Tuesday, October 28, 2014

A Counter to German Claims

I have a lot of respect for Germans. When I have interacted with them in an academic or business setting, their behavior has always been courteous, sharp and after a while, friendly. They are not warm, but I have had plenty of nice chats with Germans. Sometimes World War Two has come up, allowing for really interesting stories from the other side. One thing that strikes me is how almost all of them mention how crazy Hitler took them down the path to destruction and that the White Rose society was bigger than recorded. If only that bomb had not been moved 5 feet before going off, the war would have ended sooner. Unconditional surrender aside, had the Germans understood how to cripple their war machine, they would've killed persuaded Speer and Krupp of the futility of carrying on the war effort.

Scholars are split on the Nazi state and Holocaust in the camp of Crazy Hitler-Himmler types made it happen or that it was an institutional issue where the bureaucracy was set up to one up each other and execute on what had been decades of ups and down in anti-semitic or anti-other feelings. Seems that run of the mill Germans like to use the Crazy Hitler excuse. That discounts decades of pogroms and other anti-semitic actions. That discounts the fact that Germans loved their Fuhrer up until he started losing. It also discounts how the German officers disagreed on strategy but no one mentioned surrender. It is self-serving lies on a national scale.

The other thing it avoids is mentioning that all Hitler did was take over a state that had a fully functioning and orderly bureaucracy, military and history of being led by a monarch. Like Stalin becoming the Red Tsar, Hitler became the People's Kaiser. Had the German leadership truly wanted to end the war, they could have talked Krupp and Speer into their camp. Krupp was the genius leader behind Krupp industries. Alfried Krupp was so valuable that despite overwhelming evidence, after the Anglo-Soviet split, the Americans found a way to release him from prison after three years and get the German economy moving again. Good thing he had a senile father to blame the worst of the war crimes on. Speer had turned the German war economy into an efficient machine despite Allied bombings. Peaceniks mention how Allied bombing did not reduce German economic output. True. What is also true is that Speer took over from Goering the industrial organization of the economy and made everything more efficient. Goering was an idiot who spent more time comparing blues for his dress uniforms than looking at getting iron in the air. In some instances, Speer's changes were as simple as having multiple shifts at a factory. Krupp and Speer both wondered why the Allies never concentrated bombing strategies and seemed to bomb in odd, scattered patterns. Targeted bombings at critical points could have ended their manufacturing in a heartbeat. Likewise, had the German leadership involved in the July 20th plot to kill Hitler just talked Krupp and Speer into their camp, the war would've been over immediately.

We will still hear German claims of "shucks our leadership fooled us". Their speeches were out in the open. They had millions of supporters and millions of mitlaufers. To paraphrase what Speer wrote, at a certain point you don't even have to write speeches because you know exactly what the audience wants because what you are saying is not what you are thinking or believe but what they think and believe and want to hear. World War Two was really resolving who would be the dominant 20th century European model to impose on the world: British parliamentarian politics or German autocracy. Germans wanted their system to win. They can blame Hitler, but another autocrat would have taken his place had he died in World War One. The fortunate thing for Germans is they have the biggest of boogeymen to blame everything on. In a world with a decreasing number of people willing to look deeper, this provides the Germans with a renewable cover story.


PA said...

Here is US DOD anti-German propaganda from 1945:


Brandr said...

"World War Two was really resolving who would be the dominant 20th century European model to impose on the world: British parliamentarian politics or German autocracy.”

Kind of. WW2 was a war between Europe and the Jews. The Jews won.

nikcrit said...

Not exactly a topic for nikcrit to hold forth on with authority, but here are three thoughts:

1) I recall being intrigued while taking some upper-level college seminars on WWII and learn some of the details of the extent of German suffering and displacement by the country's regular citizenry; existential volk angst, misery and the resulting identity crisis is not a common part of the syllabus for u.s. academic consideration of wwii.

2) That being said, western countries obsess too much about world war II. It's bad in America and ridiculous in Europe and Russia.

3) I maintain it's bad p.r. for the alt-right to indulge these 'Hitler-wasn't-all-bad" hypotheticals; justified or not, it's a real hinderance toward any future wider acceptance and the practice sort-of reeks of iconoclastic self-destruction, i.e., 'oh, you bad boys are soooooo transgressive!"

Having said all that, I'd be willing to amend some of these sentiments and maybe even rescind a few; as I sensed in college that those from the coasts and overseas ruminate upon 'the big one' much, much more than do us Rustbelters (excepting those who were vets of the war or had close family who did).

