Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
Nessie that is a hard one, due to Typhus and the war. If you think we were bad, Stalin was much worse and got away with it.
Wenn wir die Flagge, die wir aus dem Nichts gerissen haben, nicht halten können, müssen Sie, meine Söhne und Töchter, greifendie Fahne in deiner Faust...Führer der NSDAP Adolf Hitler
Even if the death toll was just due to disease and hardship in the camps, the death rate for Jews was massive and counts as a genocide. It was the stated aim of the Nazis to rid Europe of the Jewish people.
That Stalin did similar is not denied by anyone, comparisons are just a tue quo que fallacy designed to distract from the elephant in the room, which is no trace of all the millions deniers claim were not murdered by shooting or gassing.
I stated "1941" because I want to know how many "Polish" Jews Sanning is stating fell under the German area of control. Sanning has that as being around 800,000 in total throughout the war years and yet has about 3 million Jews in Poland pre-war. So he is obviously claiming that about 2.2 million of those 3 million Polish Jews were evacuated by the Soviets from Poland (or evacuated themselves).Wurm wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2017 10:28 pmYou criticized Table 1 which states nothing on the situation in 1941. Regarding 1941, see Table 3 or 5, which states 1,026,000 Jews in Eastern Poland in 1941.blake121666 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:39 pmI've read his book. Sanning has zero Jews in the Polish area occupied by the Soviets when the Germans invade that area. That's the main premise of his book. So I don't understand what you are getting at here. Are you claiming that Sanning claims there were more Jews than 791,000 in Poland (East and West) in 1941? He claims the Soviets evacuated all the Jews, does he not?Wurm wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:43 pmYou may have missed that "Eastern Poland" is listed twice in the table:blake121666 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:50 am
He has only 791,000 Jews in Western Poland and none in Eastern Poland. He has 74% of the Polish Jews being evacuated from there before the Germans enter (in less than 2 years - ALL Eastern Poland Jews evacuated by the Soviets).
The KR has 1.5 million Jews being evacuated by the Germans from the "Eastern Territories" (mostly Poland) to "the Russian East". Where did those particular 1.5 million come from if there were only 791,000 Jews in Poland for the Germans to deal with?
If you say otherwise, please tell me how many Jews Sanning claims were in occupied Poland (jointly occupied by Germany and the USSR) at the outbreak of Operation Barbarossa (June 22, 1941). I want a number.
But German documents - such as the Korherr Report - have Germans handling about 3 million Polish Jews - not around 800,000. So why do the Germans think that they are futzing about with 3 million Polish Jews - allegedly transporting about 1.5 million of them to "the Russian East" and such - and yet Sanning says there were only half that number under their control?
I'll have to look it over again; but Sanning's numbers don't correlate well with the German's records of the time. This looks to be the case on its face.
EDIT: And BTW, if Sanning thinks such things such as these large deportations of Jews before the Germans arrived, THAT is a BIG BIG BIG BIG BIG thing that he should look into as thoroughly as possible. Just think of the questions that such a claim brings up. What was the reason for these transports? Who decided this? Where did the Jews go? Why were the Germans so completely unaware of this at the time? Why did the Germans THINK that these did not take place and that they were handling about 3 million Jews? Why do the German records show them administering to 3 million Jews when that was not the case? ... etc. You get the point, right? Just citing a newspaper or such saying "2 million Jews are sent to Siberia" doesn't really cut it given all of the ramifications of such a thing.
From Korherr, March 17, 1939, the General Government had 2 million Jews. That is the Nazi area of occupied Poland. By the end of 1942 that had dropped to 297,914.
Yes. To clarify, the GG was the German zone of occupied Poland and the "Eastern Territories" was the Soviet zone of occupied Poland. It looks like the KR claims the mirror opposite of what Sanning claims. I'll have to look into that further.
EDIT: And I think I miswrote above (thinking the GG to have been the non-annexed parts of Poland). I need to work out my interpretation of the KR more fully. There are still a number of questions in my mind about what my EXACT interpretation of it even is! I'm currently using Balsamo's ideas about it to a large degree at this time, though ... not totally onboard with all of his interpretations though.
