Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1987
Joined: 28 Dec 2003, 02:52
Location: World
Contact:

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#16

Post by Sergey Romanov » 07 Mar 2017, 23:11

The Black Rabbit of Inlé wrote: There's Streicher's testimony at the IMT:
Yes, he also called himself a Zionist during the IMT. His defense tactic was clear: in practice I only did what the Jews themselves agreed with.

Such statements, a part of his defense, can hardly be evidence for the origins of the Nazi ideology through direct appropriation of Judaic principles.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#17

Post by michael mills » 12 Mar 2017, 07:56

Such statements, a part of his defense, can hardly be evidence for the origins of the Nazi ideology through direct appropriation of Judaic principles.
Nowhere did I write that the racial ideology of National Socialism was directly appropriated from Judaic principles.

What did write was that the National Socialist ideology about Jews as a race distinct from all other European races was the mirror image of Judaic ideology, which divided humanity into two separate groups, Jews and Gentile. National Socialist ideology posited exactly the same division, but reversed, in that whereas Judaic ideology preached that the Jews were chosen by God and hence morally superior, while the Gentiles were rejected by God and hence morally inferior, National Socialist ideology preached that it was the Jews who were morally inferior and evil.

Of course the creators of National Socialist ideology did not read Judaic ideological texts and adopt the concepts in them in a reverse form. Rather, National Socialist ideology about the Jews as a separate race, indeed a sort of "anti-race", was derived from a long European tradition which goes right back to the Ancient Greeks and Romans, who had become aware of the Judaic ideological hostility toward the Gentiles, and for that reason regarded the Jews as enemies of the Human race, as infected with "hatred of the Human race" (in Latin "odium generis humanae"). The Greek and Roman attitude toward the Jews was absorbed into Christian ideology, which taught that the Jews had lost their "chosen" status because of their refusal to accept Jesus Nazarenus as the Son Of God, and were hence rejected by God (although it also taught that they could regain God's favour by accepting Jesus).

The concept of the Jews as the "tribe accursed" was not invented by National Socialist ideologists in the 20th Century, but had existed for centuries among the peoples who were the heirs of Greco-Roman civilisation. For example, that very phrase occurs in Longfellow's poem "Hiawatha".

"Then the Black-Robe chief, the Prophet,
Told his message to the people,
Told the purport of his mission,
Told them of the Virgin Mary,
And her blessed Son, the Saviour,
How in distant lands and ages
He had lived on earth as we do;
How he fasted, prayed, and labored;
How the Jews, the tribe accursed,
Mocked him, scourged him, crucified him;"

The crucial point is that the European concept of the Jews as the "tribe accursed", inherited from Greco-Roman civilisation, is simply the reverse of the Judaic concept of the Jews as the "Chosen People". After all, it was not as if the European peoples conspired together to separate themselves from the Jews rather it was the Jews who first drew the line separating themselves from the Gentiles.


BarKokhba
Member
Posts: 104
Joined: 28 Jan 2017, 03:11
Location: USA

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#18

Post by BarKokhba » 13 Mar 2017, 01:22

Again, Michael Mills, you are absolutely 100% incorrect in your understanding of the basis for the Jews being called the 'chosen people' and the Jewish notion of separation and the subsequent duties of Jews and Gentiles (the Nations) in the eyes of God, according to the Hebrew Bible (The Tanach) and all subsequent Jewish Law. Your insistence on the (purposefully) phony interpretation of this concept, has been used as justification for oppression, ostracization, exile, atrocities and contemporary antisemitism, such as exhibited in the Holocaust and by neo-nazis to this day. Jewish 'chosenness' has nothing to do with superiority over non-Jews on any level, and certainly has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of annihilating orher people on behalf of being 'chosen' or superior. By inculcating that silly idea in your head and propagating it even here, in such a forum as AHF, is a form of incitement, not information. 'Chosenness' reflects the Biblical dialogue between God and the Jews in antiquity that Jews were chosen to be subject to God's Laws, and to spread those Laws to mankind, as a covenant, a contract, for which in return the Jews would be freed from slavery in Egypt and receive the land of (current) Israel in return. Its why traditionalist Jews stick to 'the Letter of the Law (Torah)' to this day, fulfilling their side of the covenant. Nazi (and Longfellow) myths to the contrary, propogate a disgusting blood libel against Judaism by ignorantly throwing around a term they can hardly begin to understand.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#19

Post by michael mills » 13 Mar 2017, 06:18

Bar Kokhba, you are missing the point. How exactly the doctrine of Divine Election is to be interpreted is not the issue.

