The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Discussions
User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Mon Dec 17, 2018 11:36 pm

The Nuremberg Laws that were passed in 1935 stated that people of "German or related blood" could be Reich citizens. However, the concept of 'German or related' was never actually defined, but for all purposes it basically meant all of the European peoples. The Nazis thought that replacing 'Aryan' with 'German or related blood' would appear to be more scientific. Although Aryan fell out of use in documents after the racial laws were passed, the Nazis still used it for propaganda purposes.

The Reich Citizenship Law stated:
A member of any minority group demonstrates his ability to serve the German Reich when, without surrendering membership in his own specific Volk group, he loyally carries out his civil duties to the Reich, such as service in the armed forces, etc. Reich citizenship is, therefore, open to racially related groups living in Germany, such as Poles, Danes, and others. It is an altogether different matter with German nationals of alien blood and race. They do not fulfill the blood prerequisites for Reich citizenship. The Jews, who constitute an alien body among all European peoples, are especially characterized by racial foreignness. Jews, therefore, cannot be seen as being fit for service to the German Volk and Reich. Hence, they must necessarily remain excluded from Reich citizenship.
I find it surprising that the Nazis used the Poles as an example of 'related blood' when Hitler stated in Mein Kampf considered the Poles as racially inferior to the Germans. Yet, with the racial laws, they were to be treated as racially equal to the Germans. The Poles were also used as an example of related blood in the Ahnenpass:
Aryan is thus the one man who looked free from, the German people, strange racial impact is blood. Deemed to be a stranger here, especially the blood of the living room and in the European settlement of Jews and Gypsies, the Asian and African breeds, and the aborigines of Australia and America (Indians), while, for example, a Swede or an Englishman, a Frenchman or Czech, a Pole or Italian, if he is free of such, even that is foreign blood strikes, when used, must therefore be considered severally liable, he may now live in his home, in East Asia or in America or he likes a U.S. citizen or a South American Free State be.
Christopher Hutton in his book Race and the Third Reich: Linguistics, Racial Anthropology and Genetics in the Dialectic of Volk wrote:
If the German state was the political realization or manifestation of the German people, why did not include all Germans? Why did it include many Danes, Poles and French? Even the 'proper' Germans themselves could be presented as a colourful mix of diverse racial and national origins ('ein Sammelgemisch aller möglichen Rassen- und Volksbestandteile', Wachler 1916/17: 48). Wirth presented the German Volk as made up originally of Celtic, Lithuanian, Germanic and Slavic blood, then Romans, Jews, Huguenots and Italians, with a smattering of Swedes, Scots, Croats, Irish, Hungarians, Spaniards and Turks (1914: 72). 'What a complicated people!' concluded Willy Hellpach (1877-1955) (1926: 138).
After the Anschluss in 1938, Austrians with Czech ancestry were also allowed to be Reich citizens. In 1939, the Nazi Karl Frank said:
Whoever professes himself to be a member of the German nation is a member of the German nation," provided that this profession is confirmed by certain facts, such as language, upbringing, culture, etc. Persons of alien blood, particularly Jews, are never Germans. . . . Because professing to be a member of the German nation is of vital significance, even someone who is partly or completely of another race—Czech, Slovak, Ukrainian, Hungarian, or Polish, for example—can be considered a German. Any more precise elaboration of the term "German national" is not possible given current relationships.
This is strange considering Hitler said that he did not want anymore Czechs and in the 1940s said that he wanted the Czechs out of Vienna.

A person was considered Jewish if he or she had three or four Jewish grandparents, whether or not they practiced Judaism made no difference. This was a lot different to the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service which was passed in April 1933 and considered anyone with one Jewish grandparent as a Jew.

The concept of Mischlinge (half-breeds) was arguably the most problematic for the Nazis. The definitions of first degree and second degree changed during the Third Reich.

The Mischlinge concept brings me on to something that is quite striking and did not go unnoticed but there does not seem to have been much more said about it after the introduction of the Nuremberg Laws - Hitler's own ancestry.

In the 1920s and early 1930s there were many rumours about Hitler's ancestry. Although he managed to get a genealogist to trace his ancestry back quite a bit, the identity of his paternal grandfather remains unknown even to this day. Hitler did not possess the Ahnenpass which he made a requirement for all citizens.

Dichte Inzucht (Dense inbreeding)
Kein Ariernachweis (No Aryan certifiicate)

Joachim Fest wrote:
The indulgence normally accorded to a man's origins is out of place in the case of Adolf Hitler, who made documentary proof of Aryan ancestry a matter of life and death for millions of people but himself possessed no such document. He did not know who his grandfather was. Intensive research into his origins, accounts of which have been distorted by propagandist legends and which are in any case confused and murky, has failed so far to produce a clear picture. National Socialist versions skimmed over the facts and emphasized, for example, that the population of the so-called Waldviertel, from which Hitler came, had been 'tribally German since the Migration of the Peoples', or more generally, that Hitler had 'absorbed the powerful forces of this German granite landscape into his blood through his father'.
As did Volker Ullrich:
Whatever the truth may be, the identity of Adolf Hitler’s paternal grandfather remains uncertain. It is hard to overlook the irony that the man who would later demand that all Germans prove their "Aryan origins" was himself incapable of demonstrating his own—no matter how much the Führer’s official genealogy tried to convey the contrary impression. On 12 March 1932, one day before the election that pitted Hitler against Hindenburg for the office of Reich president, the Bayerischer Kurier newspaper remarked how strange it was that “the talkative Adolf Hitler is so silent about his ancestors and about how far back his family name goes.” A short while before, the Viennese newspaper the Wiener Sonn- und Montagszeitung had sensationally revealed that Hitler’s father had actually been called “Schücklgruber” (sic) and that the name had been changed for inheritance purposes.
John Toland questioned whether or not the concept of Mischlinge was a way for Hitler to excuse himself partially from the laws:
Then came a curious category: the Mischlinge (half-breeds), those descended from only one Jewish grandparent, or those with two Jewish grandparents who neither practiced the Jewish religion nor were married to a Jew. In practice this split non-Aryans into two distinct groups with the Mischlinge no longer subject to repressive measures. With one bureaucratic stroke Hitler made it possible for a substantial portion of the hated enemy to escape his wrath. Was his resolve to exterminate Jews truly weakening, or, again, was he merely waiting for a more suitable time to act decisively? Or was this a conscious or even unconscious attempt to save himself, since there was still the possibility that one of his own grandfathers was Jewish? The Mischlinge regulation also saved Jesus, who by Hitler's argument, being the son of God, had but two Jewish grandparents; neither did he practice the Jewish religion, nor was he married to a Jew.
Although it was never proven that Hitler had a Jewish grandfather, a claim which has now been debunked by modern historians, he could still not provide sufficient evidence of the identity of his paternal grandfather. The accepted paternal grandfather was only considered that after he had been dead for twenty years.