I would take Korherr over Sanning as Korherr was working at the time, to no agenda and the obessive idenification and registration of Jews made for some very accurate population figures.
Wurm wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2017 2:02 pmThe Holocaust is absolutely necessary for the Soviet/Russian view on the "Great Patriotic War". Whatever faults the Soviet Union had, the "Nazis" were worse due to the Holocaust, making the Soviet Union the heroes by defeating the "Nazis".
Now, if the Stalin killed the Jews, what does that imply regarding who was the WWII villain...
THAT WE ARE LIVING IN
THAT WE ARE LIVING IN
Regarding Edmund Burke's famous aphorism: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”. Well, evil has triumphed on a number of occasions, and on one of them the "good man" [Roosevelt] was indifferent. Soon after taking office as president of the United States in 1933, Roosevelt extended diplomatic recognition to the Soviet Union, which was already establishing its record as the most murderous regime of all time. Specifically, it had pursued agricultural "collectivization" by confiscating harvests and starving Ukraine into submission. Low estimates put the number of dead at seven million; the highest estimate is 13 million. In some places it was reported that dead children were not even being buried; they were being eaten.
The Ukrainian famine is sometimes called ‘the forgotten holocaust’. It might better be called the forgiven holocaust. The anti-Communist Hearst papers covered it extensively at the time, thereby incurring the wrath of [Jewry and the indoctrinated masses]. (Orson Welles portrayed William Randolph Hearst as a corrupt capitalist in Citizen Kane.) But Walter Duranty of the New York Times, eager for Stalin's favour, denied that there was any starvation in Ukraine and won a Pulitzer for his reportage. His Pulitzer has never been revoked; the Times continues to honour him among its stellar journalists of the past.
Privately, by the way, Duranty admitted to the British ambassador in Moscow that as many as 15 million had died. That his estimate may have been high only underlines his mendacity. He gave the American establishment an excuse for ignoring Communist crimes which had been amply confirmed by others, and which made most of Europe terrified of Communism between the wars. In any case, Roosevelt had no excuse. No president depends entirely on the Times for his information.
Since Pius XII is (falsely) accused of "silence" about the Nazi persecution of the Jews, it is worth mentioning that his predecessor Pius XI was far more "silent" about the Ukrainian famine and, later, the equally great Soviet purges of the later 1930s. Popes rarely commented on specific events; they condemned Communism and Nazi racialism in principle and felt it unnecessary, or unavailing, to add detailed condemnations when evil principles were put into practice.
Of course those who condemn Pius XII for silence about the murder of Jews don't condemn Pius XI for silence about the murder of Ukrainians and others. But neither do they condemn Roosevelt or anyone else for overlooking the Communist horrors. This gross double standard is a key to understanding not only Roosevelt's time, but our own.
If the official world had condemned and quarantined the Soviet Union for its "democide" (an apt word coined by Professor R.J. Rummel), [Churchill and] Hitler might have thought twice about imitating that
Today opinion condemns "Holocaust denial" that has no effect on events long past; but it maintains its own silence on the timely denials of Communist horrors while they were happening — denials that not only helped them to continue, but allowed the killers to escape punishment and censure.
Later, when the numbers of Soviet victims had surpassed the total number of the dead of World War I, Roosevelt's generosity to Stalin and the Soviet Union actually increased. He gave Stalin aid against Germany, eagerly formed an alliance with him, and praised him as a great ally in the democratic war against "fascism." He even pressured Warner Brothers to produce a major motion picture, Mission to Moscow, portraying Stalin as the benign grandfather of the Russian people. The film was based on the memoir of Joseph Davies, Roosevelt's former ambassador to Moscow; Davies defended even Stalin's purges, taking the view that anyone Stalin killed probably got what was coming to him.
