Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
User avatar
waldzee
Banned
Posts: 1422
Joined: 03 Feb 2012 03:44
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by waldzee » 29 Mar 2012 09:38

michael mills wrote:
The Madagascar plan was unworkable ......
Only as long as Britain controlled the sealanes and could prevent movement out of Europe.

Once Britain had made peace, the sealanes would have been opened, and the transport of Jews to Madagascar could have commenced. As part of the peace settlement, Britain and France could have been required to provide logisitical support in the form of shipping, accommodation, food etc.

Before the war, one-third of the Jews in Poland, about one million persons, were supported by charity from Jewish organisation outside Poland, mainly in the United States. That charitable support could just as easily have been supplied to those same Jews relocated to Madagascar.

Settling four million Jews in Madagascar was no more unworkable than settling the same number in an undeveloped place like Palestine.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Corsica was in easy reach in 1940- but it appears it ws too livable. Mike, - four months after Goebbles 'statement,' the SD was filling the death pits at Rumbala with 30,000 plus fresh corpses & blaming the slaughter on "your wild Latvian uprising''
You have to look at the actual outcomes to separate the 'cover stories' from the actual events. I am sure you are sincere, but the side blinders are on a little tight.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8819
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by michael mills » 29 Mar 2012 10:39

In July 1940, Governor-General Frank believed that the war with Britain would soon end, and the transportation of the Jews of occupied Poland to an overseas destination would begin.

On 30 November 1941, some 17 months later, most of the Jews of the Riga Ghetto were massacred at Rumbula. A very different outcome from the one envisaged by Frank in July 1940.

Why had that change come about in the intervening period of 17 months?

In the first place, the war with Britain had not come to an end, it was still going on. Although there was not much fighting going on between German and British forces, except at a relatively low level on the Libyan coast, Britain still controlled the seas and maintained a blockade of German-occupied Europe. Most importantly as far as the Jews under German control were concerned, the British blockade prevented their emigration from German-controlled territory, except for very small groups.

On top of that, Germany was now at war with the Soviet Union, and that war was not going well; the Red Army had not collapsed completely, and Germany had failed to conquer areas where it had planned to warehouse Jews temporarily. But as late as August 1941, while the invasion of the Soviet Union was still going well, the SD was still thinking of transporting the Jews of Europe, including those of the Soviet Union, to a destination outside Europe after the end of the war; in the meantime it was planned to hold them in remote rural camps.

The situation in November 1941 was thus very different from that in July 1940, and German actions against Jews at the later date cannot be read back into German intentions toward them in the period just after the defeat of France.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 4675
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by wm » 29 Mar 2012 11:12

michael mills wrote:The report of the Polish commission was utterly meaningless, since it did not carry out any investigation whatever, simply relying on what it was told by the French administration.
They conducted a throughout investigation, the suitable for settlement places were identified (central and northern regions) and there were a trial run in Madagascar. A dozen or so Polish settlers migrated there in 1936 and their adaptation to the new environment was observed.
The main problem was that the local environment was as alien as the surface of Mars, so their experience and knowledge were completely useless. The commision adopted a fundamental assumption that the settlements climate had to be as similar as possible to the Central-European, so at least part of the settlers knowledge would be useful and they could become self sufficient quickly (for example the selected regions had a low mean annual temperature - 18 degree Celsius).
This assumption was a severe limitation but after all they were trying to help the Jews, not exterminate them...

In the end they concluded that as a place for settlement for the Polish Jews/peasants Madagascar was unsuitable. The island could accommodate a few tens of thousands families but not more than that.
michael mills wrote:The existing French colonists were opposed to the idea of handing Madagascar over to Poland for the settlement of Polish Jews and surplus Polish peasants, so naturally they gave an exaggeratedly negative description to the Polish commission in the hope of discouraging them, in which endeavour they were entirely successful.
I do not think it was a problem. The two best Polish tropical experts were working for the commission, Mieczysław Lepecki and Arkady Fidler, both proficient writers on the subject. They would not be fooled by this.
michael mills wrote:In fact, the existing French colonists were able to live on Madagascar quite comfortably, without being struck down by disease and without dying in large numbers. The highlands of Madagascar have a sub-tropical climate similar to that of the Kenyan Highlands, entirley suited to European settlement.
Unfortunately it is not true:
in 1914, French authorities allowed the government to provide the Malagasy people with their first representative figure and voice in the political sector, despite much uproar and controversy among the French in Madagascar at the time.
French economic aspirations at the time were strained by external and internal forces, particularly the fluctuating economy. [...] the French struggled in many labor sectors. The labor demands from the Malagasy conflicted with labor requirements for Europeans.
Another setback to French settlers at the time was the climate. French farmers particularly faced the brunt of this. Several cyclones destroyed crops, placing affected French farmers in much financial trouble. During the depression of the 1930s, the colonial administration favored coffee over cash crops.