What is the issue is how National Socialist ideology formed the concept that the Jews constituted a race entirely separate from the rest of humanity, and as such were a negative, destructive entity.

The fact is that the division of humanity into Jew and non-Jew was not an invention of National Socialist ideology, but was a concept of traditional Judaic ideology dating from Post-Exilic times. Part of that traditional Judaic ideology was that non-Jews (Gentiles) were morally inferior, and that therefore Jews should remain strictly apart from them.

As other peoples such as the Greeks and Romans came into contact with the Jews as they expanded into the Eastern Mediterranean region, they became aware of the Judaic ideology of separation and divine election, and they reacted against it, interpreting it negatively, and seeing the doctrine of separation form the Gentiles as "hatred of the human race". That negative reaction to Judaic ideology became part of Greco-Roman civilisation, and was inherited by the European peoples who developed from that civilisation. Eventually that negative image of the Jews, formed in Greco-Roman times, was incorporated into National Socialist ideology.

How exactly Jews in ancient times and today interpreted or interpret the ideology of their self-identity and the doctrine of Divine Election is not really relevant. As far as National Socialist ideology is concerned, what is relevant is how people who came into contact with the Jews, from the Ancient Greeks and Romans onward, interpreted Judaic ideology, and how they reacted to it.

As I wrote, the negative interpretation by Gentiles of Judaic ideology was the reverse of the Jews' own interpretation of that ideology. Whereas the Jews saw their separation from the Gentiles as a positive force, Gentile observers saw it as something negative and destructive. That negative mirror image was the basis of National Socialist ideology about the Jews.

pugsville
Member
Posts: 1016
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 05:40

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#20

Post by pugsville » 13 Mar 2017, 08:31

michael mills wrote:Bar Kokhba, you are missing the point. How exactly the doctrine of Divine Election is to be interpreted is not the issue.
And yet evething after this is nothing more than than how others interrupted this.
michael mills wrote: What is the issue is how National Socialist ideology formed the concept that the Jews constituted a race entirely separate from the rest of humanity, and as such were a negative, destructive entity.

The fact is that the division of humanity into Jew and non-Jew was not an invention of National Socialist ideology, but was a concept of traditional Judaic ideology dating from Post-Exilic times. Part of that traditional Judaic ideology was that non-Jews (Gentiles) were morally inferior, and that therefore Jews should remain strictly apart from them.

As other peoples such as the Greeks and Romans came into contact with the Jews as they expanded into the Eastern Mediterranean region, they became aware of the Judaic ideology of separation and divine election, and they reacted against it, interpreting it negatively, and seeing the doctrine of separation form the Gentiles as "hatred of the human race". That negative reaction to Judaic ideology became part of Greco-Roman civilisation, and was inherited by the European peoples who developed from that civilisation. Eventually that negative image of the Jews, formed in Greco-Roman times, was incorporated into National Socialist ideology.

How exactly Jews in ancient times and today interpreted or interpret the ideology of their self-identity and the doctrine of Divine Election is not really relevant. As far as National Socialist ideology is concerned, what is relevant is how people who came into contact with the Jews, from the Ancient Greeks and Romans onward, interpreted Judaic ideology, and how they reacted to it.

As I wrote, the negative interpretation by Gentiles of Judaic ideology was the reverse of the Jews' own interpretation of that ideology. Whereas the Jews saw their separation from the Gentiles as a positive force, Gentile observers saw it as something negative and destructive. That negative mirror image was the basis of National Socialist ideology about the Jews.
and you have what evidence exactly that Nazi ideology was in anyway formed in repose to any of this?

or that Greeks and Romans views?

BarKokhba
Member
Posts: 104
Joined: 28 Jan 2017, 03:11
Location: USA

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#21

Post by BarKokhba » 14 Mar 2017, 01:09

Michael Mills, your insistance that 'traditional Judaic ideology' that non-Jews were (or are) morally inferior is totally incorrect. The Jews were in their own land in antiquity. The Greeks and Romans and all the others were invaders, conquerors who were out to tax, oppress, crush the Jews in their own land. So the invaders were not looked at in a positive light. But theologically it is not part of normative Biblical, rabbinic or contempoary Judaism to look at non-Jews as morally inferior. Non-Jews are understood to have no obligation to Jewish Law, and have their own paths to God. They are not looked at as 'morally inferior.' Non-Jews who are Jew haters seek to turn Jewish theology on its head to fulfill their own rationalization, by hating Jews as 'prime separators' of people; you've laid out a good case for that, but its a phony argument based on your misunderstanding of Jewish theology to suit your own means. BTW, the only people who are looked at as 'morally inferior' are Jewish transgressors of the Law, not non-Jews.

