Himmler: Treatment of Alien Races in the East (1940)

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Dan
Member
Posts: 8429
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:06
Location: California

Post by Dan » 15 Nov 2004 01:53

Sergey Romanov wrote:> He's done it often, and visa versa.

Quite obviously, Walter S meant this particular case.
Not according to a native English speaker.

User avatar
Sergey Romanov
Member
Posts: 1987
Joined: 28 Dec 2003 01:52
Location: World

Post by Sergey Romanov » 15 Nov 2004 02:17

From the context it follows that this native English speaker would be wrong.

Here's the analogy from another native English speaker:
> Au contraire! My opinions reflect traditional Catholic thinking--not the
> nonsense which tries to pass off for that today/.

No, on this issue, the Church has never agreed with you. Of course, not
having darkened the door of a church in 30 years, you wouldn't know.

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=36 ... put=gplain
That WalterS didn't specify the issue in the same sentence means little, since he specified it in the previous paragraph:
This implies that Mr. Mills has agreed that there was, indeed, at some point, a willful decision by the Nazi Government to exterminate the Jews of Europe.
[...]
Mr. Mills has never agreed with you, Mr. Kaschner.

User avatar
WalterS
Member
Posts: 1497
Joined: 22 Feb 2004 20:54
Location: Arlington, TX

Post by WalterS » 15 Nov 2004 05:42

Sergey Romanov is obviously a better English speaker than Dan. It is quite obvious that when I made the statement "Mr. Mills has never agreed with you, Mr. Kaschner," I was referring to the substance of Mr. Kaschner's post which was the implication that Mr. Mills agreed with Mr. Kaschner that at some point the Nazi government did develop a plan to exterminate the Jews. I stand by my statement. Mr. Mills has never agreed with that. So, Sergey is quite correct.

Why do you insist on patronising everyone on this forum?
If you call pointing out obvious distortions, fabrications, Holocaust denial and nazi apologia being "patronizing," then I guess that's your problem.

walterkaschner
In memoriam
Posts: 1588
Joined: 13 Mar 2002 01:17
Location: Houston, Texas

Post by walterkaschner » 15 Nov 2004 06:14

Michael Mills wrote:
Response to Mr Kaschner:

1. Did the Government of the United States actually have any enunciated policies in regard to the Negro population in 1940? Policies that it was enforcing?

I was under the impression that such matters were the province of individual states which in practice were left alone to do whatever they liked, regardless of the constitutional rights that existed on paper.
The policies of the Federal government were reflected in the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Unfortunately, and to the everlasting shame of the U.S., those policies were not enforced by the U.S. government - at least not after the end of the "carpet-bagger" days - until the mid-1950s, when paratroopers were sent by President Eisenhower to Little Rock Arkansas to enforce compliance with the 1954 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education, which struck down the "separate but equal" doctrine enunciated decades ago by the Court in Plessy v. Ferguson and ordered the integration of all public schools, and which was followed by the Civil Rights Act of 1957, and several more stringent pieces of civil rights legislation thereafter.

But Mr. Mills misses the basic point.

It is one thing for a government to neglect to enforce a policy enacted to relieve a people from oppression - it is quite another for a government to enact a policy specifically designed and intended to subject a population to humiliation, subservience and oppression. And I feel certain that Mr. Mills, whose intelligence and perception is beyond question, will upon reflection recognize the profound difference.

Mr. Mills also wrote:
2. I dare say that if Hitler and Himmler had been ruling the United States in 1940, and Congress had voted to suspend the Constitution and State Governments had been replaced by Federal Commissioners, then Hitler as President and Himmler as Secretary for Homeland Security would have issued decrees confining persons of Negro race, as defined by law, to the subordinate status that most them occupied de facto at the time.

If the 1935 Law for the Protection of German Blood and Honour is any guide, persons known to be of mixed African and European ancestry would have been defined as hybrids (Mischlinge), and would have occupied an intermediate status. Persons with only 25% of Negro blood would presumably have been compelled by law to marry only "Whites" (as was the case under the afore-mentioned German law), thereby causing them to be absorbed into the "White" population.

Persons with less than 25% of African ancestry (ie persons with three "White" grandparents and one grandparent with less than 100% African ancestry) would no doubt not have been defined as "Negro", and would be legally free to integrate into the wider population (to the extent that public prejudice would allow them to do so).