michael mills wrote:But in case wm has not noticed, the present Jewish State has received billions of dollars support every year for decades, mainly from the United States Government and there is no sign of that support ending. There is no reason why that support could not have gone to a Jewish settlement in Madagascar.
The main reason is that they would have to wait till 1971, before that the support was nothing more than peanuts. Earlier the main source of support were the German reparations.

User avatar
The_Enigma
Member
Posts: 2270
Joined: 14 Oct 2007 14:59
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by The_Enigma » 29 Mar 2012 16:29

During the 1940-41 period the Royal Navy had not established control of the Mediterranean, the Italian navy was still a threat; Malta was under siege; Crete had fallen; the British, Germans and Italians had demonstrated that without adequate air cover Britain’s naval power was somewhat reduced; sending ships across the breath of the Sea had resulted in numerous losses. The Royal Navy did not operate in the Baltic and the Soviet fleet had been bottled up.

My question therefore is if the Nazi regime was so intent on just ethnic cleansing rather than mass murder, which they resorted to and were not forced to do, why did some sort of exportation started to any of the Greek Islands or to Norway? With the Vichy regime being in the Nazi pocket, why did no exportation take place to Corsica, Sardinia, or French North Africa or, prior to the British led invasion, French Middle East territories?

I would inclined to suggest that surely some sort of small scale experiment, kinda like open air shootings and mobile gas chambers, would have made sense before moving full scale?

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 961
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by Gorque » 29 Mar 2012 16:57

The_Enigma wrote:My question therefore is if the Nazi regime was so intent on just ethnic cleansing rather than mass murder, which they resorted to and were not forced to do, why did some sort of exportation started to any of the Greek Islands or to Norway? With the Vichy regime being in the Nazi pocket, why did no exportation take place to Corsica, Sardinia, or French North Africa or, prior to the British led invasion, French Middle East territories?
France, although a defeated and partially occupied great power, was afforded special treatment because of France’s political and economic importance as well as the possibility of enlisting the independent rump as a junior partner in an anti-British bloc.

While the war continued, the Germans were unable, in terms of manpower, to establish the same level of executive administration with a large staff in the lands external to the Reich and the annexed lands. What was practiced instead, including those areas slated for Lebensraum, was the use of existing or newly created native institutions for the day-to-day administration. Direct rule was exercised only in those areas where the Germans had a special interest or where native cooperation could not be expected. Depending on the political program, the native attitude and the assessment thereof, direct and supervisory administration varied. Those peoples slated for inclusion into the Greater Germanic Empire or those whose fate had not been determined, were supervised.

Other factors that determined the level of administration in the non-annexed occupied lands were: the war aims of the Reich; the increasing lack of personnel, due to enlistment for the war effort and war casualties; attractiveness of the occupied land and; payment of special bonuses.

Direct administration, and therefore a lack of personnel, was practiced in the Government-General and on Soviet soil. Supervisory administration was practiced in Bohemia, Moravia, Denmark, France and Norway. Here the Germans appointed compliant national governments or granted the next level of officials, i.e., State or General Secretaries with sufficient powers to enable them in their capacity to ensure continued operation of public administration and cooperation with the Reich authorities within the framework of international law. This arrangement also allowed for the enactment and enforcement of un-popular war edicts by the native authorities. The native population, however, came to blame both the Germans and the collaboration authorities.

I would inclined to suggest that surely some sort of small scale experiment, kinda like open air shootings and mobile gas chambers, would have made sense before moving full scale?
Aktion T-4 could be considered to fill that role.

User avatar
The_Enigma
Member
Posts: 2270
Joined: 14 Oct 2007 14:59
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by The_Enigma » 29 Mar 2012 17:14

I am very much inclinded to agree with your latter point.