While all this was going on, Hitler was not alone in blaming Communism on the Jews. Secularized Jews had been prominent in the first generation of Soviet leadership; and even after Stalin had purged those Jews, other Jewish intellectuals, propagandists, and activists were conspicuous in the world Communist movement. Many Europeans crudely equated Jews with Communism. This fact in no way justifies the slightest violation of the rights of Jews, but it does explain ...the preference of many for Hitlerite over Stalinist rule. With war looming, most people forget morality and think of their own hides. Besides, in the late 1930s Hitler was not even [claimed to be] in the mass murder business yet; Stalin was.
This whole side of the period between the wars, officially ignored at the time, is officially forgotten now. It has become customary to speak as if Hitler arose in a vacuum, the German masses [supposedly] followed him out of sheer malevolence, and the French collaborated with him out of sheer cowardice. Today anyone who even advocated neutrality toward Hitler is condemned; the America First movement and other "isolationists" are spoken of as if they had actually been pro-Hitler.
That view is tenable only if you pretend that Communism didn't
...Roosevelt's latter-day admirers see no moral connection between his friendship for the Soviet Union and his indifference to the extermination of Jews.
Victims of Communism
"Victims of Communism" is not a phrase that rolls easily off lips. [But] Professor Rummel puts the number of dead under Soviet Communism at nearly 62 million.
The huge, tax-supported Holocaust Museum near the Mall today commemorates the victims of Nazism, chiefly Jewish, but also gypsy, homosexual, whatever. The victims of communism may have a plaque somewhere. Who knows?
[The whole of human society] now occupies a rhetorically Hitlercentric universe, in which Nazism is the measure of all evil and Roosevelt [and Churchill] are redeemed by their determination to crush Germany. The stain of guilt for Nazism constantly spreads — to ordinary Germans, allies of Germany, neutrals, isolationists, Swiss bankers, and Pius XII himself.
The stain even spreads backward in time, to pre-Hitler anti-Semites, Martin Luther, Christian culture in general, even (according to a filmstrip shown at the Holocaust Museum) to the authors of the Gospels.
In a new theory of causation, even the slightest historical injustice to Jews "led to" the Holocaust. Scholarly books, popular movies, and everyday rhetoric are saturated with this theme. Everyone and everything is measured on a single scale, which might be called the Hitler Continuum.
But there is not corresponding Stalin Continuum. Those who aided and defended and celebrated Stalin at the height of his crimes incur no guilt or obloquy. To have dreamed the Communist dream is evidence of idealism, not guilt or even irresponsibility. Under "McCarthyism" Communists actually became victims themselves! Books, movies, and rhetoric dramatize the plight of innocent Communists in the America of the 1950s. Old Communists like Lillian Hellman can publish their memoirs of persecution -- how they suffered firing, blacklisting, or sharp questioning by the House Un-American Activities Committee – and be hailed as heroes and champions of liberty, no less, even if it took them until 1956, the year of Khrushchev's famous denunciation, to see the error of Stalin's ways. Khrushchev, after all, didn't repudiate Communism; he merely accused Stalin of having betrayed it. How? By murdering countless innocent people? No, by purging loyal Party members!
So the stain of Communist guilt, far from spreading metaphysically, shrinks to one man, the erstwhile "Uncle Joe." He and he alone is blamed for all that carnage. We don't even ask what "led to" such astounding violence and terror, let alone why he enjoyed such complicity by powerful, influential, intelligent, and seemingly respectable people. Even Stalin's warmest admirers and benefactors aren't tainted; that would be "guilt by association," a McCarthyite tactic.
Certain shoes, for some reason, are never put on the other foot. Imagine what would be said today of a president who had given Hitler a little help when he needed it. Or an ambassador who had written eulogies to Nazi jurisprudence. Or a reporter who had written from Berlin that Jews weren't being abused in the Third Reich. Or an "idealist" who had seen Nazi Germany as the hope of mankind.
You don't have to imagine a world in which people are forgiven for doing the same things for the Soviet Union. You're living in that world right now.
~~ By Joseph Sobran [1946 – 2010]
Not likely to happen. He has been dead for a few years. Rudolf wrote about his death in the updated version of Sanning's book published by Castle Hill.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests