Jewish Nazicollaborators

[sylvieK4]

The question raised by someone whether it is a conspiracy to hide this from public debate is almost funny - it is not a conspiracy - but don't be a Jew trying to bring it to limelight. The perfect example of that is Hannah Arndt.

Could you explain us the meaning of this statement?

I think the quote means that there is no big, organized effort to quash public discussion of the collaborators, but that many people do actively oppose it. If a gentile discusses Jewish collaborators, many will accuse him or her of being an anti-Semite. And if it is a Jewish person, they will be labled a "self-hater". The point is, Jewish collaboration is an uncomfortable topic for a lot of people, and to put a stop to discussion some individuals will resort to bullying, excessive criticism or other tactics to make it go away.

I am Jewish (not a self-hater ) and a few years ago, I started a thread on another, non-political forum discussing the "Uniforms of Jewish Ghetto Policemen - Ordnungsdienst". In addition to photos of uniform pieces and cap devices, there was a good deal of discussion about the organization and day-to-day running of the Ordnungsdienst in various ghettoes and transit camps around Europe. The content was fact-based and discussed policemen who used their positions to help their less-fortunate fellow Jews, as well as those who did the work for more selfish reasons. The thread was online for a few years and garnered several thousand views. From the comments left on the board, I received nothing but compliments and encouragement (for a time it was even promoted and linked on an Israeli website). After a sudden spike in views, one day it suddenly disappeared from the forum! When I asked the site moderators about it, I was told that due to a technical glitch, some posts occasionally disappear. Maybe that is the truth, but I found it an odd "coincidence" that not only my popular thread (which included posts by dozens of others asking questions,etc.), but every single post I ever made to that forum (in multiple threads) happened to disappear at the same time. :roll: And I was not invited to start a new thread to replace it. Was this a case of coincidence or quashing? I don't know, but considering the content of the suddenly vanished thread it seemed suspicious.

Whether the disappearance of my thread was or was not a case of quashing doesn't really matter, but If it was, I don't believe it was an organized conspiracy. Like most "politically correct" activities, sabotaging discussion of collaborators likely isn't the result of many people conspiring, but the work of an uncomfortable but vocal few.

There are still many people out there who do not want to hear about collaborators. I think it's safe to say that Jewish collaborators during the Holocaust were the extreme minority, but they did exist. For students, teachers and writers of history, it is important to recognize this. We don't have to make them our chief focus, but it is really foolish to deny, prevent or destroy the record of their existence, or pretend that every victim was a saint.

We should remember that wherever there has been a murderous terror regime in the history of the world, there have also been collaborators. Just like the people involved, their motives were varied, but they did exist, and - like it or not - they do have a legitimate place in the historical record. As Simon Dubnow wrote "Write and record!"

[Simon K]

Good post Sylvie, and I agree with what you have to say.
My main concern is that such research into "collaborationism"if taken to extremes,and without due regard to context is that it runs the risk of subliminally reinforcing the notion that the Jewish population were somehow complicit in the Holocaust.
Such a view would presumably be popular in present day Tehran, but it doesnt advance our knowledge of the subject in any significant sense. At worse it can be seen to be counterproductive.

[David Thompson]

I don't know that the cover-up premise has much to support it. Here are the results of a few internet-only Google searches:

jewish ghetto police – 2,090 entries
ghetto administration – 2,180 entries
judenrat – 71,300 entries
kapos – 1,800,000 entries

Furthermore, the unsavory role of collaborators are only a small part of the main story in countries under foreign occupation. There aren't many books on American tories during the revolutionary war. I don't recall having seen many books about Chinese, Filipinos, British, Australian or Dutch who cooperated with the Japanese occupation, nor are there any great number of books about French, Belgian, Dutch, Czech, Italian, Yugoslav, Polish, Ukrainian, Belorussian, Norwegian or Danish collaborators in WWII, either. That gets us to the question regarding Jewish collaborators, "So what?"

[sylvieK4]

Good post Sylvie, and I agree with what you have to say.
My main concern is that such research into "collaborationism"if taken to extremes,and without due regard to context is that it runs the risk of subliminally reinforcing the notion that the Jewish population were somehow complicit in the Holocaust.
Such a view would presumably be popular in present day Tehran, but it doesnt advance our knowledge of the subject in any significant sense. At worse it can be seen to be counterproductive.