The Black Rabbit of Inlé
Member
Posts: 133
Joined: 10 Mar 2011, 21:12

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#22

Post by The Black Rabbit of Inlé » 14 Mar 2017, 03:14

BarKokhba wrote:'Chosenness' reflects the Biblical dialogue between God and the Jews in antiquity that Jews were chosen to be subject to God's Laws, and to spread those Laws to mankind, as a covenant, a contract, for which in return the Jews would be freed from slavery in Egypt and receive the land of (current) Israel in return.
Jews were but one of the twelve Hebrew tribes that emerged after the Exodus from Egypt and settlement in the Promised Lands. The Hebrew god had already promised the Promised Lands to Abraham, then Issac, and finally Jacob, before there was any slavery of Hebrews by the Egyptians.

Will you concede that an enormous number of rabbinic thinkers, especially in Hasidic circles, have believed the "Chosenness" is exactly what you insist it isn't?

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#23

Post by michael mills » 14 Mar 2017, 08:40

Bar Kokhba, I am not wanting to perpetuate a dispute over the question of how Jews interpret the doctrine of their being a "Chosen People". What I am on about is seeking the reason why National Socialist ideology postulated a separation between Jews and all other peoples, with uniquely negative qualities being attributed to the former.

My contention is that the separation between Jews and non-Jews made in National Socialist ideology was derived from the separation between Jews and Gentiles made in Judaic ideology from Post-Exilic times onward. In both ideologies, the separation between Jews and non-Jews was due to the Jews having special qualities, or a special mission.

The difference between the two ideologies is that in the Judaic ideology, the separation of the Jews and their special mission are viewed positively, ie to bring about the reign of God on Earth, whereas in National Socialist ideology, the view is entirely negative, ie the mission or function of the Jews is to undermine the existence of the non-Jewish peoples by corrupting them.

In that sense, the image of the Jew in National Socialist ideology is the mirror image of the Judaic self-image, with the qualities of the Jew being reversed, from good to evil. It is further my view that that negative mirror image was not an invention of National Socialist ideology, but was a concept derived from the Ancient Greeks and Romans that had become embedded in European civilisation.

I hope that makes things clear.

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3726
Joined: 28 Apr 2013, 18:14
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#24

Post by Sheldrake » 14 Mar 2017, 10:43

michael mills wrote: What is the issue is how National Socialist ideology formed the concept that the Jews constituted a race entirely separate from the rest of humanity, and as such were a negative, destructive entity.
The recent exchanges between Michael Mills and Bar Kochba miss a point. Anti-semitism was rife in many christian countries including the USA, but Nazisim was unique in its policies. Furthermore, the Jews weren't unique in facing extermination under the Nazis. Roma, Scinti,homosexuals and Jehovah's witnesses were also assigned to the the lowest strata of their Aryan supremacist world view.

James Hawes, "Englanders and Huns" described the clash of cultures between the British and Germans that arose before 1914 . raises the close connection between German anti-Semitism and German Anglophobia. In a tract from 1892 the terms “Jewish-Patrician” and “half-breed Englishmen” are used almost interchangeably: for a German nationalist, the Jews were the Englanders within. In particular German Anglophobes blamed English liberal economic free trade policies as "Manchester" economic for undermining the German economy - similar criticisms made of "globalism" .

He drew attention to the role of Heinrich von Treitschke as the intellectual heavy weight supporting this contention that Germany's enemies were a combination of the piggybacking, Manchesterist perfidity of the English and the base materialist lies and greed of the internal enemy of the internal enemy: the Jews. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_ ... Treitschke popularized the phrase "Die Juden sind unser Unglück!" ("The Jews are our misfortune!"),- the motto of Die Sturmer.