Anonymous said...

FDR's role in inciting war in Europe:



Son of Brock Landers said...

Nikcrit - Hitler was a madman. No revisionism here. I think Germans use him as a scapegoat to minimize their collective guilt. Himmler was possibly worse, but they were fools who received patronage because someone always felt they could use them.

I also think Hitler had syphilis. It's long been a theory since his personal doctor when he was the furher was a VD specialist before. His shaking and weird behavior before his suicide resembles symptoms found in syphilitics

Anonymous said...

Hitler was apparently not eager for war:


From Germany, where the speaker would be subject to prosecution if what he said wasn't true.

peppermint said...

(1) the Holyhoax is a lie. There were not six million lampshades and bars of soap; if people were being gassed in those wooden shower rooms, where were they taking showers? If six million corpses were burned, where is the ash? Why are there so many survivors? Can Elie Weasel tell the same story about his stint across multiple camps twice?

(2) the Holyhoax was used to push sexual degeneracy on Germany, in the form of child abuse under the Jew theory that the Holyhoax was a result of sexual repression.

The Holyhoax was used to push sexual degeneracy on the US in the form of titties in Holyhoax dramatizations and lurid descriptions in the hoax Diary of Anne Frank, which is given to impressionable youths. Anyone who opposed this was accused of being anti-Semitic.

(3) if I was in Europe, I could go to jail for posting this. That's how the Jews keep their magic number six million while revising their figures for the camps, for example Auschwitz was revised upwards from 4 million to the shocking figure of 1.5 million. The number six million was decided on long before WWII.

Son of Brock Landers said...

Peppermint - It happened. I dont think my grandfathers would lie to me about camps they saw. The Auschwitz number was revised down but as you said they keep the total where it was. Personally, I think it happened but the number is not as high as the historians say. Rassiner and others stated numbers far lower but still in millions for total deaths.

Brandr said...

Son of Brock,

The number you're looking for is 275,000, according to the Red Cross at the time.

Five million made-up people should be sufficient to qualify it as a hoax, especially in light of the tens of millions of Russians slaughtered by the Bolshevik Jews.

nikcrit said...

Thanks for your comment; couldn't have provided a better example for point #3 of my above remark.

(I will say though: at least in this instance, there's a semi-logic to the false accusation leveled by the 'you-know-whos,' that slippery catchall for anything evil and inconvenient).

Anonymous said...

Irving and David Cole say that the Operation Reinhardt camps were real death camps and Auschwitz was not. Indeed, a major industrial facility like Auschwitz-Birkenau would be a funny place to conduct a super-secret killing operation. Deaths in the Western camps were said to be mainly caused by typhus-something the Western allies didn't have to deal with because they had DDT to kill the lice that carried it.

Toddy Cat said...

Good to see this. The Nazis probably hurt the cause of the Right more than anything else that has happened in the last 100 years, and it may end up killing Western Civilization dead. Yeah, WWI wasn't really Germany's fault, Versailles was unfair, Roosevelt wanted the US in the war, and the Commies were just as bad if not worse - but the simple fact of the matter is, the German people behaved like damned fools in the period 1918 - 1945, and Hitler can't be tagged with all the blame

Magus Janus said...

Peppermint, if it wasnt real what happened to the 5.5 mio jews who vanished from the record during the war? If you have a good explanation for that then I'm all ears.

"World War Two was really resolving who would be the dominant 20th century European model to impose on the world: British parliamentarian politics or German autocracy.”

Except Hitler repeatedly stated and acted on wanting peace with the British Empire. His goal was a deal with the West to get a free hand in the East. Everything he did makes sense in that framework. He wanted strategic resources in Ukraine/Caucuses and land to expand the nordic population.

The UK/US/Prog/Jew commie power did not want to let this happen and fought to protect the Soviet Union from him and then to hand over half of Europe to them.

UK was never under real threat from Germany except for a few brief months in 1940, and even then it was doubtful. And the US was NEVER in any danger. Germany was no threat, and wouldn't be for decades even if victorious against the SU.

Phillyastro said...

"World War Two was really resolving who would be the dominant 20th century European model to impose on the world: British parliamentarian politics or German autocracy.”

Oddly enough here in the West we have the trappings of British parliamentary system with a real German autocracy behind the scenes. I always thought the real winner in WWII was Mussolini. Even though he was hanged from piano wire, his fascist corpocracy is now the engine that runs the U.S. and the Western Countries.