Thanks, Simon. I completely understand your concerns. As we know, there are a lot of people out there who are ready to take any excuse to deny - or at least attack the validity of - the Holocaust, how many Jews died, or how much the victims actually suffered. That is surely the root of most opposition to discussion of Jewish collaborators: some will point to the behavior of a few and apply it to all of the Jews. And aren't we familiar with that scenario? A few Jews collaborated with the Roman occupiers, and how many countless Jews have suffered persecution, brutality and murder as "Christ killers" since?

The crucifixion of Jesus was a Roman act, yet generations of Jews were collectively held responsible by those who preferred to blame the victims rather than the true aggressors. Modern persecutors want us to believe that the aggressors would have had no power without the aid of the victims. Thus they seek to attack the victims further.

I agree with your comment about counterproductivity. Discussion of Jewish collaboration will always be a sore spot in some circles. Many people fear that, just as the "Christ killer" myth took on a vicious life of its own in the past (and argueably in the present), discussion of Jewish collaboration during the Holocaust could be similarly used to fuel anti-Jewish hatred.

Like you, I believe that evaluating Jewish collaboration, should be done so by keeping its scale and extent in proper (realistic) perspective. Proportionately, very few Jews collaborated, and those who did were not the key to carrying out Nazi anti-Jewish policies or murder. Their existence cannot - and, for the record, should not - be denied, but at the same time, to exaggerate their role is historically innaccurate and only serves the enemies of the Jews.

EDIT: Oh dear! Grammar & word choice correction.

[Simon K]

Chili et al have provided (perhaps unwittingly) evidence of Jewish suspicions of collaboration by Polish co- citizens.
Has this been explored? How far did the Catholic church condone (wittingly or unwittingly by its "belief system?") measures and attitudes. which stigmatised and made "other" the Jewish population.
Please note..this is not an attack on ANYONE. But it perhaps has more relevance to the study of the Holocaust than the dead - end of Jewish "collaboration"

[jola]

Try a good book on the subject:

"Patterns of Cooperation, Collaboration and Betrayal:
Jews, Germans and Poles in Occupied Poland during World War II."
by Mark Paul

In PDF format: http://www.glaukopis.pl/index.php?menu_id=5&id=4

Here is a excerpt:


Collaboration with the Germans in occupied Poland is a topic that has not been adequately explored by
historians.2 Holocaust literature has dwelled almost exclusively on the conduct of Poles toward Jews and
has often arrived at sweeping and unjustified conclusions. At the same time, with a few notable exceptions
such as Isaiah Trunk3 and Raul Hilberg,4 whose findings confirmed what Hannah Arendt had written about the Jewish Councils (Judenräte—Judenrat in the singular),5 Holocaust historians have shied away from the
topic of Jewish collaboration with the Germans. With few exceptions, Holocaust survivors are also in
denial about this phenomenon.6 This dark chapter of the wartime history of Jews is one that merits closer
scrutiny.
In this study the author has compiled examples illustrating the various forms of cooperation,
collaboration and betrayal that turned Jews into a source of danger for fellow Jews, and less often for Poles,
and facilitated the machinery of the Holocaust. By and large, it makes little sense to speak of economic
collaboration in the context of occupied Poland, since that very term implies at least some degree of mutual
profit, and that possibility was excluded for both Poles and Jews from the outset. This compilation, which
is far from comprehensive, is not intended to demonstrate that such behaviour was somehow representative
of the Jewish population, or that Jews (or Poles for that matter) had a particular propensity for such
conduct. Rather it is meant to show that the actions of a tiny minority of the Jewish population were
instrumental in inflicting significant, perhaps enormous, losses on the Jewish population.
The actions of these individuals, often carried out in extreme conditions and under duress, facilitated the
Holocaust much more than the activities of their Polish counterparts, which areall too frequently blown out
of proportion, while the former are glossed over. Jews played an incomparably larger role than Poles in the
ghettoization of the Jews, the day-to-day functioning of the ghettos, and their liquidation.7 The role of Jewish collaborators (police, councils) in the actual liquidation of the ghettos, however, was probably
smaller than that of collaborators from among the neighbouring, non-Polish population, primarily
Ukrainians, Lithuanians, and Latvians, operating in the lands of occupied Polish. On the other hand, Poles,
in particular the Polish police, did not take part in the liquidation of any of the larger ghettos on Polish
territories (such as Warsaw, Łódz, Lwów, Wilno, Białystok, Lublin, Sosnowiec, Kraków, and many
others), nor did Poles works as guards at the infamous death and concentration camps.
The Poles did not play a pivotal, or even significant, role in the Holocaust of the Jews. (This is in stark
contrast to the situation that existed in almost every other occupied country, for example the Baltic States,
Holland, Norway, France, Romania, Slovakia, Ukraine and Hungary, where the Germans relied very
heavily on local collaborators to carry out round-ups of Jews, deportations, and even mass executions.)
Many, if not most Polish Jews, were readily distinguishable from Poles, even to Germans, by reason of
their distinctive dress, beards, physical appearance, and lack of knowledge of the Polish language. Jews
tended to live among fellow Jews and their homes bore mezuzahs so there was no particular need for Poles
to point them out. The creation of ghettos and deportation of Jews to death camps were not dependent on
Polish collaboration. These tasks were assigned for the most part to the German-appointed Jewish councils
(Judenräte) and the Jewish ghetto police (the so-called order police or Ordnungsdienst—OD).8 Jewish
officials compiled accurate and detailed list of Jews in a particular town, carefully noting such matters as
their wealth, residency status, age, sex, and occupation, with changes of residency being reported monthly.9
The liquidation of the ghettos was overseen by the Germans who employed numerous German forces, the
Jewish police, and auxiliaries of various nationalities (Ukrainian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian) brought in
for this purpose. The involvement of the Polish “blue” police was, in the assessment of leading Jewish
historians such as Szymon Datner and Raul Hilberg, marginal.10 Paradoxically, it was in Poland, where the Germans built their largest death and concentration camps for purely logistical reasons, that Jewish
collaboration became most visible and lethal.
There is no question that, on the whole, Jews had to contend with Jewish collaborators far more
frequently than with Polish ones, and that those Jews who did not venture out of the ghettos—and the vast
majority did not—would likely have never encountered a Polish collaborator or denouncer. Generally
speaking, there were four large internal sources of danger for the Jews: the Jewish councils, the Jewish
auxiliary police, Jewish agents and informants, and miscellaneous Jewish betrayers. The moral choices and
dilemmas that individual Jews who cooperated, collaborated or betrayed, faced in these circumstances is a
topic that falls outside the scope of this study.11 From the victims’ perspective it mattered little whether
collaboration or denunciation was forced or voluntary, or something in between. Without a recognition of
this phenomenon, any treatment of wartime Polish-Jewish relations is seriously flawed.
The fate of Polish Jews was not dependent on the Poles, nor were Polish attitudes something that the
Germans troubled themselves with. As Raul Hilberg notes, “There was no imperative to be mindful of the
welfare of Poles,” and thus “no need for precautions whenever anti-Jewish measures could have painful
repercussions for the non-Jewish population.”12 Contrary to what is often claimed, the Polish population
was not supportive of German policies towards the Jews. General Johannes Blaskowitz, commander of the
Eighth German Army during the September 1939 campaign and subsequently Commander-in-Chief of the
Eastern Territories, wrote to Field Marshal Walter von Brauchitsch, the Commander-in-Chief of the
German Army, in his report of February 6, 1940: “The acts of violence carried out in public against Jews
are arousing in religious Poles [literally, “in the Polish population, which is fundamentally pious (or Godfearing)”]
not only the deepest disgust but also a great sense of pity for the Jewish population.”13

[jola]

Now back to the subject.

From the same Mark Paul book:

"On February 19, 1944, a Home Army cell consisting of more than a dozen people was discovered by the
Gestapo on Bracka Street in Warsaw after being betrayed by two Jewish women who had infiltrated the
unit posing as escapees from the Warsaw ghetto. In actual fact, the women were Gestapo agents working
with a 40-member group of Jewish agents headed by Leon (or Lolek) Skosowski of the notorious
“Thirteen” (about which there is more later). Some of the Poles who were apprehended were executed