So according to Hitler, an ethnic Pole was more Aryan than himself because the Pole was of 'related blood' whereas he could not prove one of his grandparent's ancestry. The same people that the Nazis described as racially inferior to the Germans and as subhumans. At the same time, the Poles were on the 'Aryan side' away from the Jews and other non-Aryans.

Hitler couldn't even pass the bare requirements of the Nuremberg Laws. Similarly, Himmler could not pass the restrictions he set up to join the SS. And well, Goebbels, I think it goes without saying why he rarely spoke about race. He actually mocked the views of Himmler on race.

Another odd thing about the Nazis punishment of Rassenschande (racial defilement) is that Germans and Jews convicted of it were only sentenced to a concentration camp - in rare occasions the death penalty was used against the Jews. Yet, sexual relations between Germans and Poles were punished by the latter being hanged in public. Himmler did not even allow trials to take place. The only exception was if the Pole passed the racial tests and was considered to be Nordic enough.
Last edited by Goody67 on Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:01 am, edited 4 times in total.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Tue Dec 18, 2018 12:11 am

Brigitte Hamann in Hitler's Vienna wrote about about Hitler's ancestry:
It is likely that Hitler never had to deal with his intricate family relations in Waldviertel until he was a politician: in 1932, to be more exact, when, during the election campaign, they were used to threaten him. His opponents acknowledged the sensible argument that a politician who placed such crucial significance on people’s background could not but accept it if inquiries into his own history were made.
It's strange that a man who in the 1920s started openly preaching about the alleged racial inferiority of the Jews and the racial superiority of the Germans never bothered to look at his own family history.
Immediately after the first vague hints were dropped in the press about compromising facts in Hitler’s family tree, the prestigious and, when it came to business, smart Viennese genealogist Karl Friedrich von Frank offered Hitler his services on February 8, 1932: he said he already had a complete family tree of the Hitler family reaching back four generations—that is to say, to a row of eight ancestors—and that he could create an even more detailed family tree for three hundred marks. In a postscript he added, “You might be interested to learn that during my recent research I noticed that other independent research into your family background has been done at the behest of political authorities in Austria.”

Hitler retained Frank’s services on February 29. The genealogist mailed his report as early as April 8, 1932, on the same day on which the headlines of late newspaper editions announced in huge block letters: “Hitler’s Name IsSchiicklgruber.” In the article the young reporter Hans Bekessi, who later went by the name of Hans Habe, revealed the heretofore unknown history of Hitler’s father’s late change of name—a revelation that had a spectacular impact. Tens of thousands of copies of the newspaper were hauled into Germany to affect the election campaign.

Frank had properly recorded the Schicklgruber story in his family chart and did not understand all the excitement, inasmuch as illegitimate births were not unusual and not even a handicap in rural areas. In his opinion, Maria Anna Schicklgruber and Georg Hiedler’s eventual marriage had legitimized Hitler’s father anyway. In May Frank presented his work in print. 199 Hitler thanked the scholar in a letter of June 25, 1932.

Yet in the summer of 1932 there was an even far greater uproar in the press. First, on June 16, the Neue Ziircher Zeitung published a letter to the editor regarding the topic of “Hitler’s Ancestors”: the sender questioned Frank’s opinion that “with the exception of the name Wallj [the family chart contained] only German names,” and offered that “the family name Salomon, which comes up repeatedly,” surely couldn’t be “accepted without qualms as a German name. . . . At least, Adolf Hitler and his followers are not in the habit of simply accepting that name as a German name.” In the family tree that Frank published, there appears as a great' great'great-grandmother, as number forty-five, a Catholic Katharina Salomon from Nieder-Plottbach, parish of Dollersheim, daughter of the Catholic farmer Johann Salomon in Nieder-Plottbach. It was the appearance of this Jewish-sounding name that started speculations about Hitler’s alleged Jewish background.

Yet here, of all places where the genealogist could have bungled, is where he apparently made a mistake: in point of fact, number forty-five in the family tree was not Katharina Salomon, but Maria Hamberger from Nieder-Plottbach (1709-1761), whose father was Paul Hamberger from Nieder-Plottbach (1680-1706). Frank corrected this mistake as early as
August 30, 1932. Yet the print run containing the error had already been shipped.

Now scores of reporters started searching for Hitler’s alleged Jewish relatives. It was discovered that the name Hitler appeared among Jewish families in the small town of Polna in Moravia, in Poland, and that there was a Jewish merchant in the Leopoldstadt district who claimed to be a relative of Hitler via Polna. In Warsaw some Jewish families by the name
of Hitler officially applied for a change of name, adverting to the anti-Semitic German politician.

The summer of 1933 brought new headlines. Lidove Noviny in Prague reported on July 6 that in Polna people were mentioning an Abraham Hitler from the eighteenth century as Hitler’s ancestor. Deutsche Freiheit of Saarbriicken wrote on July 6, “The Jewish Hitler Family—with Sources.” Osterreichisches M orgenblatt wrote on July 13: “Brown Hitler* with His Yellow Spot.” Vorarlberger Wacht wrote: “So he did have a Jewish grandmother after all—Mr. Hitler.”

In the meantime Bekessi had become an editor for the Osterreichisch-es Abendblatt and published new revelations starting on July 12; for example, on July 14, 1933: “Awesome Traces of the Hitler Jews in Vienna,” with photographs from Hitler graves in the Jewish section of Vienna’s Central Cemetery and a cookbook by one Rosalie Hitler, written in Hebrew. On July 19 Bekessi’s newspaper even printed the headline “Hitler’s Jewishness Officially Confirmed!” This time the newspaper published the pedigree of a Jewish Hiedler family in Polna, with a Klara Hitler, born in 1821, married name Polzl, Braunau, Austria. An alleged “official” statement was attached: “There is hardly a Jew who has such a beautiful family tree as Adolf Hitler.”

To be sure, this Jewish Klara would have been no less than seventy-eight years old at the time of Hitler’s birth, and the other details would not have fit Hitler’s grandmother. In part of the article in smaller print the newspaper backed off, stating that this Jewish Klara was neither Hitler’s mother nor grandmother, but a close relative of the grandmother—which was false as well.