Your initial point i am somewhat confused by. My understanding is that Germany barked and the Vichy regimed followed suit, something, which resulted in French Jews being indentifed during 1940 and eventually roundedup and exported.

One further ponders, since the Nazis apparently only initially wanted to get rid of the Jewish people within the Reich why did they move from solving their own domestic "problem" (including the greater Reich including Poland) to deciding to solve all of Europe's "Jewish problem" ala the export of Jewish people from the Balkans, France, the low countries, Hungary etc etc.

User avatar
Gorque
Member
Posts: 961
Joined: 11 Feb 2009 18:20
Location: Clocktown

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by Gorque » 29 Mar 2012 18:48

The_Enigma wrote:Your initial point i am somewhat confused by. My understanding is that Germany barked and the Vichy regimed followed suit, something, which resulted in French Jews being indentifed during 1940 and eventually roundedup and exported.
The Gestapo and the Foreign Office personnel encouraged the actions of anti-Semites in France. As the Germans wanted the ‘de-Judaization’ of France to be viewed as originating from the French and so allowed the French government a say in the asset confiscations and the appointments of the trustees. In this regard, the French created a new agency; Service de Contrôle (des Administrateurs Provisoirs) for this purpose. The Vichy government after mid-July 1940 began measures that would exclude immigrated Jews from civil service and from French citizenship. This was followed up in October 1940 with the enactment of a statute that defined ‘Jew” in terms broader than used by the Germans. Additional measures were the internment of non-French Jews, the revocation of citizenship for immigrated Jews, removing of the ban on anti-Semitic propaganda and dismissing of Jews employed in the civil services. All Jewish immigrants who arrived in France after 1936 were to be interned. By the end of 1941, the native authorities also established a compulsory association of Jews, the Union des Israelites de France.

However when it came to deporting French Jews, Vichy and the authorities in occupied France changed their tune in late '42 and refused to willingly hand over the native Jewish population. Deportations to the East then dropped-off dramatically.

One further ponders, since the Nazis apparently only initially wanted to get rid of the Jewish people within the Reich why did they move from solving their own domestic "problem" (including the greater Reich including Poland) to deciding to solve all of Europe's "Jewish problem" ala the export of Jewish people from the Balkans, France, the low countries, Hungary etc etc.
That's a good question regarding the Balkans as Hitler envisaged a re-arrangement of European political boundaries based upon racial terms. The “Greater Germanic Empire” was envisioned to extend from the North Cape to the Alps and from the Atlantic Ocean to the Black Sea. This expanded Reich would have included the Netherlands, Belgium, Scandanavia, some form of integration of Hungary, Slovakia and, possibly Romania, with Yugoslavia and Greece left to Germany’s allies, i.e., Italy.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8819
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by michael mills » 29 Mar 2012 23:22

Question by "The_Enigma":
My question therefore is if the Nazi regime was so intent on just ethnic cleansing rather than mass murder, which they resorted to and were not forced to do, why did some sort of exportation started to any of the Greek Islands or to Norway? With the Vichy regime being in the Nazi pocket, why did no exportation take place to Corsica, Sardinia, or French North Africa or, prior to the British led invasion, French Middle East territories?
The general answer to this question is that the German Government envisaged a comprehensive solution to the "Jewish Problem" as not capable of implementation until after the end of the war it was engaged in against Britain, an end which of course it expected to be a German victory. In the meantime, its preference was to put that comprehensive solution on hold so that it could concentrate its energies on actually winning the war, which was the necessary precondition for the envisaged solution.

However, the German Government did undertake a number of small-scale steps that definitely fall into the category of "ethnic cleansing".

At the beginning of the attack on Poland, a Sipo unit called the "Einsatzgruppe zur besonderen Verwendung" under the command of Udo von Woyrsch was sent into Upper Silesia, where it began a campaign of terror against the local Jewish population. After the war, von Woyrsch testified that he had been given a secret assignment by Himmler, namely that of terrorising the Jews into fleeing eastward out of the part of Poland assigned to Germany under the appendix to the Moltov-Ribbentrop Pact.

Later in the campaign, other Sipo Einsatzgruppen operated in the area close to the San River, the demarcation line between the German and Soviet spheres under the afore-mentioned pact, with the object of forcing Jews in the area to cross over into the Soviet sphere.