If persons defined under law as "Negro" were permitted to remain in the Northern cities as cheap labour without any rights, that would no doubt have been welcomed by the Jewish businessmen who at the time were ruthlessly exploiting them.

If persons defined as "Negro" were expelled from the North and confined to the South, I dare say that would have been welcomed by WASP property-owners in the region, who would have benefitted from the flood of coerced labour.

Who knows what would have happened once Hitler and Himmler retired from office and went on the lecture circuit. If the Constitution were reinstated, no doubt history would have resumed the course it actually took, although the time-frame can only be guessed at.

The above is based on the assumption that the United States under the Hitler-Himmler Administration never found itself in the situation that Germany was in from 1939 to 1945, ie under blockade and teetering on the edge of starvation, faced with the need to deny food to some parts of the population in order to feed the more favoured parts. I cannot imagine any scenario in which the situation of the United States at war would have come anywhere near that of Germany.
Of course I was wrong and it was unfair to request Mr. Mills to speculate on this issue, and I apologize. He is quite correct in that there is simply no basis for comparison. And that quite naturally leads to the question of why he attempted to make a comparison in the first place! As Mr. Mills now concedes, the situation of the African-Americans in the U.S. in 1940 has absolutely no bearing on the situation leading to the policies adopted by Hitler-Himmler against the Poles at the same point of time, and brooks no comparison.

I in turn will readily concede that the treatment of the Negro minority in the U.S. was shameful, disgraceful and hateful, not just in 1940, but for decades thereafter, and has not yet been totally (but almost) erased to this day. But the policy of the U.S. government, even though unenforced for decades, has never since our Civil War been to condemn members of that minority to everlasting illiteracy and peonage-like servitude to a "master race", as was the announced and approved policy of the Nazi government vis-à-vis the Poles.

Regards, Kaschner

xcalibur
Member
Posts: 1457
Joined: 20 Apr 2003 15:12
Location: Pennsylvania

Post by xcalibur » 15 Nov 2004 06:35

I'd like to ask Mills to further educate our readers on the subject of these Northern Jewish business owners who were exploiting African Americans in this time period. Please speak with specificity to the example of Philadelphia as a major northern manufacturing and business center with a large Jewish population of business owners.

szopen
Member
Posts: 814
Joined: 21 May 2004 15:31
Location: poznan, poland

Post by szopen » 19 Nov 2004 11:52

My notes from Czeslaw Luczak "Od Bismarcka do Hitlera. Polsko-niemieckie stosunki gospodarcze", Poznan 1988


Short summary and conclusions: The POlish minority in Germany between 1919 and 1925 lowered by few hundred thousands. ZOKZ was in fact disbanded in 1934 and replaced by government institution. Main activities of ZOKZ was monitoring of German nationalistic organisation and humanitarian help to Polish minority abroad.

By the same criteria as MM is applying to German minority, one must wonder why people were so much complaining about fate of German minority in Poland, where most harsh measures were applied only as realisation of policy of "equal treatment" (well, in less PC speech: revenge for treating of Polish minority in Germany) while being silent about fate of Poles in Germany?

Based on pages 275-334

Census 1925: 802.934
1933 440.168
1939 139.441 Poles in Germany

After 1933 Poles admitting to their Polishness were threatened with sending
to German concentrating camps. Poles were beaten, buildings of Union of Poles
in Germany were devastated and the glasses in windows were broken.

European Congress of National Minorities however estimated that there were
1,2 million of Poles in Germany before 1939. It estimated that about 600-800.000
were living in Opole region, 100-400.000 in Warmia and Mazury.


in 1950 Polish official census showed 1,1 so called "autochtones", that is
Poles who lived in Germany before 1939.

Between 1919-1925 200.000 Poles leaved for Poland. In total number of optants
was about 245.000, but many of them emigrated to other countires. (Some of them,
about 20.000 returned).

After WWII about 100.000 Poles emigrated to France and Belgium.


Polish grammar schools in Germany: 52 in 1925, 5 in 1938. Students: from
1275 to 53.

Polish property was confiscated in 1934-39 based on two laws:
' from 29 September 1933 and second from 17 August 1937. Poles
couldn;t buying new lands, Polish self-help
organisations couldn't buy new buildings, lands etc.