This time it was fair game for Vienna’s competing anti-Semitic newspaper, Neue Abendzeitung. On July 20 it promised, for its part, to reveal the “Truth about Hitler’s Ancestry” and to refute the “myth of Polna”: “It would have meant jubilation, would have beeen like shouting Hosianna, for all the Jews in the world, to have done in the man whose example and teachings have become the greatest danger to their dream of global predominance.” What they were dealing with, the newspaper said, was the “most monstrous Talmudic pettifoggery of the century.”

When Frank’s corrected and extended family tree was published in 1933—without the name Salomon—this was only viewed as an indication for a deliberate hushup. Soon afterward, writer Konrad Heiden picked up the story about the alleged Jewish grandmother from Polna in his Hitler biography, which was published in Zurich in 1936. 205 The myth
became part of scholarly literature. Yet even though both reporters and genealogists set out to research the matter, nothing ever turned up except for names similar to those of Jewish families.
The Jewish Adolf Hitler of Trembowla:

Image

https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic ... 5#p2150757

Similarly, in 1933 the British newspaper the Daily Mirror published an article claiming to show the 'Jewish grave of Hitler's grandfather' and showed a photo of a grave in a Jewish cemetery in Bucharest with a Hebrew inscription and the name Adolf Hittler on it.
Hitler changed his genealogist: a large illustrated genealogical tree, put together by Rudolf Koppensteiner, appeared in Leipzig in 1937, to angry protests on the part of Frank. The new family researcher was from the Waldviertel district, was a distant relation to the Hitlers, and therefore had easier access to the documents, which had become too hot to handle. He did not mention the name Salomon either. And he, too, took it to be certain that it was illegitimate Alois Schicklgruber’s father whom the mother later married, in other words, the miller’s assistant Georg Hiedler. Thus Hitler had an unblemished “Aryan” pedigree.

Astonishingly, neither genealogists nor journalists picked on the obvious weak spot in Hitler’s family tree, his father Alois Schicklgruber, who was born out of wedlock and whose father uncertain.
One has to wonder - why did the genealogist ignore the illegitimacy of Hitler's father? A genuine genealogist surely would have questioned why a man was only declared the father of a child twenty years after his death.
After the Anschluss Waldviertel advanced to “the Führer’s ancestral district” and paid homage to the Schicklgruber family’s famous offspring by way of Hitler oaks and honorary citizenships. Even his ancestors were honored: the church square at Dollersheim was renamed Alois Hitler Place. The alleged—no longer even identifiable—houses in Strones in which Hitler’s father and grandmother were born were spruced up as places of pilgrimage. Because graves of Hitler’s ancestors could no longer be found at the cemetery of Dollersheim, “the Führer’s grandmother”— Maria Anna Schicklgruber—received a belated honorary grave.

Scores of journalists set out to look for heartrending stories about Hitler’s ancestors. When the people in Waldviertel finally competed with one another on being related to the “Führer and Reich chancellor” and exhibited more or less fantastic family trees in all kinds of places, particularly in taverns, Hitler intervened in November 1938: “The Führer does not wish any family trees to be displayed which allegedly have anything to do with himself. Therefore the family trees now put up are to be removed immediately. As a precautionary measure, I furthermore advise you,” the Lower Danube district leader told the district captain, “that pursuant to the Fuhrer’s decision the display of memorial plaques meant to serve the memory of the Fuhrer’s ancestors or places where he stayed is prohibited.” In contrast to his beloved Linz, Hitler did not grant Waldviertel any privileges. In September 1938 he even forbade the town of Dollersheim to issue a stamp with the addition “the Fuhrer’s native town.”

Yet as early as August 1938 troop-training grounds were established in the area around Dollersheim, Zwettl, and Allensteig—of all places!— with over sixty square miles, the largest of their kind in Western Europe. People living there were transferred, and the villages, destroyed—including Strones, where Hitler’s father and grandmother were born (thirty-nine houses), and Klein-Motten (ten houses), where Maria Anna Hiedler, nee Schicklgruber, had died, and as late as 1942, Dollersheim (120 houses). This did not exactly attest to Hitler’s piety regarding his “ancestral district” and fed rumors that he was embarrassed about his ancestors and wanted to extinguish traces. However, the Dollersheim parish register, the only source for the Schicklgruber’s family history, was transferred to the closest parish, Rastenfeld, where it has survived intact to this day.
Hitler certainly didn't do himself any favours with regards to the rumours by erasing the areas of his ancestors.
Hitler did not want to hear anything about relatives: I’ve got no idea about family history. In that area I’m an absolute dunce. Even when I was younger I didn’t know I had relatives. I’ve only learned that since I became Reich chancellor. I am an entirely nonfamilial being, a nomclanning being by nature. That’s not my cup of tea. I only belong to my folkish community.
Again, one has to ask - why was a man who was so obsessed with race and the purity of a nation not bothered about his own family tree?
Not until after 1945 did Hitler’s personal attorney, Hans Frank, former governor general in Poland, make truly explosive material public: shortly before he was executed he wrote his memoirs—Im Angesicht des Galgens (Facing the gallows)—where he mentioned the following bonafide scoop: at the end of 1930, he wrote, Hitler had shown him a letter, commenting that this was “a disgusting blackmail story of one of his most repulsive relatives, concerning his, Hitler’s, ancestry.” The relative had dropped hints to the effect that “in connection with certain remarks in the press one would be well advised not to broadcast certain circumstances of our family history.” The point was that “Hitler had Jewish blood in his veins and therefore had scant credentials for being anti-Semitic.”

Frank claimed that after Hitler directed him to check confidentially into the matter, he found out “from all kinds of sources,” which he did not want to divulge, the following: Before the child was bom, Hitler’s grandmother Schicklgruber had been a cook in Graz, in the household of a Jew by the name of Frankenberger; that she had become pregnant by the son of the house; and that for the next fourteen years she received child support payments for little Alois. There had been “a correspondence between these Frankenbergers and Hitler’s grandmother, which went on for years, and whose basic thrust it was that everyone had tacitly acknowleged that Schicklgruber’s illegitimate child was born under circumstances that obliged Frankenberger to pay child support.” According to his own racial laws, Hitler thus would have been a “quarter Jew” and not been able to produce the necessary ticket into the Third Reich, the “proof of Aryan descent.”

Frank was conspicuously ambiguous in leaving the impression that he did not find this theory implausible. It is with apparent deliberation that he made Hitler’s denial sound so extremely feeble: Hitler, he said, knew “that his father wasn’t the product of sexual intercourse between the Schicklgruber woman and the Graz Jew. He knew that from what his father and grandmother had told him.” Yet his grandmother had died forty-two years before Hitler was bom.

