My biggest problem with this both side thing is that it’s often being use by apologist to make the ally somewhat as bad as the axis ,while yes the allie did commited war crime and atrocity, I don’t think they are on the same level as the axis one (I tend to think that the holocaust is way worst than anything the ally did +the axis actually started the war and the nazi wanted to exterminate people because they deemed them as subhuman). Also I often see it use alongside the classic "victor write history"trope .
2 Likes
Holodomor - 8 million dead in 1 winter. Your faithful allie ussr and stalin…
3 Likes
I think Nazi Germany was unique on a few levels
1 Germany was a Democracy and went “Dachau” by choice. Voting for Hindenburg and a substantial minority for Hitler. Mein kampf and the party agenda an violent mobs left no doubt. For those apologizers many Germans still agree.
2 The holocaust was institutionalizing and maximizing sadism for no rational reason at all. Rathenau, Haber and other Jews more than did their share in WW1. Like timeghost pointed out Jews were buried alive, gassed, there were continuous mass rapes and murder.
3 Also, the mass murder was often done voluntarily. Those who refused were given other jobs as mechanics etc. Scientific works like “Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 11 and the Final Solution in Poland” or Goldhagen prove this. The view that war criminals didn’t have a choice is untrue.
This definitely made the Holocaust uniquely horrible and preventable.
4 Likes
A lot of Nazis escaped to western europe after the fall of Berlin and were spared by the Allies.
The British also committed geonicde in Iran at the time, arguably in India as well.
And let’s not forget Stalins treatment of Anacho communists and socialists.
just in case: please don’t do genocide olympic
also why do I got these “draft is edited in another windows” message?
3 Likes
Iran had a couple of hundred deaths during WWII, what genocide are you referring to?
2 Likes
Kiev’s court of appeal put the number at 3.9 million back in 2010, which comes close to what historian Timothy Snyder has in his books Bloodlands and Black Earth (3.3-4.5 million).
I think that both the deniers as well as the exaggerationists do us all a disservice.
A lot of this can be traced to the Cold War, where deaths at the hands of Hitler were downplayed to the Holocaust only (ignoring German butchery of millions of Soviet citizens) and deaths at the hands of Stalin were vastly exaggerated to the point where 20 million deaths were outright shifted from Hitler’s column into Stalin’s column.
Often these Cold War historians (I use the term loosely) would not just include Soviet citizens killed by the Germans as victims of Stalin, but would also add theorized numbers of unborn millions to the total.
So my question to you is, what is your goal by being an exaggerationist? I also saw you here at TimeGhost in another thread making ludicrous claims that are at best unverified and at worst revisionist?
2 Likes
Keep it cool, fellas.
kinda wondering what is your definition of communist sympathiser now because while I acknowledge their atrocity, I don’t think they were as bad or worst than than the nazi(and using number isn’t great because of how so call historian can distort them in fonction of their bias[per example the black book of communism one] and often when death toll are use for comparing nazi germany to ussr,people will use the toal number for both even though the ussr had more time to do their killing than the third reich ) and groverr furr isn’t a good source as well
1 Like
I always look at what a person does and what he says. You, for example, dislike nazis a lot it seems, which makes you put allies on the pedestal of some sort, now if you would be just talking about British (even though they murdered my people in 1945) or French, later the USA, I would agree with you 100%. But unfortunately, allies also consisted of statin gulag of nations, commonly known as ussr and for some reason, people in the west call Russia.
Of course, the communist crimes and murders seem less for a longer time the occupied and still occupy the world countries. But we can only compare the Nazi regime under 1 leader, Hitler, and that is it. Under Brezhnev, for example, ussr stopped mass murder on stalin level, and Kruschev fell out with china because Mao in there was a stalinist and murdered many more millions then ussr. It is estimated up to 60 million people were and still are murdered in communist occupied China.
Why is there no hard number? there were never trials against soviet murderers, modern-day Russian Federation keeps it archives shut and only permits small releases from here and there. communists are saluted there, especially inside the government and secret police. Cheka badges are sold and Dzerzinsky portraits can be seen in the cabinets of fsb, in comparison, it would be the same as having Himmler portraits in german GSG9 (or however their secret police is called). It is estimated numbers, and communists apologists and sympathizers try to bring down the number as low as possible. According to Nove, Alec (1993), “Victims of Stalinism: How Many?” ussr killed up to 8.1 million (for a period ending in 1937). Some put it higher, The black book of communism claims 20 million. In Rudolphs Rummel (1994), “Death by Government” he claims up to 61 million (for the period 1917-1987).
In general, communists killed all over the world many more people then Hitler ever did, even if you look at time stance. Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge murdered at least 1,386,734 in a country with a population of 8 million.