For details on the anti-Jewish operations of the unit commanded by von Woyrsch and the other Sipo units, I recommend consulting the book by Rossino, "Hitler Strikes Poland".

In the period between 1 and 28 September, orders issued by Heydrich indicate a Sipo aim of concentrating all the Jews of western and Central Poland, the part assigned to Germany, in the area east of Krakow. At that time, the eastern boundary of the German zone was constituted by the Vistula and San rivers, and some historians have concluded that the German aim in concentrating the Jews of their zone close to that boundary was to push them en masse across it, as a form of "ethnic cleansing".

After 28 September, the German-Soviet demarcation line was moved eastward to the Bug River, under the terms of the Borders and Friendship Treaty of that day, thereby placing the Lublin district under German rather than Soviet control. From then on, the Lublin district rather than the area east of Krakow became the German Government's designated area for the concentration of the Jewish population.

In October 1939, the German Government openly proclaimed its intention of creating a Jewish "reservation" in the Lublin District, between the Vistula and Bug Rivers. Under its policy of "Volkliche Flurbereinigung" (redistribution of territory according to ethnicity), the German Zone of Occupation in Poland was to be divided into three strips, a western strip, which was to be populated by Germans, a central strip, in which the ethnic Polish population was to be concentrated, and an eastern strip, reserved for the Jews.

According to the openly proclaimed intention of the German Government, all the Jews of the territories then under direct German control (Germany, Austria, Czechia, western and central Poland), an estimated total of two million, was to be concentrated in "Lublin land". The concept of a Jewish reservation was widely discussed in the media at that time, and anti-German propagandists loudly proclaimed that this was a form of covert physical extermination.

However, the underlying German Government purpose was eventually to transfer the Jews concentrated in "Lublin land" into Soviet territory. That is shown by the fact that in the period until the end of 1939, individual German units were pushing groups of Jews across the demarcation line wherever they could. It is also shown at a higher, more official level by the two written requests made by Eichmann's office of Jewish emigration in January 1940 to Chekmenev, the Soviet official in charge of immigration, that the Jewish population of areas under German control be evacuated to Soviet territory under the German-Sovietagreement on population exchanges.

The German Government aim could not be achieved due to the Soviet refusal to accept the proposed transfer of Jews onto its territory.

The whole thrust of German Government policy towards the Jewish population in the parts of Poland that had come under its control indicates that its aim was "ethnic cleansing" through the expulsion of that population from German territory, rather than holding on to it for the purpose of physical extermination at a later time.

The policy of "ethnic cleansing" was entirely consistent with the policy of the German Government from 1933 onward, which was one of encouraging, and where necessary compelling, Jewish emigration from all territory under its control, first from the "Old Reich", then from Austria, finally from Czechia. Heydrich was in control of the program of emigration, ably assisted by Eichmann, and to that end both of them worked in close collaboration with the Wolrd Zionist Organisation and the Jewish Agency for Palestine. Once the policy moved on to "ethnic cleansing" by expulsion in Poland, Heydrich remained in control of that also.

However, Jewish emigration remained a policy option right up until October 1941, although opportunities for it were greatly limited due to the war situation. Small groups of Jews were permitted to emigrate, for example by travelling across the Soviet Union to Vladivostok, from whence they continued to various destinations.

The indications are that between August 1939 and July 1940, the German Government considered that the co-operative relationship established with the Soviet Union would be long-lasting, and that therefore a transfer of the Jewish population of the German-controlled territories, some two million persons, into Soviet territory would provide a long-term solution, since they would no longer be in contact with the German people and would be under the control of a friendly government.

The concept of a transfer of the entire Jewish population of Germany, Austria, Czechia and western and central Poland into the Soviet Union may sound bizarre to us today, given the post-war anti-Soviet attitude of the Jewish Establishment in the West, but in the inter-war period the Jewish Establishment was quite sympathetic to the idea.

In 1919, the Anglo-Jewish leader Lucien Wolf had proposed the mass emigration of the Jewish populations of the newly independent states of Eastern Europe, Poland, Hungary, Romania, into Bolshevik Russia, once the civil war there had ended, on the basis that the Bolshevik regime would be far more Jew-friendly than the East European states. (Wolf also predicted that if the Bolshevik regime in Russia were ever overthrown, there would be a massacre of the Jews on a vaster scale than had ever occurred before, a prediction that came true in 1941-42).