However—and at that point Frank came up with a confusing explanation, allegedly directly from Hitler—“the two had no money. The child support the Jew paid for years was a highly welcome supplement to meager poor household income. The Jew had been declared the child’s father because he had money, and he did pay without going to court, probably because he feared the outcome of a trial and the publicity it would entail.” In other words, Maria Anna Schicklgmber had only pretended that her mysterious employer’s son was the father to make him pay—a popular excuse during the Nazi era, when one’s “proof of Aryan descent” was in serious jeopardy because of an illegitimate birth and a Jewish father. With stories like this, Frank tried to explain Hitler’s hatred of the Jews as the result of a condition he called “psychotic hatred of one’s relatives due to a rebellion of one’s blood.”

To be sure, around 1830 there were no Jews living in Graz. After the expulsion of the Jewish community around 1500 under Maximilian I, the Styrian estates successfully blocked new Jewish settlements. Under Joseph II, in the late eighteenth century, Jews were again allowed to visit Graz, but only during the market season and for no longer than twenty-four hours at a time. Not until the passing of the basic laws of 1849 were Jews finally allowed to settle in Styria. From 1856 on Graz’s Jewish community kept a community register.

Furthermore, during the period in question, in 1836-37, there was no family in Graz by the name of Frankenberger, not even a non-Jewish one. To be sure, there were families by the name of Schicklgruber, but neither a Maria Anna nor an Anna Maria. 214 The supposedly compromising correspondence never turned up, and no one ever mentioned it. Neither were there any indications ever for child-support payments to the child’s mother, who after all gave the boy to her brother-in-law after she got married, lived in poverty, and died when Alois was ten. And, most important, there is not the slightest indication that Maria Anna Schicklgruber ever left Waldviertel. Accepting employment in faraway Graz would have constituted an extraordinary step, which certainly would not have remained unnoticed within the Waldviertel circle of relatives. Migrating workers from Waldviertel typically went to Vienna, which is sixty miles away, or Linz, which is even closer, but hardly to Graz, which is twice as far away, beyond the Semmering. This would have been particularly unusual for maids, who around 1830 traveled on foot.

When her son was born, dirt-poor Maria Anna Schicklgruber was already forty-one years of age—which was considered rather old in the nineteenth century—and surely not exactly what people could afford in some rich houses: a young, poor, and, considering the danger of infection, if possible innocent maid from the country who was supposed to introduce the son of the household to “love”—and who then would not be able to fend off the other members of the family either. Furthermore, Frank displayed such ignorance about Hitler’s family relations that it is hard to believe Hitler was his source of information.
As already noted, even without Frank's claim about Hitler's grandfather, Hitler still would have difficulty proving the ancestry of his paternal grandfather and lacked the proof of 'Aryan' descent he demanded from every citizen of the Third Reich.

Although Frank's allegation has been debunked, there is still no answer to the identity of Hitler's paternal grandfather, it is unlikely that it will be answered.
But now let us turn to Hitler’s blackmailing relative, who supposedly was the reason for his desire to find out what happened. This must clearly be William Patrick Hitler, born in 1911, the son of an Irish mother and Hitler’s half-brother Alois Jr. Shortly after the birth of the child, Alois disappeared—making his wife and child believe for years that he was dead—and remarried in Germany. In 1924 he was sentenced in court for bigamy.

When Hitler became famous, his poor Irish relatives, whom he did not know, saw their chance to make money and gave interviews to newspapers in England as “Hitler’s relatives.” Subsequently, in 1930, Hitler had nineteen-year-old Patrick, whom he had never met before, visit him in Munich, where he told him and his half-brother Alois that he forbade them to do things like that. He is supposed to have said that the family should not believe they could become famous at his expense: “You idiots!!” he was quoted to have shouted. “You’re going to do me in! . . . How carefully I have always kept my private life and my personal affairs from the press! People must not know who I am. They must not know where I’m from and who my family is. Not even in my book did I allow one word to come out about these things, not one word! And then all of a sudden there’s a nephew! A nephew! They will start investigating. They will sic snoopers on the tracks of our past.” In a newspaper interview in 1939 Patrick Hitler even said that his uncle had started sobbing and in his anger shed tears.

Later Hitler tried to deny that he was related to Alois, who had quite a criminal record. He said that Alois was not the son of his father but an orphan raised by the family. Yet Alois submitted the certificates of baptism as proof, according to which he was a premarital child of the second wife of Alois Hitler Sr., who had legitimized the boy.

There was no getting rid of Patrick. After 1933, while unemployed, Patrick traveled to Berlin to ask his uncle for support. A hint at his father’s certificate of baptism sufficed to make Hitler, who evidently interpreted this as blackmail, pay. He got Patrick a job and occasionally gave him money, but he left no doubt that he was not interested in familial relations.

After almost six years in Berlin, Patrick returned to England in January 1939, shedding any restraint he may have had before. Despite their thin content, his interviews created a sensation: “My Uncle Adolf,” “Why I Hate My Uncle,” 217 and the like. In 1939 he and his mother emigrated to the United States, where he made a living going on lecture tours about his “Uncle Adolf.” Patrick’s mother Bridget Hitler, too, waged her “private war against the Hitler family” in the newspapers, increasingly so after the war started.

None of these interviews ever mentioned an alleged Jewish grandfather. How much money Patrick and Bridget could have made with that story! In aq interview with the Secret Service in New York in 1943 the nephew also vehemently denied that Hitler’s godparents, Johann and Johanna Prinz, had been Jewish, as had been claimed in a recently published book. Neither did Bridget Hitler’s posthumously published memoirs contain the slightest indication in the direction of any Jewish relations.

The writer Franz Jetzinger illustrates how much manipulation went on in that area. He supported the Frankenberger theory by referring to an interview with Patrick Hitler in an issue of Paris Soir that was hard to come by—except, Jetzinger said, the nephew had mentioned the name “Frankenreiter” rather than Frankenberger. This, however, is pure invention: neither Frankenberger nor Frankenreiter are mentioned, nor were any other allegedly Jewish grandfathers of Hitler. Incidentally, investigations into the name “Frankenreiter” revealed that there was an impoverished Catholic butcher in Graz by that name. His son Franz, under suspicion of being Alois’s father, was ten years old at the time.

What needs to be pointed out is that the Frankenberger story has one single source: Hans Frank. In looking for a motive for his equivocal insinuations one cannot but suspect that the raging anti-Semite Frank even wanted to place the responsibility for an allegedly Jewish Hitler on the Jews, or at any rate rattle them by way of rumors.
Hitler certainly had a strange family.