National Socialism drew on linked emotional appeals. It would not be the last time that someone offered a right wing radical alternative to the failed politics of liberal democracies, blaming foreigners, ethnic minorities and a global economic system dominated by a conspiracy of an international elite.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 8999
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 13:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#25

Post by michael mills » 14 Mar 2017, 13:23

Sheldrake,

It is said that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and your comment about Heinrich von Treitschke is an example of that phenomenon.

With the words, Die Juden sind unser Unglueck", Treitschke was not expressing his own opinion. Rather, he was describing a sentiment that was topical in Germany in 1879.

The words occur in his essay "unsere Aussichten" (Our Prospects), in the periodical "Preussische Jahrbuecher". Here is the full context:
Ueberblickt man alle diese Verhältnisse – und wie Vieles ließe sich noch sagen! – so erscheint die laute Agitation des Augenblicks doch nur als eine brutale und gehässige, aber natürliche Reaction des germanischen Volksgefühls gegen ein fremdes Element, das in unserem Leben einen allzu breiten Raum eingenommen hat. Sie hat zum Mindesten das unfrei­willige Verdienst, den Bann einer stillen Unwahrheit von uns genommen zu haben; es ist schon ein Gewinn, daß ein Uebel, das Jeder fühlte und Niemand berühren wollte, jetzt offen besprochen wird. Täuschen wir uns nicht: die Bewe­gung ist sehr tief und stark; einige Scherze über die Weis­heitssprüche christlich-socialer Stump-Redner genügen nicht sie zu bezwingen. Bis in die Kreise der höchsten Bildung hin­auf, unter Männern, die jeden Gedanken kirchlicher Un­duldsamkeit oder nationalen Hochmuths mit Abscheu von sich weisen würden, ertönt es heute wie aus einem Munde: die Juden sind unser Unglück!
The "loud agitation of the moment" referred to by Treitschke was a wave of anti-Jewish sentiment that was sweeping Germany in 1879 as a result of the huge stock market crash of that year, in which a large number of Jewish bankers and financiers were involved. A lot of middle-class Germans were financially ruined by that crash, which they blamed on the underhand dealings of unscrupulous bankers, a disproportionate number of whom were Jewish. The words "Die Juden sind unser Unglueck" were actually ascribed by Treitschke to the people who were blaming the Jews in general for the crash.

Treitschke himself did not share that sentiment, as is shown by the immediately following passage of his essay:
Von einer Zurücknahme oder auch nur einer Schmälerung der vollzogenen Emancipation kann unter Verständigen gar nicht die Rede sein; sie wäre ein offenbares Unrecht, ein Abfall von den guten Traditionen unseres Staates und würde den nationalen Gegensatz, der uns peinigt, eher verschärfen als mildern. Was die Juden in Frankreich und England zu einem unschädlichen und vielfach wohlthätigen Elemente der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft gemacht hat, das ist im Grunde doch die Energie des Nationalstolzes und die festgewurzelte nationale Sitte dieser beiden alten Culturvölker. Unsere Ge­sittung ist jung; uns fehlt noch in unserem ganzen Sein der nationale Stil, der instinctive Stolz, die durchgebildete Eigenart, darum waren wir so lange wehrlos gegen fremdes Wesen. Jedoch wir sind im Begriff uns jene Güter zu erwer­ben und wir können nur wünschen, daß unsere Juden die Wandlung, die sich im deutschen Leben als eine nothwendige Folge der Entstehung des deutschen Staates vollzieht, recht­zeitig erkennen
Treitschke is saying that there can be no question of a retraction of the accomplished emancipation of the Jews, since that would be in his words an injustice. He says that reason why the Jews in Britain and France were a harmless and beneficial element in bourgeois society was that the firmly rooted national pride of the British and French meant that they were not afraid of Jewish competition. The Germans by contrast were a young people whose national pride was as yet undeveloped, and that is why they were nervous of the Jewish presence in their midst. However, he believes that as a result of the creation of the German State, the German people was beginning to acquire the same sort of national pride that the British and French had.

User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1987
Joined: 28 Dec 2003, 02:52
Location: World
Contact:

Re: Did the Nazis consider their "non-Aryan" allies to be racially inferior?

#26

Post by Sergey Romanov » 14 Mar 2017, 18:43

> Nowhere did I write that the racial ideology of National Socialism was directly appropriated from Judaic principles.

Then the NS ideology being Judaism's alleged mirror image is irrelevant and is only brought up to enable anti-Judaic rants which however add little substance to the topic at hand even if they were fully accurate.

Post Reply

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”