The most notorious concentration of Jewish collaborators in Warsaw was “The Thirteen” (Trzynastka—
or “number thirteen”), a name derived from their premises on 13 Leszno Street. Ostensibly this was the
Office for Combatting Usury and Profiteering (Preisüberwachungsstelle) in the Jewish District, established
by the Gestapo shortly after the creation of the ghetto in November 1940 to fight the black market. Its staff comprised about 300–400 persons (perhaps even as many as 500, according to Raul Hilberg). “The
Thirteen” furnished information to the Germans while also providing a range of welfare services. In this
way, it aimed to supplant both the Jewish police and even the Judenrat itself. It provided to the Germans
detailed reports about the internal life of the ghetto, especially the underground and illegal activities. The
tentacles of that organization reached every aspect of ghetto life and it even achieved a certain degree of
popularity because of its promotion of Jewish culture and other aspects of Jewish life. “The Thirteen”
created an atmosphere that encouraged informant activity, which became the scourge of the ghetto. Some
historians even called them “The Jewish Gestapo.”
“The Thirteen” was headed by Abraham Gancwajch (Ganzweich), a former teacher and Zionist journalist
who became a gangster-like figure. He entertained rabbis, artists and the culturally prominent at lavish
feasts, while at the same time engaging in a wide array of extortion inside the ghetto (such as bullying
people into paying fines and blackmail). The staff of “The Thirteen” began extorting more and more
money. In December 1941, Ringelblum noted that they had begun taking a 25 percent cut of the goods
stored in underground warehouses, plus 25 percent for soup kitchens, leaving the owners with the
remaining 50 percent. A few days later, Ringelblum wrote that in confiscating Jewish property, on the
Aryan side of Warsaw, “The Thirteen” took one-third for itself, handed one-third to the Germans, and left
only one-third with the owners. By March 1941, their corruption was entirely out in the open, sending
people out to bakeries to forcibly take bread for themselves and standing at the ghetto’s exit points and
taking bribes. Gancwajch was also an ideological ally of the Nazis who called on Jews to cooperate, as the
Germans were going to win the war. Gancwajch collected hefty sums in exchange for promising to lobby
for releasing Jews from prison (although his success rate was moderate), obtaining permits and other
favours. He lived a privileged life; the ghetto buzzed with talk about his son’s lavish bar mitzvah in May
1941, held during Shavuot (the Feast of Weeks) when other Jewish children lay starving in the streets. On
the other hand, he handed out free bread to the poor and supported cultural and literary activities.
“The Thirteen” formed their own 300 to 400 member strong police, headed by Dawid Sternfeld, formerly
of the Łódz underworld, whose activities were separate from those of the Ordnungsdienst. Sternfeld’s
closest associate was Gojcherman. Those policemen, says Jonas Turkow, “Were fat fellows, debauched,
mostly from the lowest low of the underworld.” In return for a sizable amount of money, policemen cast a
blind eye toward smugglers, and at times even cooperated with them. If other smugglers were arrested,
these policemen would charge a fee—often thousands of złoty—for not handing them over to the Germans.
They extorted hush money from various ghetto craftsmen. They arrested Jews and released them in return
for thousands of złoty in ransom money. The upper echelons of “The Thirteen” and its police force were
patrons of expensive restaurants and coffee-houses of the ghetto. Ringelblum related:
At the “Britania” hotel at 18 Nowolipie Street they’ve opened a club in the basement that is little
more than a whorehouse. It’s open until 7:00 in the morning, and the owners are Leszno 13 folks.

“The Thirteen” would often appear with Germans and Jewish policemen, who were partners in their
transactions. One Jewish policeman, who was on friendly terms with both “The Thirteen” and SS,
frequented their parties in the ghetto:
I remember walking with Jedrus in the street once, when a fellow waved at him and said: “Hello,
Jedrus!” “Hello, Jas,” Jedrus replied. “Who was it?” I asked because I was intrigued that they
greeted each other like friends. “Oh, it’s an SS man I know, but in plain clothes.” …
It’s interesting that at those parties of theirs—so I was told by Jedrus—occasionally SS men
appeared as acquaintances of the young people. They socialized with the Jewish youths.537