The full book can be read here.
Last edited by Goody67 on Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:03 am, edited 5 times in total.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Tue Dec 18, 2018 12:32 am

Compare the Ahnenpass document:

Image

Seite 41: „Der Rassegrundsatz/Der Begriff der arischen Abstammung“ („ein Engländer ... oder Tscheche, ein Pole ... als verwandt, also als arisch“)
Aryan is thus the one man who looked free from, the German people, strange racial impact is blood. Deemed to be a stranger here, especially the blood of the living room and in the European settlement of Jews and Gypsies, the Asian and African breeds, and the aborigines of Australia and America (Indians), while, for example, a Swede or an Englishman, a Frenchman or Czech, a Pole or Italian, if he is free of such, even that is foreign blood strikes, when used, must therefore be considered severally liable, he may now live in his home, in East Asia or in America or he likes a U.S. citizen or a South American Free State be.
To:
It must become clear to everybody in Germany, even to the last milkmaid, that Polishness is equal to subhumanity. Poles, Jews and Gypsies are on the same inferior level. This must be clearly outlined [...] until every citizen of Germany has it encoded in his subconsciousness that every Pole, whether a worker or intellectual, should be treated like vermin.
As Reichsführer-SS and Chief of the German Police, however, I am responsible to see that such deeds find their just penalty. The community of the people demands the destruction of such parasites, regardless of whether, according to juristic considerations, a subjective guilt exists or not. I cannot accept that a Polish sub-human escapes their punishment through some legal regulation or other.
A video of a German male and a Polish female being publicly humiliated for having sexual relations was found, Public humiliation for violation of racial laws in Silesia, 1941

Diemut Majer in "Non-Germans Under the Third Reich" wrote:
The placement of the Poles under rule of special law was done from fundamentally political motives. The race-political grounds for hatred of the Poles were merely the ideological mask justifying the National Socialist policy of violent force. The political bias for the systemically fomented hatred of and malice against Poles reveals itself in the thesis, invented ex post facto, of their "threat to the community," which then became the dominant argument in both theory and practice. According to this, the Poles had to be excluded from the European community of rights on account of their "Germanophobia" and their political incompetence and "lack of culture." In contrast with this political argument, neither the racial window dressing of Nazi propaganda that commenced in 1939, according to which the Poles were "racial foes" with regard to whom restraints were not to be observed, nor the elaborate attempts of the Race Policy Office to set up a racial classification of the Poles achieved much of an echo.
The extent of punishing Germans and Poles for having sexual relations included German rape victims being paraded through the streets with placards and having their heads shaved. Despite disapproval, it was used to install fear into the Germans to avoid the Poles at all costs.

Richard Evans wrote in The Third Reich at War: How the Nazis Led Germany from Conquest to Disaster a common scenario of what happened when a Polish man was found guilty of having sexual relations with a German woman:
A typical incident occurred on 24 August 1940 in Gotha, when a seventeen-year-old Polish worker was publicly hanged without trial in front of fifty Poles (who were forced to attend) and 150 Germans (who attended voluntarily). His offence was to have been caught having sexual intercourse with a German prostitute.
And:
The Gestapo continued to carry out public executions (by hanging) of Polish men, but did so away from spectators, still to the dismay of judicial authorities. In July 1941 a mildly phrased letter of complaint by the Nuremberg Higher Court President to the Minister of Justice in Berlin noted that the Gestapo hanged Julian Majlca for having an affair with a German who became pregnant (she was later given ten months in jail). After the execution all the Poles in the vicinity were marched past the body. ‘The fact that this execution took place without previous judicial hearing, was the subject of lively discussion.’ Apparently even the local Nazi Party boss was opposed. The same letter mentioned a case where the Gestapo in Regensburg went to the court jail, picked up another Pole being held for having forbidden relations and executed him. In November the same thing happened in the forest near Eschelbach, where the Pole Jarek was hanged for having relations with a 20-year-old woman. Again, 100 or so Poles from the area were led past. As a judicial report from mid-1942 makes clear, justice authorities were often left in the dark, knowing neither the charges nor even the number of such executions.

The issue of what should become of the German woman was much discussed among police authorities and the people. A popular response, as we have already seen, was that she should not be allowed to get off lightly. In a case from the Düsseldorf area (in June–July 1941), the minimum demand was that the woman have to witness the execution.

[...]

How the Poles were treated elsewhere is suggested by correspondence from other areas in Germany. Thus, a report from the Higher Court President in Jena on 31 May 1940 noted that two courts were supposed to deal with a Polish man who was accused of having sexual relations with a German woman; she was given seven years by the court, but before he could be tried, ‘an official of the Secret State Police appeared, took the files, and declared that the RSHA in Berlin had issued orders to hang the Pole’. In another case from the same area on 24 August 1940 the Gestapo took a man from the court prison in Gotha and hanged him in the presence of 50 Poles on the side of the road; the body remained there for 24 hours.
Isn't it strange how the Nazis treated fellow Aryans?
Last edited by Goody67 on Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:40 am

Christopher Hutton in Race and the Third Reich: Linguistics, Racial Anthropology and Genetics in the Dialectic of Volk wrote also about the Nazis' concepts of 'Aryan' and 'German':
The notion that Nazi race theorists promoted the notion of a superior Aryan race is deeply embedded in academic and popular perceptions of Nazism. The term 'Aryan' was widely used in Nazi Germany, and 'non-Aryan' became in many contexts a synonym for 'Jewish'. However, Nazi race theorists opposed the promotion of 'Aryan' as a racial concept. By 1935, the National Socialist regime had accepted that this use of the term was unscientific. Almost every academic commentary - outside specialist writings on race science in the Third Reich - fundamentally misrepresents the intellectual history of this question. The notion that the Nazis 'confused language with race' or Volk with Rasse in relation to the Aryan question is completely false.
Hutton seems to be ignoring the fact that even though the term was acknowledged by the Nazis as being unscientific, they still continued to use it in propaganda. Although the term 'German or related blood' was used instead of 'Aryan' in documents e.g the Nuremberg Laws (specifically the Reich Citizenship Law), the two terms basically meant the same to the Nazis and Hitler frequently made reference during the war that the war would bring about the extermination of the Jews and not the Aryans (European people).
In the early years of Nazi rule, there was a collision between this populist-political term and the basic tenets of racial anthropology. From the point of view of the National Socialist regime, there were a number of fundamental problems with the term 'Aryan'. Firstly, if used in a positive sense ('of Aryan descent'), it failed to distinguish between Germans from non-Germans, since the concept 'Aryan' was much wider than 'German'. Used in the negative, the term also caused problems in relations to the status of foreign nationals resident in Germany. Though it was primarily targeted at Jews, it actually failed to pick them out in any precise or legally defined way, even if everyone knew what 'non-Aryan' intended to mean. There was the question of long-standing European populations such as the Finns and the Hungarians who did not speak an Indo-European or Aryan language. Furthermore, it had been long argued by scholars that the term 'Aryan' referred to a language family and connoted a linguistic not a racial identity. In short, the term 'Aryan' was unable to make the required racial distinctions, though one suggestion was to reject use of 'non-Aryan' for Jewish but retain 'Aryan' for peoples which consisted of predominantly Nordic racial elements.
This is very true. As I have shown, even some of those considered 'Aryans' by the Nazis but were 'non-Germans' still suffered the same as Jews, Gypsies, and blacks, when it came to a racial hierarchy of punishing sexual relations between Germans and non-Germans.
The term 'Aryan race' (arische Rasse) was not favoured in official documents in Nazi Germany, and instances of this phrase are extremely rare, though it is used in reporting the views of earlier race theorists. Laws passed in the early years of the Nazi regime used the notion of 'Aryan descent', but exclusively in its negative form, so that those 'of non-Aryan descent' were excluded from different aspects of public life. In the Law for the Restoration of the Civil Service (Gesetz zur Wiederherstellung des Berufsbeamtentums, 7 April 1933, Reichsgesetzblatt I s. 175), civil servants who were 'of non-Aryan descent' ('Beamte, die nicht arischer Abstammung sind') were to be compulsorily retired (with exceptions made for those who were appointed before 1 August 1914, or who had served at the front in the First World War, or whose father or son had been killed in the war). Non-Aryan descent was defined so as to include those with one (or more) Jewish grandparent(s). The Minister of the Interior also had discretionary powers to make recommendations in other cases (ss. 3.1, 3.2). Similarly, the Defence Law (Wehrgesetz, 21 May 1935, Reichsgesetzblatt 1935 I, s. 609) made Aryan descent a prerequisite for active miliary service, and for the taking of positions of authority (ss. 15.1, 15.3) But the racial use of the term 'Aryan' was politically and legally problematic.
There are still examples of the term 'Aryan' being used by the Nazis in speeches, writings and documents after 1935.

https://www.ns-archiv.de/imt/m001-m200/020-m.php
https://www.ns-archiv.de/personen/hitle ... tament.php
https://www.ns-archiv.de/verfolgung/kor ... r-lang.php
The question of how a non-Aryan was to be defined in relation to this and subsequent laws was controversial. There was concern from some of the bureaucrats responsible for policy that valuable and hitherto loyal racial elements were being alienated from the Volk. Someone who was a quarter Jewish was also three-quarters 'Aryan'. For Party radicals such as Julius Streicher this was much too lenient; there were calls for the compulsory sterilization of Mischlinge. The expert on Jewish affairs in the Ministry of the Interior, Bernhard Lösener, wrote an account of the behind-the-scenes debates about how official anti-Semitism was to be translated into legal form. Lösener subsequently defined his role as that of trying to moderate policy with regard to Mischlinge, since in this regard there was room for flexibility that was absent with the 'full-blooded' Jews (Volljuden). What is clear is the fundamental confusion about the nature of the racial hybridity involved. In contrast to the 1933 law, the 1935 laws defined any individual with three Jewish grandparents as a Jew. In the case of the Mischlinge with one Jewish grandparent (Mischling 2. Grades) or two (Mischling 1. Grades), the definition of who counted as a Jew merged the ostensibly 'race-biological' and cultural criteria, including membership of the Jewish community and marriage to a Jew.
Different Nazis argued over how much percentage of 'Jewish blood' made one a Jew. Some even suggested 1/16 Jewish was enough.
In late 1935, a terminological shift took place in the language of the law, and the term' Aryan' ceased to be used. The Citizenship Law (Reichsbürgergesetz. 15 September 1935, ReichsgesetzblattI 1935 1 s. 1146) restricted citizenship to those of 'German or cognate blood' ('deutschen or artverwandten Blutes', s. 2.1), and the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour (Gesetz zum Schutze des deutschen Blutes und der deutschen Ehre, 15 September 15 1935, Reichsgesetzblatt I. S. 1146) forbade marriage and sexual intercourse between Jews and those 'of German or cognate blood' (ss. 1.1, 1.2). These laws did not speak of a 'Jewish race', but of Jews defined 'according to race' ('der Rasse nach'), as opposed to converts to Judaism ('Erste Verordnung zum Reichsbürgergesetz, 14 November 1935, Reichsgesetzblatt I s. 1333). This law also evoked the concept of 'the purity of blood' ('die Reinheit des Blutes', ss. 6.1, 6.2). The phrase 'of German or cognate blood' was used in the later Civil Service Law ('Beamtengesetz, 26 January 1937, Reichsgesetzblatt I s. 41 ss. 25.1, 72.1).
Yet, as I have shown, some people of 'cognate blood' were also punished for having sexual relations and were forbidden to marry Germans.
The official solution was to replace the problematic term 'Aryan' with the notion of 'German blood ties'. Setting out the argument for a Sippenamt (Genealogical Office), Achim Gercke (1934) argued that such an office would 'water over the purity of the blood' (Blutsreinheit) of the Volk. Its task would be to awaken the 'racial will of the people', and those who worked in the office should represent the best 'German blood' (deutsches Blut). Dr Ernst Brandis, a senior legal bureaucrat, in his commentary on the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour and the Law for the Protection of the Hereditary Health of the German people Gesetz zum Schutze der Erbgesundheit des deutschen Volkes or Ehegesundheitsgesetz, 18 October 1935), defined 'German blood' in the following terms:

"The German people is no unitary race, rather it is composed of members of different races (of the Nordic, Phalian, Dinaric, Alpine, Mediterranean, East-Elbian race) and mixtures between these. The blood of all these races and their mixtures, which thus is found in the German people, represents 'German blood'."
Yet, one can easily find the Nazis talking about a 'German race'. Nevertheless, such a term was actually officially banned in the 1940s!
Critics of National Socialist ideology, both then and now, havee failed to grasp the narrative. They have been misled by use of the term 'Aryan' in the early laws and in many public contexts in the Third Reich'. The term 'Aryanization' (Arisierung) was used for the state-authorized seizure of Jewish property, and the popular terms for the genealogical certificate required to prove an individual's racial identity (the Abstammungsnachweis) were Ariernachweis or Arierpass. It has been assumed that this terminology reflected the ideologically distorted views of scholars and academics about the relationship of language to race.

Günther consistently rejected the racial use of the term 'Aryan', fearing that it would lead to the misleading classification of non-Nordic racial elements. Günther argued against its use in any scholarly context, including linguistics, ethnography and racial anthropology. The juxtaposition of 'Aryan' with 'Semitic' confused linguistic with racial identity. The use of 'Aryan' in linguistics instead of Indogermanic was also ill-advised, as the term would be again used to designate anthropological race in a confusing way.
Even though there were academics and race anthropologists that made a clear distinction between the concept of 'people' and the concept of 'race', the Nazis still often used terminology that made both interchangeable.
Last edited by Goody67 on Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:44 am

Eric Ehrenreich in The Nazi Ancestral Proof: Genealogy, Racial Science, and the Final Solution wrote about the problems of simple definitions of, 'Aryan', 'German or related blood', and even 'Jew'. The pseudoscience of the Third Reich was exposed during the passing of the Nuremberg Laws. Throughout the whole 12 years, the Nazis were never able to satisfactorily distinguish between an 'Aryan' and a 'Jew' or actually define a 'German'.

Also, not everyone thought of the Nuremberg Laws as a bad thing.
Indeed, some explanations for the racial laws were quite apologetic in tone. Thus, for example, while one of the leading commentaries on the Nuremberg Laws could claim in 1935 that the legislation was based on the “fundamental recognition of the inequality of the human races,” another could assert the next year that “there is no absolute hierarchy between the races. . . ,” Similarly, at the same time that anti-Jewish rhetoric and policy were becoming increasingly strident in many quarters, a widely sold version of the Ahnenpass could still assert that “National Socialist thought . . . grants full equity to every other Volk and, moreover never speaks of superior or inferior, but rather only of alien racial admixture.” In January 1936, a Stuttgart newspaper went so far as to claim that the Nuremberg Laws would actually lead to a decrease in hatred of the Jews since, once “the Jewish guest Volk . . . are . . . separated from the German Volk politically, culturally, and above all biologically,” they will live “according to their own type of life” and this will “serve as a guarantee for acceptable joint living in the same national space.”
The full book is available to read here.
Last edited by Goody67 on Mon Dec 24, 2018 5:28 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:51 am

Diemut Majer in "Non-Germans" Under the Third Reich wrote about how pretty much any term that was considered to be racial was never actually defined.
In practice, however, the first term to be widely employed was of Aryan descent; yet from 1935 on, the expressions German or related blood or German-bloodedness were substituted, as the term Aryan was purely linguistic in origin and not capable of even pseudoscientific justification. But these terms were just as imprecise as the terms previously used, Aryan and non-Aryan, for they either exhausted themselves in purely negative definitions (non-Jewish, noncolored), or else they defined German blood as being the "blood of the various races" of which the German yolk was composed, as the blood of "peoples racially related" to it; but they never did define what race or racially related actually meant.
p. 40.
Neither the term 'Aryan' nor the term 'non-Aryan' was ever satisfactorily defined
p. 60.
Whereas the earlier provisions under special law had used the terms Aryan descent or non-Aryan descent, after the Nuremberg Laws of September 15, 1935, took effect, the only term in use was German or racially related blood or non-German or racially unrelated blood—even though these terms were never officially defined. Persons of "German or racially related blood" were in future to be grouped together under the expression German-blooded, a term, however, that did not take hold to any great extent until the relevant regulations were promulgated beginning in 1939.
p. 113.

Strangely enough, when it came to the Nuremberg Laws, Wilhelm Frick claimed that Judaism meant more to the Nazis than any racial concept.
Aryan' and 'Non-Aryan' [are] sometimes not entirely tenable . . . From a racial political standpoint, it is Judaism that interests us more than anything else.
Claudia Koonz, The Nazi Conscience, p. 180.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:55 am

Christian Gerlach wrote in The Extermination of the European Jews on pp-157-160:
Leading racist scholars like Hans Günther rejected the idea that there was an Aryan race. For them, 'Aryan' was a term that belonged to linguistics. As a result, the term 'Aryan' was neither used in the Nuremberg racial laws nor in many other relevant Nazi laws starting in the second half of 1933. Historically, the European idea of Aryanism had emerged from structural similarities between Indian and European languages that were discovered in the late eighteenth century. Through much of the nineteenth century, the theory of an Indo-Germanic language spurred imaginings that there were also relations of blood among most European and Indian peoples; and some, such as the Iranians, who were in between. The 'Aryan' family of people was supposed to exclude, for example, 'Semites' like Arabs and Jews and 'Asian' peoples like Turks, Hungarians or Sami (Lapps). The Aryan myth had been in decline since the late nineteenth century, but, on a popular level, ideas persisted that relatively close relations existed among certain (European) races, and so did the (often non-official) use of the term 'Aryan'. Hitler used the term in his book, Mein Kampf, without defining it or reflecting on it. In his later speeches he talked about "Aryan peoples," Aryan peoples and races" and "European-Aryan peoples" interchangeably.
This begs the question - why did the Nazis cling on to a term they knew was not scientific and had no racial meaning?

This reminds me of John Lukac's remarks about Hitler's usage of 'Aryan' in The Hitler of History pages 121-123:
Hitler did write in Mein Kampf that the racial question was the key to world history. That he was not consistent in his racial preferences is obvious. When the occasion demanded, he chose, or sought, alliances with Japanese, Chinese, Romanians, Arabs, and so forth while remaining committed to fighting or even destroying his Nordic or Aryan opponents [Norway, Denmark, Holland, UK]. (...) Haffner noted that "race was never defined by him and often equated with the concept of nation... A supreme race as a master nation shall according to Hitler rule the world one day, but which a race or a nation? the Germans or the Aryans? This is never entirely clear with Hitler. Equally unclear is whom he regards as Aryans. Only the more or less Germanic nations? Or all whites except the Jews? This is nowhere clarified by Hitler." The real difference among white, black and yellow-skinned people did not much interest Hitler. What interested him was the struggle within the white race, between the "Aryans" and the Jews". Only about Jews did he remain consistent to the very end of his life. (...) There was a racist element in his thinking, but his governing obsessions were not biological. National sentiments of superiority (...) were cultural rather than racial. (...) Hitler said "Pride of race is a quality which the German fundamentally did not possess. We use the term of Jewish race as a matter of convenience, for in reality and from the genetic point of view there is no such thing as the Jewish race.
Explications of who was supposed to be Aryan, if that concept was used, differed slightly. Addressing the diplomatic corps in 1934, Minister of the Interior Frick stated that all "non-Jewish members of all European peoples" were Aryan. Poles were defined as Aryan, but "gypsies" and "Negroes" were not. The view that Poles were Aryans can be found in documents of occupation authorities, and non-Jewish Poles were told as much. The former applied to Slavs in general — Russians, Ukrainians, Belorussians and Serbs — whom earlier theorists also considered Aryan.