In the mid-1930s, elements in the Soviet Government declared their willingness to take in Jewish immigrants from outside the Soviet Union, especially from Poland, and resettle them in Crimea and/or in the new Jewish "national home" in Birobidjan. Negotiations were held with Agro-Joint, the branch of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee engaed in facilitating Jewish agricultural settlement in the Soviet Union, for the purpose of organising and funding that immigration, but eventually it came to nothing, partly because of the problem of financing the proposed resettlement, and partly because religious Jewish leaders were afraid that the immigrants would become atheists and assimilate, as so many of the Soviet Jews already had.

Given the above background, the German Government concept of a mass movement of the Jews of its territory into Soviet territory does not seem so hare-brained.

After the defeat of France in June 1940, the prospect opened of a movement of Jews into French colonial territories, as an alternative to the concept of a movement into Soviet territory, which had come to nothing because of the Soviet Government's opposition.

One small interim move was made in that direction late in 1940, when Eichmann organised a deportation of a small group of Jews from western German and Alsace-Lorraine into the Unoccupied Zone of France. That movement had not been approved by the French Government, which had not even been informed in advance, and was immediately opposed, with the result that no further such movements took place.

The actions undertaken by the German Government in 1939 and 1940 indicate that its Jewish policy at the time was one of "ethnic cleansing", not preparation for physical extermination. It took a number of tentative interim steps in the direction of pushing Jews out of its territory, but they did not continue because of resistance by the Soviet and French Governments respectively. The full implementation of an organised mass movment of Jews out of German-controlled territory therefore had to be postponed until after a successful conclusion to the war with Britain.

User avatar
The_Enigma
Member
Posts: 2270
Joined: 14 Oct 2007 14:59
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by The_Enigma » 30 Mar 2012 00:36

Intresting replies, however there are few points i am struggling with.

A campaign of terror to push the Jewish people into the land assigned to them or across the border into the USSR raises some questions for me:
1) It seems a gross simplification of what was going on considering things such as Operation Tannenberg were going on, with death squads wandering around attempting to wipe out the intellectuals etc. Granted they were not targeting Jewish people per se, although it highlights the jump to murder is not so much of a leap, along with Action T4.
2) The ghettos do not appear to be just centres for holding people for the long awaiting plan to move Jews to Africa. Glancing the net kind of suggests they were heraded in and left to their own devices without little or any support i.e. suggestions on the net of starvation etc.
3) Why heard them across the border into the USSR if, as the historians seem to agree, the invasion of the USSR was on the cards.

In regards to hearding them together for a future move, again i am puzzeled by my glancing of the net and some replies here:
1) why were the people, as it would seem on the whole, stripped of their belongings and money ... how exactly were they going to support themselves in this new Jewish colony?
2) Considering the Nazi regime was so anti-Jewish, why exactly would they want to fork out to establish a Jewish colony? Who was going to support said colony afterwards? Where was the food going to come from (from my reading of empire, early settlers took what they needed to become self-suffient, was the Nazi regime going to provide this?)?
3) Glancing the net seems to suggest the plan to move them to Madagascar was a pipedream of some and thats it.
4) Why wait until the end of the war when Italian (and Vichy) merchant ships were available and the Med sealines open to North Africa (The French having pioneered the colonisation of Algeria showed organised settlements could work out in the desert and other "unihabinted" lands away from the coast and main cities. There was a lot of "empty" space to "dump" people)?

Although my major point of not understanding here is:
If the Nazi regime was so intent on just moving the Jewish people out to a colony somewhere in Africa (or Poland), and were prepared to wait out the war to its succesful conclusion before doing so ... why did they change policy and decide on mass murder? To some, the war was still open to debate until at least '43, so by the logic of waiting out the war why did mass killings start and camps open before even Stalingrad was lost? Afterwhich why divert so much attention to a "problem" that wouldnt be the regime's problem for long?