Polish workers were losing jobs because of pilgrimages to Czestochowa,
because of using Polish while in work etc.

Polish ZOKZ (Zwiazek ochrony kresow zachodnich) and Polish gvt was organising
help for Polish unemployed and for Polonia, but it was much smaller
than similar help of Germany for German organisations in Poland.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23724
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 01 Dec 2004 09:44

Partial translation of Document 1918-PS in Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression, Vol. IV, US Government Printing Office, District of Columbia: 1946, pp. 553-572
Himmler's Address to Officers of the SS-Leibstandarte "Adolf Hitler" on the "Day of Metz" (Presentation of the Historical Nazi Flag) [moderator's note -- in 1942]

Now I would like to bring another matter to your attention. Very frequently the member of the Waffen-SS thinks about the deportation of this people here. These thoughts came to me today when watching the very difficult work out there performed by the Security Police, supported by your men, who help them a great deal. Exactly the same thing happened in Poland in weather 40 degrees below zero, where we had to haul away thousands, ten thousands, hundred thousands; where we had to have the toughness -- you should hear this but also forget it again immediately -- to shoot thousands of leading Poles, where we had to have the toughness, otherwise it would have taken revenge on us later. We also had to bring in, in this winter of 40 degrees below zero, ten thousands of Germans, and had to take care of their needs -- that the women were warm; that, when they bore children, these children did not experience want and destitution; where we had to take care of their horses; where we had to take care of the baggage of these poor Germans from Volhynia; all duties where the proud soldier says: "My God, why do I have to do that, this ridiculous job here . . . !" Gentlemen, it is much easier in many cases -- and that I would like to tell you this once, or would like to recall to you, you will gladly admit: in many cases it is much easier to go into combat with a company than to suppress an obstructive population of low cultural level in some area with a company, or to carry out executions, or to haul away people, or to evict crying and hysterical women, or to return our German racial brethren across the border from Russia and to take care of them.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 817#587817

Obserwator
Banned
Posts: 557
Joined: 01 Aug 2004 18:50
Location: Poland

Post by Obserwator » 01 Dec 2004 12:07

The Polish civilians summarily executed by German security forces in West Poland immediately after the German occupation were mostly members of the League for the Defence of the Western borders, an extremely anti-German Polish chauvinist organisation that proposed the seizure of all German territory east of the Oder, or of the Insurgents' Union
Mills repeats this lie again despite the fact that it has been discredited before on this forum.
The number of 60.000 Polish citizens murdered in Operation Tannenberg does include actors, intectuals,priests, businessmen and every one considered to be part of polish elites, and anti-german in the view of Nazis and German nationalists-that meaning anyone who could be a threat to their goal of murdering a large amount of polish population and reducing the rest to the slave status.
Here is a description of how it looked like :
http://www.kki.net.pl/~museum/rozdz3,2.htm
"There were 19 such camps in following places:Bydgoszcz, Brodnica, Chełmno, Dorposz Szlachecki, Kamień Krajeński, Karolewo, Lipno, Łobżenica, Nakło, Nowy Wiec near Skarszew, Nowe over Wisla, Piastoszyn, Płutowo, Sępolno Krajeńskie, Solec Kujawski, Tuchola, Wąbrzeźno, Wolental near Skórcza, Wyrzysk.Poles imprisoned in those camps (men, women and youth) in majority were muredered in cruel way.The description of conditions made by those few who escaped by miracle chill the very blood.
People shot were finished by blows from shovels, or by beating with rifles, sometimes they were buried alive.Mothers were forced to place their children in mass graves where they were shot together afterwards.Before executions women and girls were raped.Polish accounts of those atrocites are reflected in german documents from that time.Some German soldiers were terrified at what they saw in the camps.For example-about the atrocites in October 1939 in Świec conducted on both Jews and Poles we know, because two Wehrmacht soldiers made a report to their superiors outraged at the atrocites they saw.Some people responsible for most sadistic crimes like those in Starogard and Lobieżnica were put before trials and sentenced but received amnesty from Hitler at the end of 1939."

As always Mills refuses to answer in which way children, young mothers were member of Bolsheviks conspiracy against the victimized German Nazis.
As to his repeated misinformation about "League for the Defence of the Western borders, an extremely anti-German Polish chauvinist organisation that proposed the seizure of all German territory east of the Oder", Mills has forgotten to add that this definition of the group and the mentioning of it as a part extermination effort(and Mills even goes further then that,saying it was the majority) is from....Himmler.Such an explenation is a worthy statement as a statement that Jews were murdered because they were bolshevik conspirators, because Hitler believed so.

