Posen Speech

Discussions
User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23552
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:03 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Fri Nov 16, 2018 12:45 pm
Monstrous wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2015 5:49 pm
*Why does the speech state that genocide was part of the NSDAP party program?
A denier favorite. I just came across today where Eichmann stated at his trial, "The party program did not matter, you knew what you were joining." This is in Mann's book, Fascists, and Mann sums up,
Many Nazis . . . would boast that they had never looked at the party program and say (though only in private) that thy had never opened their copies of Mein Kampf
In this sense, the "program" became "'shared knowledge' . . . more than any canonical dogma." (p 141) Mann does argue, however, that the party program gave "a clear summary of . . . cleansing nation-statism." More on this later.
Stat,
All started with this mysterious post from you, bumping up a post - the POSEN SPEECH THREAD - untouched for over two years
Sorry, my prerogative (and hardly mysterious). I've done it before, I'll do it again. Only in this instance has my doing so prompted hysterics.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
then using a Eichmann's trial statement - which is utter BS like 90% of his testimonies when it comes to his personal implication to the genocide
I didn't quote Eichmann on genocide. I quoted Mann quoting Eichmann on how the party program was viewed.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
to prove what exactly? That genocide was in the program?
Clearly not.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
or that "everyone"(who?, all party members? all Germans?) knew (what exactly, the genocide?) what they were joining" ?" (what joining? joining what?)
Clearly not. I did spell this out for you in one of my replies btw (viewtopic.php?f=39&t=25102&start=400#p673387). I also had written in a different post, "And, a second point, Mann doesn’t so much as imply that the party program had a plank specifically advocating genocide. . . ."
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
And then, what? Mann summing up that this untold "program" - which did not matter - as everyone who joined (again what?) know it was a "shared knowledge" - Eichmann's favorite - that is a "shared knowledge of the genocide that was going on"?
Absolutely not. It seems that you've decided not to read what I wrote and are substituting straw men of your liking.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
And then, you conclude, by stating that Mann - sorry i am just about finishing the "Dark side" and not "Fascist", confirming what i am basically saying that Germany through the NSDAP program "gave a clear summary of "cleansing nation statism!
But not genocide. And cleansing nation-statism explained in a different way from how you're trying to have it.

In any event, the cleansing aspects of the party program seem to me to have involved Mann's levels 1-3, not 4-6. Thus, the program differs to the import of Himmler's Posen remarks.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
then, when i reacted, this thread is no longer about the Posen speech but Mann?
No, my point was always, as I've tried explaining several times, about how the party program was viewed, and what light that might shed on Himmler's invocation of the program at Posen, prompted by something Mann had written about this.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
Stat:
But the comment I made about this was about election campaigning before the seizure of power, not the larger context and background (I wrote about the Nazis' "downplaying anti-Semitism during election campaigns for example", which presupposes an existing, prevalent antisemitism that was being downplayed).
I understood that...
But then what is the relation between the NSDAP political strategies ( in the 20's and 30's) to get elected and the Posen Speeches?
Nothing directly. I made a comment on campaign strategies in the context of saying that the implications of the cleansing rhetoric of the '20s and early '30s was not then clear. To help you understand that the party program, even earlier, didn't have a clear statement of cleansing strategies.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
And even then, who would - certainly not Mann - take conclusion of what a political party says during a electoral campaign in the first place?
It is Mann who makes this point, actually, in explaining what the Nazi appeal was to their sympathizers and those who voted Nazi.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
But then - and i have not checked - if Mann downplays Antisemitic action during the years 1932-1933, then he is just wrong! Especially after the "fire of the Reichstag" which was attributed to the Communists, which means in Nazi rethoric, Jewish*-Bolshevism.
Mann is discussing, as I was, the period before the seizure of power, so the Reichstag Fire, the antisemitic legislation, etc are not relevant to his point, which you've taken far afield of the intent of my original post.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
I don't know what this means. I don't know what you think my perspective and Mann's might be. Now, Mann says (I would, too) that the Nazis set out with a cleansing mindset. But how that relates to what you say here, I don't know.
Come on, Stat, you know very well what "ethnic cleansing" means.
I don't know what you think it means or how you think Mann described "cleansing nation-statism" in the party program. Why you say that, on this basis, Mann and I (!?!) take a step backwards is as elusive to me now as it was when I told you I didn't understand your point.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
So even if the program is meant to get the Jews out of the German society, and that as soon as enough authority is gathered, the first Antisemitic laws, along with way too many public killings and/or humiliations, are issued continuously in order to make the life of Jew in Germany impossible, you and Mann would qualify this as a "mindset" ????
So that half of the German Jews left Germany before was the result of a "mindset?
I don't think that the party program - note: party program - is very clear on the mindset, particularly on how far cleansing is to go, what forms it will take, what actions are permissible or desirable, etc.

The party program actually says that Jews might remain in Germany, as guests, on their good behavior. It was ominous in tone but the specifics were not worked out, and, as Mann and many others point out, the Nazi pitch during these years utilized details and left loopholes that encouraged confusion about Nazi intentions.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
Sorry but i don't remember Mann stating such things. I remember him saying that the first mean was "pressured" emigration ( what is the objective?), followed by forced deportation (again what is the objective?), and finally the genocide ( and bloody hell the objective is the same!)
I don't see all that in the 1920 party program.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
So my question to you would be: How do you define a "Ethnic cleansing" (or of course, political, religious or social one)?
We have a whole thread on this - but the answer isn't pertinent to the issues here.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
But conquest kept bringing in, so to speak, larger and larger Jewish populations.
Of course, and this new situation imposed new means. But that is really another issue.
Exactly. But you're the one who keeps bringing up this entire history, rather than focusing on what I posted about.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
Link to what? The translation discussion? I don't see that at all. You introduced the word ausrotten as the expression for cleansing - I told you that the term is not used in the 1920 platform.
Well, maybe,
No, definitely.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
because the word ausrotten is quite relevant to the Posen speech which is what this thread is about?
Reading your posts here, I feel that if I had made a post about the Posen speech focusing on where Himmler said "It is a tragedy according to the laws of nature that Russian men born in 1925 to 1927 amount to 1.5 and 1.8 men million respectively, while our men born in the same years amount to only 500,000 to 600,000 respectively, that is, a third of the Russian number," I would have been treated to long lectures on ausrotten.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
And what the hell do you mean by platform in this context?
Calm self. I mean the party platform of 1920. I don't think I was unclear about that. That's partly why I dug up an old post from Monstrous, in fact. I will go further: you know exactly what I was referring to.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
So that some German scholars(?) from 1930 write or translate about "Die ausrottung der Ukrainer in Polen" (published in Prague by the way) means it is also out of that "platform?", of those who wrote that book just missed a genocide that took place three years before Hitler became chancellor? Or was this unfortunate minority also victim of a vicious "cleansing mindset" by the Polish government?
You've lost me.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
Mann didn't mention ausrotten. And I didn't say that he did. You introduced discussion of the word.
First, Mann mentions the term at least on page 191.
On p 191 Mann discusses the class thesis for Nazi support. I don't see the word ausrotten on that page. Nor do I see Mann using that word earlier, where he discussed the party's program, the context in which you first posted that the German word for cleansing is ausrotten.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
And then should we conclude that the term ausrotten is irrelevant to to the Posen speech thread.
We should conclude that every discussion about the Posen speech is not about your obsession with the word ausrotten.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
Then better to open know thread about it, then...I can hear the loud applause from the crowed of readers...
Seriously though, take some deep breaths, calm yourself, and think about what is being said before going off on tangents like this.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
OTOH I think the forum can serve as a "repository" for arguments, thoughts, etc that undermine denial. As a kind of side thing. Anyway, whether you want me to or not, that's one thing I will keep on doing.
So you were really talking to Monstrous in your first post?
Sorry then.
I was, as I've done before in other contexts, using a statement a denier here had made to add a new thought to earlier replies. Why does this trouble you so much?
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
This has nothing to do with what Mann wrote or what I posted.
Nope, but the thread is about the "Posen speech".
Again, the Posen speeches are long and cover many points. The part I was focused on is different to what you keep posting in reply. It's pretty simple, despite the length of these posts.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
That is really a stretch - and, to be clear, Mann makes no such argument; in fact, he writes, of the 1920s and early 1930s, "It was still unclear, even perhaps to Hitler himself, what all this ethnic and political cleansing might practically entail."
Not meant to be a stretch, just a summary.
I meant that your conclusion, in the context of the point I'd raised, is a stretch. Especially when you write, "All those measures taken can be considered as part of the Nazi political program," and I am trying to spell out what was in the party program of 1920 vs a more general shared sense.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
Unclear/undecided about the "How's" in order to achieve a goal (already decided) is irrelevant. They took action as soon as they could - and by saying that i do not oppose Mann's radicalization steps at all.
But the lack of clarity is not irrelevant to the 1920 party program (nor, in my opinion, is it irrelevant to the pre-war period as a whole, but that's a different matter).
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
Of course, if one starts from the final dramatic ending, that is the true nature of the Final solution, that is the extermination, then the perspective is to concentrate on what actually led to the genocide. The logic in this perspective is to identify the steps that led to the radicalization steps that led to the genocide. (Is that clear?). But this perspective is only given to those who knows the end, you and me among millions, it is just that it does not work so good with contemporary actors through a perspective from "the past to the future".
But, sigh, again, this larger process is not what I was making a point about.
Balsamo wrote:
Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:06 am
Of course, and who would even dare to claim such stupidity, that genocide was not even thought about in the 20's or 30's, but one thing is certain a ethnic cleansing - or political social - whatever, anyway the cleansing of the Jews started long before 1939.
Would you at least agree with that?
I can't because I don't know what you're trying to say.
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2564
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Balmoral95 » Sat Dec 29, 2018 4:05 am


User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9854
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Sat Dec 29, 2018 12:54 pm

Poor David, still pining over his beloved Uncle Dolfy. Ironically Churchill wanted to keep the empire, just like Irving.
“They say..that in Slonim they gathered in the town square 14,000 people...and all were machine-gunned. I ask you, is it possible to believe such a thing?...How can the world remain silent? It is probably not true.”
Calel Perechodnik, Polish Jew, 1942

https://twitter.com/jonronson/status/10 ... 24832?s=21

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 23552
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Posen Speech

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sat Dec 29, 2018 1:37 pm

This kind of leapt out at me:
EIGHT WEEKS LATER

Finally, it has arrived. From a second-hand book dealer in America – my Cassell’s German–English dictionary. I can now know how listeners would have interpreted Hitler’s ‘prophecy’ about the ‘ausrotten’ of the Jews in 1939, because that is the year in which this dictionary was published. So what did the word imply back then? Emasculation? Or extermination?

Ausrott -en, v.a. extirpate, exterminate, root out. Comp. -ungs-fried m war of extermination.
I've not seen any brave revisionists follow Irving in offering up "emasculate" as a translation ...
"It was still at the stage of clubs and fists, hurrah, tala"