Gancwajch’s closest collaborators were the aforementioned Moryc Kohn and Zelik Heller from Łódz;
Zachariasz and B. Szymonowicz, from Radomsko; the lawyer Herbert Stahrer from Gdansk (Danzig), who
acted as Grancwajch’s legal adviser and secretary general; and the writer Jehuda Warszawiak, his press
secretary. Other collaborators of “The Thirteen,” which included many Jews from Łódz and some from
Germany, included: Gonsiorowicz, from Radomsko; Stanisław Boraks, a lawyer from Warsaw; Lewin, a
lawyer from Wilno; Lewin, a lawyer from Warsaw; Mandel, an engineer; Margules, a sock manufacturer
from Łódz; Gurwicz (Górowicz), from Wilno; Koenigl (Kenigel), from Lwów; Reichman (Rajchman),
from Łódz; the Pruanski (Próanski) brothers, from Warsaw; Leon Skosowski, from Łódz; Hendel; Kaner;
the Erlich brothers; Wolf Szymonowicz, from Radomsko; Stroter, a lawyer; M. Lejzerowicz; Dr. Feldszuh;
Kleinweksler, a lawyer; Bramson, a lawyer; Reszal, a lawyer; Dr. Sirota; Katz; Bialer. According to
historian Adam Rutkowski, there were “many, many others.”539
As mentioned, many of these people maintained close contacts with the Gestapo, and were indeed its
agents. The agents Kohn and Heller, for instance, did not hesitate to draw up lists of people to be
eliminated by the Gestapo. Both Gancwajch and Dawid Szternfeld are believed to have blackmailed and
betrayed Jews hiding on the “Aryan” side.540 As Jonas Turkow points out, “The Thirteen” targeted both
Jews and Poles:
Leon Skosowski and Kenigl were very officially collaborators of the SD [Sicherheitsdienst, i.e., the
security service unit of the SS] and were more often on the ‘Aryan’ side than in the ghetto. Their
task consisted in denouncing Jews who found themselves on the ‘Aryan’ side and denouncing Poles
who engaged in political [underground] activities."

[Ahf]

Most books I’ve read and documentaries I’ve seen on the Holocaust have covered the problem of collaboration by the Judenrat, the Jewish police, speculators, Jews who betrayed Jews in hiding, inside and outside, the ghetto. It’s hardly a secret and no one is in denial about it.

[Artur Szulc]

Ahf wrote,

Most books I’ve read and documentaries I’ve seen on the Holocaust have covered the problem of collaboration by the Judenrat, the Jewish police, speculators, Jews who betrayed Jews in hiding, inside and outside, the ghetto. It’s hardly a secret and no one is in denial about it.

Interesting, can you please give us the titles of the those books and documentaries.

I have also read books that mentions the problem of collaboration by Jews, but it has been books not specifically about jewish collaboration.

Cheers,

Chili

[jola]

One watered down site on Thirteen- the Jewish Gestapo unit.

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org ... The13.html


Yeah right, there are workshops in every school on the Jewish Gestapo.

[jola]

In "Notes from the Warsaw Ghetto the Journal of Emmanuel Ringelblum" :

Ringelblum mentions positive Polish attitudes and helpful Polish actions towards Jews many times (p. 21, pp. 51-52, p. 64, 66, 91, 137, 152, 199, 216-217, 322-323). In terms of generalizations, at least some Jews believed that most local Poles were good to the Jews (May 15, 1941): "The Catholics displayed a far-reaching tolerance...Mr. Isaac estimates the percentage of saintly gentiles in Starograd at 95 per cent." (p. 170). Polish organizations are credited with doing away with Polish blackmailers (October 15, 1942; p. 322).

Ringelblum alludes to the Germans' torching of a synagogue in Lodz and then blaming the Poles for it in an attempt to divide Poles and Jews (p. 39). He also never loses sight of the fact that Poles were also victims of the Germans. He discusses the privations and mass murders of Poles, notably of the Polish intelligentsia, numerous times (p. 21, 26, p. 30, pp. 38-39, 137, 145, 154, 169, 259, 288). The Poles realized that they were "next" when they saw the Jews ghettoized (p. 91).

All illegal acts had to be conducted away from the prying eyes of the Germans and their informers of various nationalities. Ringelblum spoke of Jewish informers (p. 251, 339-340), Jewish Gestapo agents (p. 182, pp. 280-281), and the search for Jews hiding within the ghetto (December 14, 1942): "In 90 percent of the cases it was the Jewish police who uncovered the hideouts. First they found out where the hideouts were; then they passed the information along to the Ukrainians and Germans." (pp. 340-341). Ringelblum doesn't mention the fact that Jewish agents, specially trained for the unmasking of hideouts, were also sent to Polish urban areas, and into fields and forests, in order to uncover Jews hidden by Poles.

In common with other chroniclers, Ringelblum's harshest criticisms are directed against fellow Jews (September 22, 1942): "The Jewish police had a very bad name even before the resettlement. The Polish police didn't take part in the forced-work press gangs, but the Jewish police engaged in that ugly business. Jewish policemen also distinguished themselves with their fearful corruption and immorality. But they reached the height of viciousness during the resettlement...And now people are wracking their brains to understand how Jews, most of them men of culture, former lawyers (most of the police officers were lawyers before the war) could have done away with their brothers with their own hands...Very often, the cruelty of the Jewish police exceeded that of the Germans, Ukrainians, and Letts...For the most part, the Jewish police showed an incomprehensible brutality." (pp. 329-331).

Owing to the actions of the Jewish ghetto police, a relatively small number of Germans and their Ukrainian and Baltic collaborators sufficed to send over 300,000 Warsaw Jews to their deaths at Treblinka (October 15, 1942): "Why could 50 S. S. [SS] men (some people say even fewer), with the help of a division of some 200 Ukrainian guards and an equal number of Letts, carry out the operation out so smoothly?" (p. 310).

During the actual extermination process, there was the Jewish outcry over the fact that the world was not doing anything to stop it. But even what later became known as the Holocaust was at first contextualized by Ringelblum (June 25, 1942): "Why should the world be shaken by our suffering when rivers of blood are spilled daily on every battlefield? In what respect is our Jewish blood more precious than that of the Russian, Chinese, English soldiers?" (p. 296).

[jola]

Now, when prof. Hannah Arendt pointed in "Eichman in Jerusalem" how servile obedience of the Judenrate, in cooperation with the Germans made the deportations to the camps so efficient," she was ostratacized by the Jewish community.

"
On collaboration by the Judenrat officials, Dr. Arendt wrote:

‘To a Jew this role of the Jewish leaders in the destruction of their own people is undoubtedly the darkest chapter of the whole dark story. It had been known about before, but it has now been exposed for the first time in all its pathetic and sordid detail by Raul Hilberg, whose standard work The Destruction of the European Jews I mentioned before. In the matter of cooperation, there was no distinction between the highly assimilated Jewish communities of Central and Western Europe and the Yiddish-speaking masses of the East. In Amsterdam as in Warsaw, in Berlin as in Budapest, Jewish officials could le trusted to compile the lists of persons and of their property, to secure money from the deportees to defray the expenses of their deportation and extermination, to keep track of vacated apartments, to supply police forces to help seize Jews and get them on trains, until, as a last gesture, they handed over the assets of the Jewish community in good order for final confiscation. They distributed the Yellow Star badges, and sometimes, as in Warsaw, ‘the sale of the armbands became a regular business; there were ordinary armbands of cloth and fancy plastic armbands which were washable’.

In the Nazi-inspired, but not Nazi-dictated, manifestoes they issued, we still can sense how they enjoyed their new power – ‘The. Central Jewish Council has been granted the right of absolute disposal over all Jewish spiritual and material wealth and over all Jewish manpower’, as the first announcement of the Budapest Council phrased it. We know how the Jewish officials felt when they became instruments of murder - like captains ‘whose ships were about to sink and who succeeded in bringing them safe to port by casting overboard a great part of their precious cargo’; like saviors who ‘with a hundred victims save a thousand people, with a thousand ten thousand’. The truth was even more gruesome. Dr. Kastner, in Hungary, for instance, saved exactly 1,684 people with approximately 476,000 victims. In order not to leave the selection to ‘blind fate’, ‘truly holy principles’ were needed 'as the guiding force of the weak human hand which puts down on paper the name of the unknown person and with this decides his life or death’, And whom did these ‘holy principles’ single out for salvation? Those ‘who had worked all their lives for the zibur ' (community)' - i.e., the functionaries - and the ‘most prominent Jews’, as Kastner says in his report.
No one bothered to swear the Jewish officials to secrecy; they were voluntary ‘bearers of secrets’, either in order to assure quiet and prevent panic, as in Dr. Kastner's case, or out of ‘humane’ considerations, such as that ‘living in the expectation of death by gassing would only be the harder’, as in the case of Dr. Leo Baeck, former Chief Rabbi of Berlin. During the Eichmann trial, one witness pointed out the unfortunate consequences of this kind of ‘humanity’ - people volunteered for deportation from Theresienstadt to Auschwitz and denounced those who tried to tell them the truth as being ‘not sane’.