Finally-in the past Mills has proven that he not only uses names of polish organisations that didn't exist, or either who's names are against the rules of polish gramma, but also made definitive statements about events he knew nothing about(statement about foolish killing by ignorant Gestapo agents of Grot Rowecki, when in fact he was captured and held prisoner for extend period of time at the knowledge of Hitler and Himmler, and finally killed in concentration camp).
Past errors of Mills and ideological motives behind his posts, combined with offensive repeations of errors already corrected in the past by other forum members led me to question his credibility and ability to explain and to inform about the mass extermination effort made by the German Nazis.

michael mills
Member
Posts: 9000
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by michael mills » 16 Jan 2005 01:16

In this thread, much has been made of the fact that Himmler recommended that Polish children not selected for germanisation should receive only four years of elementary schooling.

It has been suggested that Himmler was thereby condemning the Polish people to illiteracy, with the implication that there position would be greatly worsened thereby.

I have now gained access to some statistics concerning educational levels and illiteracy rates in Poland up to 1939, and can therefore compare Himmler's proposals with the situation in Poland prior to its conquest by Germany.

The data are from the book "Poland 1918 -1945: An Interpretive and Documentary History of the Second Republic", by Peter Stachura, Professor of Modern European History and Director if the Centre for Research in Polish History at the University of Stirling. They can be found on pages 104-105.

Throughout the book, Stachura adopts a stance that can fairly be described as moderate Polish nationalist. Accordingly, he can hardly be accused of selecting data unfavorable to Poland.

According to Stachura, the total length of Polish primary education was seven years, which can be compared with the four years recommended by Himmler.

However, Stachura states that even by 1938-39 a large majority of Polish children still did not receive the full seven years of primary education, which makes Himmler's proposal of four years' elementary education look a lot less drastic.

In 1920-21 the number of Polish children attending elementary school was 2.9 million.

By 1938-39, the number had risen to 4.9 million, representing almost 100 percent enrolment.

As a result of the increasing extent of primary education, the illiteracy rate fell from approximately 33% of the population in 1919 to 23% in 1931 and about 10% at the beginning of the war.

And that fall in illiteracy was achieved despite the fact that a large majority of Polish children did not receive the full seven years of primary education. Perhaps a large proportion of those children only received the four years proposed by Himmler.

The results achieved by leass than seven years' of primary education demonstrates that the Polish nation would not have been condemned to illiteracy by the restriction of children's education to the four years' elementary proposed by Himmler. Those four years would have been quite sufficient to achieve functional literacy, as the decline in the Polish illiteracy rate until 1939 had demonstrated.

Thus, the cries of outrage generated by Himmler's proposal to limit the education of Polish children to four years of elementary schooling are shown to contain more than a little hot air. The great majority of Polish children would have been no worse off educationally as a result of Himmler's proposals than they were in 1939 under the rule of their own government.

Stachura also gives statistics on the extent of secondary and tertiary education in pre-war Poland.

By 1936-37, some 200,000 pupils were enrolled in 760 secondary schools. That is only 4% of the almost five million primary school pupils.

There were 48,000 students at 28 institutes of tertiary-level education, or only 1% of the number of primary school pupils.

It is true that Himmler proposed closing down the secondary and tertiary education sectors in Poland. But that would only have affected some 250,000 persons, a very small proportion of the total population of about 30 million.

Thus, Himmler's proposals concerning the education of Polish children under German rule are seen to be not all that drastic, and not a great change from the educational opportunities available to the vast majority of Polish children before they came under German rule.

To be sure, German rule was not intended to improve the lot of Polish schoolchildren. But it did not represent an appreciable worsening of their condition in comparison to what the Polish government had given them.

szopen
Member
Posts: 814
Joined: 21 May 2004 15:31
Location: poznan, poland

Post by szopen » 17 Jan 2005 08:56

You are not trying to argue, that goal of Polish government was to limi Polish children to 4 years of education and train them for being slaves? Because in my opinion THAT'S the difference, not the number of years in education.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23724
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 17 Jan 2005 09:39

Michael -- You said:
In this thread, much has been made of the fact that Himmler recommended that Polish children not selected for germanisation should receive only four years of elementary schooling.