Nazis killed according to race is a common quote, and that us right, but communists killed according to race as well, they, of course, focused on class and social status more, but never the less. Soviets decided to “eliminate, exterminate, and deport the population of a whole territory,” which they had taken to calling the “Soviet Vendée”. Many people groups were deported just because they were anti-communist or did not want to accept the overlords from kremlin. Decossackization, were probably between 300,000 and 500,000 murdered from a population of 1.5 million Don cossacks during 1919 and 1920, this murder also included rape of children, torture of anyone they could in most sadistic methods. This statistic exceeds any nazi crime in comparison to time and numbers.
Holodomor was not just in Ukraine, Ukraine was the hardest hit, but it also spread to other parts of occupied lands, the difference is Ukraine talks about it and modern-day RF does not. 8 million is an estimate of all people who did during Holodomor, not just Ukrainians if severe hunger causes a woman to have a miscarriage then it is also murder since a healthy woman would actually have a baby. From my mothers side, my great grandfather was considered a Kulak by communists and was sent to gulag where he died in 1938. He was living 2 hours away from Moscow by modern roads, his family starved, lucky for them americans were able to send aid and they did not die and did not have to each other, like in many other regions where one of the kids would be eaten so others would survive.
The communist up there tells lies and propaganda produced by communists, I know it because I heard it from them all my life, for example, communists claim that in the Chernobyl disaster only 31 people died, this is obviusly a lie. modern-day RF prases on the official level occupation of the Baltic state and anyone who fought in UPA (they fought both against nazis and communists) are considered Hitler’s collaborators and fascists.
soviet apologists take the lies of communism, call it statistics and shove them into other people calming them as facts. Shoving soviet propaganda films like “Liberation” and claiming it represents the eastern front, saying that only 1 million people died in soviet gulags. All those lies make communist apologists equivalent to holocaust deniers, the only difference is that in the west one is mainstream knowledge and another is not. If your question 6 million 99% of people would call you out, but if you question the number of people murdered by communists 90% of people would have no idea if they are real. So-called “professors” in universities, who are actually communists themselves will come up with lower numbers, the press, like Washington Post or New York Times, will continue their tradition of lying about communists crimes, juts like they did back when it was happening.
4 Likes
My biggest problem with his does this take in account the same time period nazi germany existed? (and honestly I still don’t considered general plan Ost some kind of leftist proganda ,if the nazi had won ,they would legit do their lebensraum idea and it would ld to even more dead than the soviet union) .
I would say that nazi germany is way worst than the ussr in therm of ideology ,also if I’m so bias against nazi germany ,it’s because they would have legit exterminate me due to my genetic disease and autism
( I don’t think that anecdote are verry good evidence [mainly due to the survivor bias involved, remember that the dead can’t tell their version of the story,per example “le grand père”(french variant of “mein opa” told by vichyboo) may have it good in vichy france ,but that doesn’t mean the people targeted by the regime(the jew per example) have it good])
So the communists would murder me because i hate them and disagree with their ideology and i can earn money batter then people who do not work.
Murder does not have time, murder does not have to take place in 1939 - 45 to be equivalent, if you want to compare murder in regimes you have to look at all the crimes commited by them and if it so happens that communists concentrated their killing earlier then the nazis does not mean that they were better.
You hate nazis and you try to explain yourself that they were actually worst becouse of resons, yet some of the reasons do not get together, Cossacks, Caucases people, Turkmens, Tatars and etc, were apparently good enough and plan ost did not seem to be effecting them. Vlasov had idea of taking Russia with german help and then kicking them out in the union of Liberated People of ussr.
You try to make one side better, and this argument just does not hold ground, you start million topics here with the same premise, “everything to do with Germany in WW2 was evil and everything to do against them was all right” which makes you dance on the bones of millions murdered by communists. but then against being from the west they don’t teach you about communist crimes, what is there to be surprised about.
You are bringing it back to nazis hypothetically were better then communists. Insted of saying nazis were evil and communists were no better, or do you think you would be free to do what you like in ussr? During Moscow 1980 Summer Olympics ussr would ship not all homeless, invalides, people with symptoms like you away from moscow and put them under kgb controlled locations do the foreigners would not see them. Most likely you would be put in hospital where you would be kept until you die.
2 Likes
saying that the nazi are worst than the soviet isn’t me trying to make the soviet look better, seriously I still don’t get your logic here (did I mention that I acknowledge their crime?)
2 Likes
Look I can’t disagree with you more. Thing is the Holocaust was pursued with greater irrationality than the Holodomor or the Armenian Genocide, but it’s wasn’t more preventable or more horrible.