Max said...

SOBL- I'm interested to know if you've read Richard Evans' three book series on the Third Reich. The second, The Third Reich in Power, relates to your post.

Evans makes a convincing case that the Nazis continually used what power they had to gain more, first over the German government and finally over the German people. Hitler, for example, barely gained the chancellorship and used his weak mandate to eliminate all voices in opposition. "When they came for the Communists," and all that.

What I found most striking in the second book was the complete Nazification of German society. If you were a factory worker, you'd find your union disbanded and a Nazi guild in its place. This effectively put a Nazi party operative (your grasping, status-hungry and nosy co-worker, puffed up proudly with his official swastikas) right in your workspace. The factory managers were forced to work with the party's corporatist goals and had operatives as well. One of your neighbors achieved his own personal authority by being the leader of your neighborhood's Nazi organization, in charge of poking around and being officious. Your wife's sewing circle was directed to disband and reform under the party's auspices. Your son was no longer in Boy Scouts--the Hitler Youth satisfied all his outdoor adventures.

The party's reach extended into all parts of a citizen's life, from work to recreation to family. In addition, the party was pointedly unconcerned whether an accusation had merit or was simply a tool in a petty squabble.

My impression is that the citizen had two choices: either to remain completely silent and hope that none of your acquaintances with party authority had a grudge against you, or cover your bases by appearing unassailably pro-Reich.

To do anything else was to be exposed to the party's capricious cruelty. In the years before the Holocaust, concentration camps were filled with a wide variety of Nazi enemies, some of whom were simply unenthusiastic about the Reich. Once imprisoned, they had no idea when--or if--they might be released. Executions and beatings were committed on a whim. If one was released, he was instructed to keep silent about what he'd seen and the threat of returning made sure that he was.

I discussed some of this (clumsily), here

With all this in mind, what would the average citizen have done if he heard whispers that Jews were being transported into a nearby camp, never to be seen again? Even if he knew incontrovertibly about the exterminations, what could he do but stand up, say, "This is wrong," and be murdered himself? Nothing would be changed except the destruction of his family. It's no wonder that Germans didn't want to know.

I think that discussion of German anti-Semitism pre-Hitler is important, but to lay blame on an evil German Volkisch character--which is the growing consensus--is to miss that this brutality is a universal danger.

The argument that "Hitler was crazy" is equally dismissive. The Nazis trained everyday members of a civilized, established nation to accept--and cheer--brutality. In my opinion, no one can say, "It can't happen here."

coyote said...

"SIX MILLION".... this magic number from the the kabala and the talmud has been around far longer than hitler appeared on the scene. ancient babyloonian usurers keep coming back with the same old shit. ya.. a couple of my uncles walked into the starving camps AFTER the allies bombed the fuck out of german railroads and no more food or medical supplies could get there. and then a real holocaust began starving, raping, and general genocide of the surviving german civilians. jewish control of our media anyone?

Son of Brock Landers said...

Max - Never read that trilogy.

Magus - Yes Hitler did want a deal with the empire. He kept offering a guarantee they could keep it if he could turn eastern europe and russia into a german empire.

nikcrit said...

Seems that run of the mill Germans like to use the Crazy Hitler excuse. That discounts decades of pogroms and other anti-semitic actions. That discounts the fact that Germans loved their Fuhrer up until he started losing. It also discounts how the German officers disagreed on strategy but no one mentioned surrender. It is self-serving lies on a national scale.

Perhaps, but we don't have enough information to make that assessment. I mean, the last sentence of your post here is way too absolute and deterministic. And the preceding couple of sentences aren't necessarily contradictory; (i.e., publicly suggesting 'surrender' was taboo for a host of 'self-serving' reasons ----- mainly, it could cause incite your administrative peers to label you a traitor and kill you. I'd say preventing that was prudent self-interest.
Still, Speer said in post-prison interviews that he did, in fact, implore Hitler to surrender and fought vehemently against the Fuhrer's scorched-earth policy, which, btw, caused exponentially more misery on all those volk that the fuhrer loved and fought for.
So maybe you're right ---- volk loyalism toward the fuhrer was strong ---- or at least stronger than was the fuhrer's return volley of loyalty toward said volk.

nikcrit said...

Umm, I think i need a mulligan on that last comment of mine; (i misread part of your post and commented accordingly...)