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 5571
Joined: 13 Jun 2008 22:54
Location: Kent

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by Terry Duncan » 30 Mar 2012 00:44

In July 1940, Governor-General Frank believed that the war with Britain would soon end, and the transportation of the Jews of occupied Poland to an overseas destination would begin.
Frank's belief is hardly proof of anything unless it can be supported with detailed evidence of what led him to hold such a belief. Who in authority to make such a decision told Frank anything that could lead to such a belief being held? It is also possible Frank mistakenly held a belief based upon rumour in the same way people do everywhere all the time, so unless it can be shown why such a belief was held, the fact he held a belief is not in itself proof that such a belief was in itself correct.
The actions undertaken by the German Government in 1939 and 1940 indicate that its Jewish policy at the time was one of "ethnic cleansing", not preparation for physical extermination.
Ethnic cleansing can often involve physical extermination, it is simply a policy of removing unwanted people by any means possible, and a policy of driving people out can be replaced at a later date by one of killing those that proved unwilling or unable to leave. All that can really be established is that the German government had not implimented a policy of genocide in 1939-40, it does not mean that they had not already considered moving to such a policy at a point some time in the future.
It took a number of tentative interim steps in the direction of pushing Jews out of its territory, but they did not continue because of resistance by the Soviet and French Governments respectively.
German controlled territory had borders with other neutral nations or the ability to transport people to such nations by sea, such as Spain, Turkey, or Sweeden, so there were other options to be tried if so desired.
The full implementation of an organised mass movment of Jews out of German-controlled territory therefore had to be postponed until after a successful conclusion to the war with Britain.
Was Britain ever approached with the proposal to allow ships full of Jewish refugees to leave German waters to any desitination worldwide? Were the Red Cross ever approached with the idea of evacuating unwanted peoples from German controlled territory?
Afterwhich why divert so much attention to a "problem" that wouldnt be the regime's problem for long?
A very good question when you look at the manpower devoted to the camps and the extermination process, it is hard to consider that so much effort with regards to manpower and logistics could be devoted to such a policy unless it had been under deliberate consideration for a considerable time beforehand.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 4675
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by wm » 30 Mar 2012 20:47

In this video Magnus Brechtken talks about the Madagascar Plan. He is an expert on German history and politics, one of his areas of expertise is Third Reich and history of anti-Semitism.
He concludes that:
The Madagascar plan [...] was [...] an alternative of place for killing the people [...] so the argument that Madagascar would have been alternative to the Holocaust is just flawed.


The opening and closing song is the classic Polish nonsense song from the thirties "Ay, ay Madagascar" inspired by the Polish misguided efforts to acquire colonies.
The full video of the talk is here.
A few stills from the video:
jm3.jpg
jm1.jpg
jm2.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
waldzee
Banned
Posts: 1422
Joined: 03 Feb 2012 03:44
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by waldzee » 30 Mar 2012 22:55

michael mills wrote:Question by "The_Enigma":
My question therefore is if the Nazi regime was so intent on just ethnic cleansing rather than mass murder, which they resorted to and were not forced to do, why did some sort of exportation started to any of the Greek Islands or to Norway? With the Vichy regime being in the Nazi pocket, why did no exportation take place to Corsica, Sardinia, or French North Africa or, prior to the British led invasion, French Middle East territories?
The general answer to this questionThe German Government aim could not be achieved due to the Soviet refusal to accept the proposed transfer of Jews onto its territory...."



"....

In 1919, the Anglo-Jewish leader Lucien Wolf had proposed the mass emigration of the Jewish populations of the newly independent states of Eastern Europe, Poland, Hungary, Romania, into Bolshevik Russia, once the civil war there had ended, on the basis that the Bolshevik regime would be far more Jew-friendly than the East European states.One small interim move was made in that direction late in 1940, when Eichmann organised a deportation of a small group of Jews from western German and Alsace-Lorraine into the Unoccupied Zone of France. That movement had not been approved by the French Government, which had not even been informed in advance, and was immediately opposed, with the result that no further such movements took place.
te]+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mike:
Lucien Wolf didn't say that - but I hope your new novel, 'Madagascar' sells... :)


Wolf was opposed to political Zionism, although he was one of the first people to formally propose the British government incorporated an aspiration for a Jewish home in Palestine into its war aims during the First World War. He later came to favour a model of national cultural autonomy, similar to that proposed by the Jewish Bund, for Jewish communities in Eastern and Central Europe"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucien_Wolf

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8819
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by michael mills » 30 Mar 2012 23:59

Lucien Wolf didn't say that - but I hope your new novel, 'Madagascar' sells...
Did he not?

Are you sure about that, Waldzee?

Have you read his Peace Conference Diary?

I suggest you check the entries for 6 and 9-11 August and 5 and 8 September 1919.

If you cannot get hold of his Peace Conference Diary, I suggest you check out the article by Eugene C Black "Lucien Wolf and the Making of Poland: Paris 1919", on pages 264-295 in the 1993 book "From Shtetl to Socialism: Studies from 'Polin' ", edited by Anthony Polonsky.

To save you the trouble, I will quote the relevant passage here. It is from note 53 on page 295:
Wolf, while putting these tragedies [the pogroms in Poland] in a balanced light, hoped that ultimately the resolution of the Russian civil war and restoration of peace there would create an opportunity for eastward Jewish migration and reduce the Jewish presence and problem in the small succession states.
Waldzee, I suggest to you, in a spirit of collegiality, that you check the facts before rushing enthusiastically to the keyboard.

User avatar
waldzee
Banned
Posts: 1422
Joined: 03 Feb 2012 03:44
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by waldzee » 31 Mar 2012 00:05

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Duly note- challenge declined. ( Once agian).
Mike- there is a 'Lucien Wolf Society' in London which documents his studies. He made a brilliant case at Versailles & had minority rights written into the league charter.
If I need to look up someone- I prefer pristine sources. Revisionist lit is well,"special"

Edit:
Its perhaps more accurate to say that' your paraphrase' & your actual Wolf Quote ( in red) mean two differerent things.
Wolf proposed setting up a legal rights framework that would allow the Ukrainian refugees to return.
Nice big red letters, though.

Edit Two:
Wm, your cartoons are too funny. Decades ago, the National Lampoon satirised the Madagascar plan in their 'Swartz Family Robinson ' series...
Last edited by waldzee on 31 Mar 2012 10:41, edited 1 time in total.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8819
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Britain makes peace in 1940 - What happens to the Jews?

Post by michael mills » 31 Mar 2012 00:55

Brechtken's conclusion is based on an ideological imperative, rather than on objkective analysis of the economic conditions in Madagascar.

He simply says that the incoming Jews would die because there was "nothing there". That in itself was false, since there was an indigenous urban civilisation based on rice cultivation. Furthermore, there was a French colonial administration that had carried out a measure of development, including the introduction of modern plantation agriculture. There is absolutely no reason why the Jews arriving on the island would have died of starvation.

When the first shipment of exiled British convicts arrived at the present Sydney in January 1788, there was even less there than there was in Madagascar in 1940. There was no indigenous agriculture, no towns, just a primitive population living by hunting and gathering.

Nevertheless, the convicts and their guards, although they suffered great hardship, did not all starve to death. For the first few years, until they could start farming, they depended for food on supply ships coming from Britain or India, and often their supplies ran dangerously low. But they survived; the death rate was relatively low.

Australia was much further away from Europe than Madagascar, and it took many months to reach it by sail, as opposed to a few weeks to reach Madagascar with the transportation technology available in 1940. Accordingly there is no reason why Jews exiled to Madagascar could not have been supplied, particularly if the states defeated by Germany were roped in to help, and aid were supplied by the Jewish Establishment in the United States.

The British Government back in the 1780s had much the same attitude to its large criminal underclass as the German Government had towards its Jewish minority in the 1930s; it despised it, and wanted to get rid of it by shipping it out of the country. The British Government in the 18th Century was able to ship large numbers of unwanted convicts to its colonies, first to Norht America and the Caribbean, then to Australia, and settle them there, without incurring an abnormally high death rate; there is no reason why the German Government could not have done the same with its unwanted Jews in the 1940s.

Brechtken refers to the small population of Madagascar in 1940 as an indication of the inability of the island to support and influx of Jewish exiles. However, a glance shows at this article

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

shows this statement:
The population grew from 2.2 million in 1900[15] to an estimated 21.9 million in 2011.[4]
The 10-fold population increase in the 20th Century shows that Madagascar is quite capable of supporting a large population, despite all the alleged difficulties.

To be sure, the present indigenous population has a very low standard of living. According to the article,
Approximately 69% of the population lives below the national poverty line threshold of one dollar per day.[
But if a Malagasy can live on one dollar per day, why cannot a Jew also live on one dollar per day? Is there any clause in the Mosaic Law that decrees that all Jews must have the same standard of living as the Jewish population of the United States?

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”