It has been suggested that Himmler was thereby condemning the Polish people to illiteracy, with the implication that there position would be greatly worsened thereby.
Then you went on to say:
As a result of the increasing extent of primary education [in Poland], the illiteracy rate fell from approximately 33% of the population in 1919 to 23% in 1931 and about 10% at the beginning of the war.

And that fall in illiteracy was achieved despite the fact that a large majority of Polish children did not receive the full seven years of primary education. Perhaps a large proportion of those children only received the four years proposed by Himmler.

The results achieved by leass than seven years' of primary education demonstrates that the Polish nation would not have been condemned to illiteracy by the restriction of children's education to the four years' elementary proposed by Himmler. Those four years would have been quite sufficient to achieve functional literacy, as the decline in the Polish illiteracy rate until 1939 had demonstrated.

Thus, the cries of outrage generated by Himmler's proposal to limit the education of Polish children to four years of elementary schooling are shown to contain more than a little hot air. The great majority of Polish children would have been no worse off educationally as a result of Himmler's proposals than they were in 1939 under the rule of their own government.
You concluded:
Thus, Himmler's proposals concerning the education of Polish children under German rule are seen to be not all that drastic, and not a great change from the educational opportunities available to the vast majority of Polish children before they came under German rule.

To be sure, German rule was not intended to improve the lot of Polish schoolchildren. But it did not represent an appreciable worsening of their condition in comparison to what the Polish government had given them.
Let's revisit what Himmler said again:
A basic issue in the solution of all these problems is the question of schooling and thus the question of sifting and selecting the young. For the non-German population of the East there must be no higher school than the four-grade elementary school. The sole goal of this school is to be--

Simply arithmetic up to 500 at the most; writing of one's name; the doctrine that it is a divine law to obey the Germans and to be honest, industrious, and good. I don't think that reading is necessary.

Apart from this school there are to be no schools at all in the East.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 101#570101
and compare it to your premise:
The results achieved by leass than seven years' of primary education demonstrates that the Polish nation would not have been condemned to illiteracy by the restriction of children's education to the four years' elementary proposed by Himmler. Those four years would have been quite sufficient to achieve functional literacy, as the decline in the Polish illiteracy rate until 1939 had demonstrated.
You seem to have overlooked something here -- Himmler's statement that "I don't think that reading is necessary." That means illiteracy -- not "functional literacy." The corollary is that Himmler's idea of a 4th grade education ("Simply arithmetic up to 500 at the most; writing of one's name; the doctrine that it is a divine law to obey the Germans and to be honest, industrious, and good. I don't think that reading is necessary.") fell substantially below the 1939 Polish standards. Himmler's statement effectively demolishes your argument, and makes it obvious that the great majority of Polish children would have been worse off educationally as a result of Himmler's proposals than they were in 1939 under the rule of their own government.

As this oversight demonstrates, your conclusion does not follow from your premises. The Polish educational system was designed to help Polish children become better-educated. Himmler's proposal was designed to prevent education beyond the level necessary for efficient serfdom. Under the Polish educational system, Polish students could be educated beyond the fourth grade level. Under Himmler's proposal, ordinary Polish citizens were to be forbidden an education beyond the 4th grade level. I think it is fair to conclude that Himmler's proposal was drastic, and was intended to promote illiteracy. If there's any hot air here, it's coming from your direction.

walterkaschner
In memoriam
Posts: 1588
Joined: 13 Mar 2002 01:17
Location: Houston, Texas

Post by walterkaschner » 19 Jan 2005 08:11

My ancient edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica generally agrees with the Polish illiterate percentages cited by Michael Mills above. But it seems to me that the steady increase in literacy refutes rather than supports his basic point. Clearly the policies of the Polish government were to increase literacy and the general level of education in Poland, and the figures quoted demonstrate the success of that policy, particularly when you consider that a great portion of the illiterates in 1939 undoubtedly reflected the illiterates among the older generation, who were illiterate in 1921 and remained so in 1939. At the same time, of course, undoubtedly many of the 1921 illiterates among the elderly had died off by 1939, which accelerated the decrease in illiteracy.

But to me the telling point is that Himmler himself insisted that the sole goal [his very words] of the 4 year elementary schools - the only schools to be permitted - was to be:
Simply arithmetic up to 500 at the most; writing of one's name; the doctrine that it is a divine law to obey the Germans and to be honest, industrious, and good. I don'think that reading is necessary [My emphasis.]
Himmler didn't believe reading was necessary because the purpose of the system was to create a population of illiterate slave laborers to carry out "heavy work" for its German masters. Thus in his own words:
....... a people of laborers without leaders, [which would] be at our disposal and will furnish Germany annually with migrant workers and with workers for special tasks (roads, quarries, buildings): they themselves will have more to eat and more to live on than under the Polish regime; and, though they have no culture of their own, they will, under the strict, consistent, and just leadership of the German people, be called upon to help work on its everlasting cultural tasks and its buildings and perhaps, as far as the amount of heavy work is concerned, will be the ones who make the realization of these tasks possible.
The four year curriculum evisioned by Himmler obviously had not the faintest similarity to the curriculum which Mr. Mills and I enjoyed at that age. Those four years were intended, not to educate, but in Himmler's very own words to instill in the inferior Eastern races" the doctrine that it is a divine law to obey the Germans and to be honest, industrious, and good". After 4 years of that they would in his opinion be cheerfully content with their mission to perform the heavy manual labor in obedience to their übermenschenlichen German superiors. How better to insure against the possibility of intellectual ferment, unrest and rebellion than to deprive the Untermenschen of the ability to read?! Above all, prevent their exposure to any highfalutin ideas!!

No amount of speculation or logic juggling can obscure the basic intent of Himmler's program; his intention was not benevolent - it was simply enslavement.

Regards, Kaschner

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10162
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Himmler: Treatment of Alien Races in the East (1940)

Post by Sid Guttridge » 10 May 2020 05:33

Hi Michael,

In writing that the proposal was to integrate some Poles you miss a basic point. These people were considered as lost Germans, not as Poles. Any cultural or linguistic trace of Polishness was to be eliminated from them.

And how many is "some"? In Wartheland, where there was a hard line gauleiter, this "some" was not very many. Far more Poles were expelled to the General Government than were designated for integration. Furthermore, the further East one went from Wartheland, the lower the proportion of "redeemable" German stock there was likely to be.

As for Poland's Jews in 1940, while there was no written policy of extermination, ghettoisation was already beginning to produce differential death rates compared with surrounding Poles, let alone Germans and, even if conditions remained the same, (which they did not), death rates were almost certain to get worse as the assets of the ghettos began to run out. Indeed, there was never a written policy paper trail to Hitler of exterminating Jews, yet it still happened.

Furthermore, even before the end of 1939 General Blaskowitz, the senior German officer in Poland, was already officially complaining about the SS's murder of Jews, which was then in its infancy. Blskowitz was no shrinking violet - his troops had already occupied two Euopean capitals for Hitler.

By contrast, for all the inequities of the American South, the trajectory for Black Americans was generally upwards through self help. They were only a couple of decades away from desegregation. The Poles under German rule, we're headed in the opposite direction.

Cheers,

Sid

George L Gregory
Member
Posts: 1083
Joined: 13 Nov 2020 15:08
Location: Britain

Re: Himmler: Treatment of Alien Races in the East (1940)

Post by George L Gregory » 19 Mar 2021 22:15

Why did Heinrich Himmler consider the extermination of people to be a Bolshevik un-German method in 1940 but a few years later was bragging secretly about the extermination of Jews to be a Nazi policy?

michael mills
Member
Posts: 9000
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 12:42
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Himmler: Treatment of Alien Races in the East (1940)

Post by michael mills » 20 Mar 2021 13:00

A change in circumstances.

As of May 1940, Germany had not yet invaded the land ruled by the Bolsheviks, where their alleged method of exterminating entire peoples was practised, and so far as Himmler knew it was not going to do so. It was not until July of that year, after the defeat of France and the refusal by Britain to negotiate an end to hostilities, that Hitler raised the possibility of such an invasion.

A few years later, the land of the Bolsheviks had been invaded, and the logical conclusion was to use the Bolsheviks' own methods against them. And in Himmler's mind, in accordance with the National Socialist ideology that he ascribed to, the main "bearer of Bolshevism" was the Jewish population.

Ergo, in order to destroy Bolshevism it was necessary to exterminate the Jews.

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”