One can, and I have much to utter disgust, that the Armenian Genocide and the mass killings/genocide of the Anatolian Greeks was an utter success on the strategic level in that the Turks held onto disputed territory by murdering the other claimants out of existence. And yes there was population exchange with the Greeks, but if there hadn’t been the Turks would have completely annihilated the Anatolian Greek population rather than kicking them out.
That doesn’t mean that it was less preventable. The British COULD have exterminated the Irish population in the wake of World War, but they agreed to the loss of strategically vital territory, territory that could in the long run put Britain itself, not merely the empire in mortal danger. And sooner or later it absolutely will, that’s the simple strategic reality waiting for a local great power conflict to fill, presumably after the collapse of the Pax Americana.
The Armenian Genocide and the Holodomor were all kinds of horrible and for most victims of Operation Reinhard, it was less horrific because they were killed straight away in extermination camps, not crucified, burned alive in churches and barns or face slow starvation over months. I am NOT saying the Holocaust was less horrible, what I’m saying is the extermination through work camps like Auschwitz I were functionally no different than the more extreme Gulags and pre-Gulags in the Russian Empire. Dostoevsky describes his stay in one of them in the 1850s and they are largely compatible with Auschwitz I experiences I’ve read from Weisel and Frankel.
And the Holodomor was even less sensible than the Holocaust because there wasn’t wartime need to even fig leaf it. The Germans were facing starvation and food shortages and though this isn’t an excuse, it does have a toe in reality. The Holodomor was done because of the greed of Stalin, and both done from batshit insane ideological convictions. Neither was done with any scruples, any notion of finding a better, less violent, and destructive way to achieve their instrumental goals.
It’s a GROSS mistake to think the Nazis were in any way ideologically or culturally unique. I think Origins of Totalitarianism explains it most in-depth but the Poles have it most pithy:
These types of movements are less by malicious personalities and a horde of flying monkeys
This apparently comes from Political Ponerology: A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes
In totalitarian states the 1% of psychopaths control a ‘nobility’ of 5% of extremely pathological people and a ‘middle class’ of 12% of less pathological and low-conscience people (17% Flying Monkeys), which is why all totalitarian states look the same behind their different ‘ideological masks’, and why democracies can only survive if their citizens are accurately educated about psychological matters (‘Political Ponerology’, A. Lobaczewski, 1984).
2 Likes
Which source told you that starvation that food shortages/starvation was the reason for the holocaust? There is NO TRUTH IN THIS WHATSO EVER. This is one of the holocaust deniers arguments. These people who happened to be Jewish actually more than did their share in World War 1 without hesitation. For example Fritz Haber with its horrible poison gas and Walther Rathenau the logistics wonder of World War 1 (Germany would have run a lot better with him or someone like him).
Note:
Holocaust denial is against forum rules! I would like to know the source you used.
" it was less horrific because they were killed straight away in extermination camps,"
Another false statement just see the pictures of the emanciated people in Auschwitz. Hate to say it but you don’t need to have a Masters in History to know this very basic fact.
“Dostoevsky describes his stay in one of them in the 1850s and they are largely compatible with Auschwitz I experiences I’ve read from Weisel and Frankel.”
Note: that Dostoevsky got out alive and could publish a book in Russia, that was not the plan of the Final Solutions and guess what in the Kristallnacht unwanted books were burned.
As for my post:
I am not going into a “numbers contest(Genocide Olympics)” with regards to Holodomor/Armenian Genocide and instead used the 3 points above as a combination which in my view made the holocaust unique. Democracy before, totally irrational, and option to refuse for the executioners in very many cases.
Chewie,
PS Should you ever get to the Netherlands I am willing to give you a free tour of some of the sites. I don’t work in Russia anymore and am not sure if their Gulag museum is as good as it used to be.
I think he should watch the BBC show Auschwitz:the nazi and the final solution or read this geat blog http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/
1 Like
You want my source? Movie Conspiracy based on Wannasee notes and Adam Toozes Wages of destruction. Would love to pick apart that emotional toss you’ve tossed out but I’m not feeling well ATM.
Read up on the Hunger Plan section. He’s the one who discusses in detail German food shortages and what they planned to do about it.
Democracy is not a telos. There is no telos. Germany being a democracy is completely irrelevant. Never let emotions or morals get in the way of analysis. You will only discredit yourself and draw wrong conclusions.
By this sentence, I think he means that the communists were not in war, or am I mistaken?
since communists were selling bread to west while starving farmers without being involved in any conflict with anyone but the White Movement and other rebels. In fact, stalin used money from selling this food to build factories, so 8 million lives were one of the few prices of communist modernization.
