greatest problems, the seizure of the victims, had an easy solution. We have noted that in several places the Einsatzgruppen had enlisted the army’s support in combing out prospective victims, and, as far as possible, Einsatzgruppen commanders had relied also upon the local population to discover Jewish residences and hideouts. Now, however, the Kommandos had found their most efficient helpers: the Jews themselves. In order to draw together and assemble large numbers of Jew, the killers had only to “fool” the victims by means of simple ruses.
The first experiment with ruses was made in Vinnitsa, where a search for members of the Jewish intelligentsia had produced meager results. The commander of Einsatzkommando 4b called for “the most prominent rabbi in town” and told him to collect within twenty-four hours the most intelligent Jews for “registration” work.” When the result still did not satisfy the Einsatzkommando, the commander sent the group back to town with instructions to bring more Jews. He repeated this stunt once more before deciding that he had a sufficient number of Jews to shoot. In Kiev, Einsatzkommando 4a followed the much simpler expedient of using wall posters to assemble the Jews for “resettlement.” Variations of the registration and resettlement legends were used repeatedly throughout the occupied territories.
The psychological traps were effective not only for the seizure of Jews within the cities; the Einsatzgruppen actually managed to drive back large numbers of Jews who had already fled from the cities in anticipation of a disaster. We have seen that the Jews who had taken to the roads, the villages and the fields had great difficulty in subsisting there because the German army was picking up stray Jews and the population refused to shelter them. The Einsatzgruppen took advantage of this situation by instituting the simplest ruse of all: they did nothing. The inactivity of the Security Police was sufficient to dispel the rumors that had set the exodus in motion. Within a short time the Jews flocked into town. They were caught in the dragnet and killed.[…]


Source of quote: Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, student edition, 1985 Holmes & Meier, pages 123-125

[…]The reaction pattern of the Jews is characterized by almost complete lack of resistance. In marked contrast to German propaganda, the documentary evidence of Jewish resistance, overt or submerged, is very slight. On the European-wide scale the Jews had no resistance organization, no blueprint for armed action, no plan even for psychological warfare. They were completely unprepared. In the words of Anti-Partisan Chief and Higher SS and Police Leader Russia Center von dem Bach, who observed Jews and killed them from 1941 to the end:

Thus the misfortune came about … I am the only living witness but I must say the truth. Contrary to the opinion of the National Socialists that the Jews were a highly organized group, the appalling fact was that they had no organization whatsoever. The mass of the Jewish people were taken completely by surprise. They did not know at all what to do; they had no directives or slogans as to how they should act. That is the greatest lie of anti-Semitism because it gives the lie to the slogan that the Jews are conspiring to dominate the world and that they are so highly organized. In reality they had no organization of their own at all, not even an information service. If they had had some sort of organization, these people could have been saved by the millions; but instead they were taken completely by surprise. Never before has a people gone as unsuspectingly to its disaster. Nothing was prepared. Absolutely nothing. It was not so, as the anti-Semites say, that they were friendly to the Soviets. That is the most appalling misconception of all. The Jews in the old Poland, who were never communistic in their sympathies, were, throughout the area of the Bug eastward, more afraid of Bolshevism than of the Nazis. This was insanity. They could have been saved. There were people among them who had much to lose, business people; they didn’t want to leave. In addition there was love of home and their experience with pogroms in Russia. After the first anti-Jewish actions of the Germans, they thought now the wave was over and so they walked back to their undoing.


The Jews were not oriented toward resistance. Even those who contemplated a resort to arms were given pause by the thought that for a limited success of a handful, the multitude would suffer the consequences. Outbreaks of resistance were consequently infrequent, and almost always they were local occurrences that transpired at the last moment. Measured in German casualties, Jewish armed opposition shrinks into insignificance. The most important engagement was fought in the Warsaw ghetto (sixteen dead and eighty-five wounded on the German side, including collaborators). Following the breakout from the Sobibór camp, there was a count of nine SS men killed, one missing, one wounded, and two collaborators killed. In Galicia sporadic resistance resulted in losses also to SS and Police Leader Katzmann (eight dead, twelve wounded). In addition there were clashes between Jewish partisans and German forces in other parts of the east, and occasional acts of resistance by small groups and individuals in the ghettos and killing centers. It is doubtful that the Germans and their collaborators lost more than a few hundred men, dead and wounded, in the course of the destruction process. The number of men who dropped out because of disease, nervous breakdowns, or other court martial proceedings was probably greater. The Jewish resistance effort could not seriously impede or retard the progress of destructive operations. The Germans brushed that resistance aside as a minor obstacle, and in the totality of the destruction process it was of no consequence.[…]


Source of quote: as above, pages 293-294

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 15:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Post by Roberto » 10 Dec 2002 11:41

j.north wrote:Goodness me, what nonsense.

Montgomery told his troops to 'Kill Germans!'; he was probably Jewish, you know. They applauded him, they were probably Jewish too.


Why nonsense, Jonathan?

While you write that, history is repeating itself:

michael mills wrote:President Bush is not the driving force behind the push for war (and unlike Hitler in that respect). He is just a genial guy with a pretzel problem.

The men pulling the levers have names like Wolfowitz and Perle, obviously of Thai Buddhist origin.

The public pronouncements which Bush reads off his autocue are not comparable with Hitler's private comments to his generals. A more appropriate comparison would be with the private discussions among Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and their inner circle. We are not privy to them, of course, but it is a fair bet that the content of those private discussions is not the supposed Iraqi threat to the United States, but rather the benefits of the coming war, for the Oil Lobby the prospect of controlloing Iraqi oil, and for the Jewish Lobby the opportunity to solve the Palestinian problem once and for all.


Fri Oct 18, 2002 3:57 am
http://thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/viewt ... 1b3a998f3b

Charles Bunch
Member
Posts: 846
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:03
Location: USA

Post by Charles Bunch » 11 Dec 2002 06:43

Roberto wrote:
j.north wrote:Goodness me, what nonsense.

Montgomery told his troops to 'Kill Germans!'; he was probably Jewish, you know. They applauded him, they were probably Jewish too.


Why nonsense, Jonathan?

While you write that, history is repeating itself:

michael mills wrote:President Bush is not the driving force behind the push for war (and unlike Hitler in that respect). He is just a genial guy with a pretzel problem.

The men pulling the levers have names like Wolfowitz and Perle, obviously of Thai Buddhist origin.

The public pronouncements which Bush reads off his autocue are not comparable with Hitler's private comments to his generals. A more appropriate comparison would be with the private discussions among Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and their inner circle. We are not privy to them, of course, but it is a fair bet that the content of those private discussions is not the supposed Iraqi threat to the United States, but rather the benefits of the coming war, for the Oil Lobby the prospect of controlloing Iraqi oil, and for the Jewish Lobby the opportunity to solve the Palestinian problem once and for all.


Fri Oct 18, 2002 3:57 am
http://thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/viewt ... 1b3a998f3b


An interesting review of a book dealing with this subject: _Stumbling Colassus_ by David Glantz contains a thorough discussion of the two major schools of thought on the topic of this thread.

http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse. ... &user=&pw=

Dan
Financial supporter
Posts: 8429
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:06
Location: California

Post by Dan » 11 Dec 2002 15:17

michael mills wrote:
President Bush is not the driving force behind the push for war (and unlike Hitler in that respect). He is just a genial guy with a pretzel problem.

The men pulling the levers have names like Wolfowitz and Perle, obviously of Thai Buddhist origin.

The public pronouncements which Bush reads off his autocue are not comparable with Hitler's private comments to his generals. A more appropriate comparison would be with the private discussions among Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and their inner circle. We are not privy to them, of course, but it is a fair bet that the content of those private discussions is not the supposed Iraqi threat to the United States, but rather the benefits of the coming war, for the Oil Lobby the prospect of controlloing Iraqi oil, and for the Jewish Lobby the opportunity to solve the Palestinian problem once and for all.


Perhaps because Mills doesn't live in the USA he is unaware that the Fundamentilist leadership like Falwell and Roberson have as much influence on public and governmental opinion as the Jewish neocons, but other than that, his comments are correct.

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 15:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Post by Roberto » 11 Dec 2002 15:44

Dan wrote:
michael mills wrote:
President Bush is not the driving force behind the push for war (and unlike Hitler in that respect). He is just a genial guy with a pretzel problem.

The men pulling the levers have names like Wolfowitz and Perle, obviously of Thai Buddhist origin.

The public pronouncements which Bush reads off his autocue are not comparable with Hitler's private comments to his generals. A more appropriate comparison would be with the private discussions among Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and their inner circle. We are not privy to them, of course, but it is a fair bet that the content of those private discussions is not the supposed Iraqi threat to the United States, but rather the benefits of the coming war, for the Oil Lobby the prospect of controlloing Iraqi oil, and for the Jewish Lobby the opportunity to solve the Palestinian problem once and for all.


Perhaps because Mills doesn't live in the USA he is unaware that the Fundamentilist leadership like Falwell and Roberson have as much influence on public and governmental opinion as the Jewish neocons, but other than that, his comments are correct.


As I said, history is repeating itself:

Image

The stinking Jew Ehrenburg, by the way, is known to have been a violent Francophile, who was pissed as hell at the Nazi defeat of France in 1940.

Could it be that this motivated his anti-German stance as much as or even more than his being Jewish?

Dan
Financial supporter
Posts: 8429
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:06
Location: California

Post by Dan » 11 Dec 2002 15:52

That picture looks like Kissinger!

But seriously, people like Billy Graham, William Krystal and the rest have the presiden't ear, and people like, oddly enough, both you and I are being totally ignored.

Forgive the off topic.

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 15:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Post by Roberto » 11 Dec 2002 16:25

Dan wrote:That picture looks like Kissinger!

But seriously, people like Billy Graham, William Krystal and the rest have the presiden't ear, and people like, oddly enough, both you and I are being totally ignored.


That's unfortunate. But then, I wouldn't expect President Bush to understand much of what I'd have to tell him. :D

User avatar
Marcus
Member
Posts: 33944
Joined: 08 Mar 2002 22:35
Location: Europe

Post by Marcus » 11 Dec 2002 17:39

This is going nowhere pleasant.

/Marcus

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”