We know the physiognomies of the Jewish leaders during the Nazi period very well; they ranged all the way from Chaim Rumkowski, Eldest of the Jews in Lodz, called Chaim I, who issued currency notes bearing his signature and postage stamps engraved with his portrait, and who rode around in a broken-down horse-drawn carriage; through Leo Baeck, scholarly, mild-mannered, highly educated, who believed Jewish policemen would be ‘more gentle and helpful’ and would ‘make the ordeal easier’ (whereas in fact they were, of course, more brutal and less corruptible, since so much more was at stake for them); to, finally, a few who committed suicide - like Adam Czerniakow, chairman of the Warsaw Jewish Council, who was not a rabbi but an unbeliever, a Polish-speaking Jewish engineer, but who must still have remembered the rabbinical saying: ‘Let them kill you, but don't cross the line’.13

Dr. Arendt's conclusion was that without this collaboration, many lives could have been saved:
'But the whole truth was that there existed Jewish community organizations and Jewish party and welfare organizations on both the local and the international level. Wherever Jews lived, there were recognized Jewish leaders and this leadership, almost without exception, cooperated in one way or another, for one reason or another, with the Nazis. The whole truth was that if the Jewish people had leally been unorganized and leaderless, there would have been chaos and plenty of misery but the total number of victims would hardly have been between four and a half, and six million people.'14

This wasn't that well received.

As Hannah Arendt comments in the New York Review of Books, 20 January, 1966:

‘In other words, as everybody soon knew and repeated, my ‘thesis’ was that the Jews had murdered themselves.'


This sort of response is fairly typical of the Zionist reaction when questions about Nazi collaboration are raised. Although the first attacks on Hannah Arendt's book described it as an ‘otherwise masterly report’ and said that ‘Dr. Arendt is a recognized scholar’ and ‘a person of eminent respectability’, by the end of the campaign they had to prove that the ‘evil book’ was written by an ‘evil person’.

Whole books were written by various ‘experts’ to refute her.19

In ‘The Jew as Pariah’ she describes the campaign against her:

'No one will doubt the effectiveness of modern image-making, and no one acquainted with Jewish organizations and their countless channels of communication outside, their immediate range will underestimate their possibilities in influencing public opinion. For greater than their direct power of control is the voluntary outside help upon which they can draw from Jews who, though they may not be at all interested in Jewish affairs, will flock home, as it were, out of age-old fears (no longer justified, let us hope, but still very much alive) when their people or its leaders are criticized. What I had done, according to their lights was the crime of crimes. I had told ‘the truth in a hostile environment,’ as an Israeli official told me, and what the A.D.L. and all the other organizations did was to hoist the danger signal…


Does that explain a little why there is so few studies of this subject.

Source: http://www.lastsuperpower.net/docs/nzc4hannaharendt

[Simon K]

Jola
Good sources but at the risk of repitition what is new here?

[Artur Szulc]

Good sources but at the risk of repitition what is new here?

Why must it be "new"?

Just like I wrote in my first post, the knowledge on jewish collaboration is not widely spread, known etc. Nor does teachers bring this important issue up to discussion.

Some years ago the Swedish government published a book on the Holocaust: "Tell ye your children..."
http://www.levandehistoria.se/files/engelska.pdf

How many references to the Judenräte can be found? (Yes, the Judenräte is mentioned, I know); but:
How many references to the Thirteen can be found?
How many references to the Zagiew can be found?
How many references to Jewish spies can be found?

This book was distributed to every school in Sweden and if I do not remember wrong, to every household.

Cheers,

Chili

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Jola,

No, you are still dealing in generalisations about Jews that are no more than opinion and offering no facts in support.

You write, "about the Jewish community burying Jewish collaboration in the archives" without offering any evidence whatsoever.

It seems to me that your repeated unsupported generalisations about contemporary Jews are teaching us rather more about your prejudices than this thread is about Jewish collaboration.

I repeat:

"There are two strands to your posts.

1) A reporting of facts. Nobody has any objection to that.

2) Your insertion of unsupported personal opinion that goes beyond the facts as you present them. This is where you are tripping yourself up.

Stick to demonstrable hard facts and you can't go far wrong."

Cheers,

Sid.

P.S. What primary archives have you personally used?