1 Like
Get well soon,
Just reread Tooze (interesting works on economics but not an undisputed source of holy truty. Apart from the fact that he confused 90+ % of historians when writing about Junkers Aircraft and not the landowners ). Also I read Tooze and I never read that the deathcamps with Jews
Germany wanted to create “Lebensraum” and looked at according to their horriblelogic JudeoBolshevik territory:
“The natural area for settlement of the German people is
the territory to the east of the Reich’s boundaries up to the Urals, Tooze, Wages of Destruction 2007, p. 198.”
That Germany had self-inflicted food shortages (just read what Tooze said about the RNS) is no reason to put Jews/other undesirables (according to Nazi’s in gas chambers and death camps.) Guess what they could have worked in the newly conquered territory?
Tooze isn’t perfect and his work is very good but has a narrow economic focus, However it doesn’t explain the death camps and the choice of WHO went in there.
Did you really read the books in full or did you find a site which created this false narrative (like the Seige of Madrid example)?
@Chewbacca
Here’s the thing:
First, Military Visualized is no apologist channel. And he talks about the bombing of BARCELONA, not Madrid, but all the strategic bombing of the SCW and the pre-1940 Sino Japanese War showed over and over again that Strategic bombing failed in its actual purpose: to break morale. That WHY the Nationalists bombed Barcelona, their ground attack failed so they tried the doctrines of the air theorists. And they NEVER worked. German production peaked in mid 1944 and then collapsed…because of resource shortages due to lost territory.
You didn’t read Tooze very well. He’s very explicit that in the Nazis planning, operation Reinhard was a form of triage, rapidly killing the Nazis least favorite groups of people to free up the remaining agricultural capacity. Which is sorta like if your foot is in a cast and you need to drive but can’t use the petals, instead of renting a handicapped car that you could accelerate and brake with hand control, you hire a midget or small child to work the petals for you as you drive. It’s a very bad solution, and it’s batshit, crazy, but it addresses a real need.
What you’re missing is that the Agricultural ministry was run by hacks, but even if it hadn’t, Germany had little capacity to feed it’s conquered territories effectively. Not in Tooze’s book, but one of the reasons the Germans were so blithe to a British blockade is that in 1908-12 IIRC Germany could easily grow 80% of its own food and had stores. The unanticipated problem was that they were dependent on Phosphates from Chile to fertilize their land, and even after they discovered nitrogenation from the air, most of that Nitro went to munitions, not the fields.
What shocks the conscience is not the horribleness, reading Tooze’s section on food policy but it’s utter laziness. Because the German High Command expected 10-20 million Russians to starve to death in 1941 due to disrupted harvests and they were cool with that. That’s horrible on its own but then it DIDN’T happen, cause most of the Russians went home to their parents farms and worked the soil and barely produced enough food to keep from starving to death in the interim.
But even Tooze doesn’t explore these implications of what the Germans could or should have done in the Barbarossa planning. Clearly they could have done more than they did, but because most historians deal with the boring facts of what actually happened and make no counterfactual assessment, they are basically the Challenger engineers saying to the world “The O-Ring failed and that’s why the shuttle blew up. Solutions didn’t happen so they’re not important and certainly not our purview.”
Also, like it or not, the Germans voting for Hitler in 1932 is a bad narrative, cause it was 2/3 of the totalitarians in the Reichstag, either Commies or Nazis, but this isn’t a German cultural issue, it’s the political version of strategic default. The middle class wasn’t ruined by Versailles, which is as true as it is irrelevant. The Middle Class had been utterly wiped out in not one but THREE banking collapses in 12 years, 1918, 1923, 1930. At that point, the great stabilizer of modern policies, the middle class was tapped out and desperate. Certainly, at the time, they were facing ruin at the hands of the Communists and possible purges, or subjugation at the hands of the Nazis or a long civil war that results in one of those two things.
Without hindsight, voting for the Nazis was a supremely rational act, one most of us would have made. People say a lot of shit. They thought Hitler was lying about the whole race war thing because it was crazy talk. And Hitler certainly lied about nearly everything else, which makes him a typical politician. How do you tell brown toxic waste in a cesspit filled with liquid shit? You can’t.
To take a MILDER version of things, no one in 2010, even in the Chinese Communist Party, could have seen Xi becoming the all-powerful dictator of China he is now. No matter what he said, if he said anything to show his ambitions, there were systems in place in the Communist system to prevent another Mao, which Xi has painstakingly dismantled in the last 10 years. The Hitler of 1933 and 1941 is a much MUCH different animal and I don’t just mean the public face. Drunk with power applies to bad men even more than good men.
BTW, thank you for the well wishes. Didn’t even know a BiPAP hose could leek this bad. Waking up every 90 minutes, strung out and with horrid dry mouth is not a fun way to spend a Sunday afternoon, I tell you what.
2 Likes