The fact that 'Aryan' was a popular buzzword, but expressed no definite concept, is underlined by racists' widely varying and ambivalent assessments of Slavs. Slavs, of course, were not supposed to be a race. Even important Nazi politicians-cum-ideologues did not agree on how to evaluate them: Himmler, who wanted Germany to lead a struggle against Asia, advocated radical policies against Slavs and racial screenings of them, but he also had Slavic (and Asiatic) ethnicities recruited iinto the Waffen-SS; whereas Rosenberg viewed certain Slavic peoples as potential allies who should be allowed a separate, appropriate, segregated and dependent development. Erich Koch had praised the "young peoples of the East" prior to 1933, even proposing "racial mixing" between Prussians and Slavs, and he saw positive aspects of Soviet society as late as 1939-41, before turning to brutal racist oppression as the Reich Commissar for Ukraine. Like Hitler, many Nazi leaders had said little (and little negative) about Slavs in their early writings. The general view in Germany was that the Slavs were a mixture of races.

The Polish people were supposed to consist of the same races as the Germans, although in a different mixture. Russians were said to have also incorporated Mongol blood. Anti-Slav prejudices were old and widespread in Germany but they were also displayed, for example, by Italian diplomats. Yet some scholars argue that in German academia views hostile to Slavs were only frequently expressed. Apparently, no general Nazi guidelines for Slavic philology or eastern European history existed. In a 1944 propaganda brochure entitled "What are we fighting for?" the Supreme Command of the Ground Forces omitted explicit anti-Slavic arguments, listing Jews, Bolshevism, the USA and England as Germany's main enemies.

Given all these inconsistencies, old prejudices — also cultivated by intellectuals — influenced German policies strongly. According to these attitudes, Slavs were uncultured, stupid, alcoholic, disorderly and undisciplined. During the Weimar Republic they were also portrayed as treacherous, brutal and revengeful. In Germany after 1939, when large numbers of Polish forced laborers were used, Poles were portrayed as lazy, undisciplined, envious, hateful, revengeful, and as only pretending to be subservient, and their country was described as pre-industrial. Even to writer Heinrich Böll, an admirer of Russian literature, Russia appeared "sad and vast and demonic, the country without fences."

Racists held that Slavs were incapable of sustained state-building and of bringing order to environments. On the one hand, the old stereotypes allowed for the publication shortly after the German-Soviet non-aggression treaty in 1939 of a relatively respect brochure on Soviet Russia that described the Russians' national character as natural, friendly, pious, down-to-earth, passionate, adaptable, and ambitious though non-achieving; but on the other hand it did emphasize some negative elements of prejudice by adding that Russians were also passive, melancholic and devoid of individual personalities. And even during the ongoing German war against Poland in 1939, Hitler publicly praised the bravery of Polish soldiers. Thus, Aryanism and, so, racist thinking itself, to a degree had room for such contradictory evaluations. Nevertheless, after 1943 calls for treating the Slavs well, and the 'Europe versus Bolshevism' propaganda, were rarely justified by reference to Slavs' positive 'racial' value.
I think a lot of people do not realise that anti-Slavism had been part of nationalism in Germany for a long time before the Nazis. Bismarck was a lot more racist towards the Poles than Hitler was during the 1930s - the former he even said that the 'Polish Question' could be solved by exterminating the Poles!

This reminds of when deniers often like to reference The Unknown History of the 1939 German-Polish Conflict which was written by an anonymous writer (surprise, surprise!) whilst ignoring the centuries of suppression of the Poles by the Germans. The article is basically a handful of cherry-picked examples of the Poles showing hostility towards the Germans without putting those quotations into context.
German anti-Slavic racism was also the basis for extreme forms of racist dehumanization. For it was not only Bolsheviks, commissars and Jews against whom the concept of the "subhuman" was employed, but also the Soviet people collectively. To be sure, this term was also applied to German criminals and people of supposedly low intelligence as well as 'Negroes' and 'Mongoloids.'
Yet many of those Slavic subhumans were the ideal Nordic image. :D

Mark Mazower in Hitler's Empire: Nazi Rule in Occupied Europe wrote on p. 198:
Hitler himself thought Himmler’s race mysticism was impractical and, while hostile to Serbs and Russians in general, he felt differently about other groups of Slavs. He praised the Czechs as “industrious and intelligent workers” and speculated that blue-eyed Ukrainians might be “peasant descendants of German tribes who never migrated.” In fact, he came round to the view – common among German anthropologists – that there was, racial speaking, no such category as “Slavs”; it was a linguistic term, nothing more.
Last edited by Goody67 on Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
True Skeptic
Posts: 10736
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Tue Dec 18, 2018 1:14 pm

Man, that’s a lot!!!!

Thanks. I’ll glance through it more later but back to work now.
Also, Donald Trump is a clownfraud who only got involved in this for the attention.

Deadspin, 2014:
https://deadspin.com/there-are-just-two ... 1613879544

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Tue Dec 18, 2018 6:43 pm

It's quite revealing how flexible the racial theories of the Third Reich were, especially during the war years.

As Diemut Majer wrote:
Analogously, no convincing race-theoretical explanation could be found to justify the discrimination against the Poles. According to National Socialist racial doctrine, all European peoples belonged to the family of Aryans and were thus "fundamentally equivalent", that is, recognized as equal before the laws.
Yet, we read the following:
14. Punishment for sexual intercourse with Germans. Czechs, Poles, and other Eastern workers or prisoners of war who had had sexual intercourse with Germans were examined by the racial examiners of RuSHA. Those who were found to be not "racially desirable" were imprisoned in concentration camps or executed. Those found "racially valuable" were Germanized. The defendants Greifelt, Creutz, Meyer-Hetling, Schwarzenberger, Hofmann, Hildebrandt, and Schwalm are charged with special responsibility for, and participation in, these crimes.
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=56401
Foreign nationals, particularly from the East, including Poles, Czechs, and Russians, were subject to these decrees (both civilians and prisoners of war). As early as 7/3/1940 Pancke, then chief of RuSHA, sent a report to the office of Bormann, assistant to Hess, suggesting the issuance of laws to protect German blood.

"The order given by the Reich Leader of the SS on the special treatment of Poles is extended to the Czechs too. The Reich Security Main Office continues to complain that a quicker decision must be reached concerning suitability for Germanization. It proposes a short course of instruction for all the heads of the State Police Regional Offices and afterwards the inauguration through these of a system of rough racial selection of the civilian workers suggested for special treatment. On account of principal considerations this consent to the Reich Security Main Office had to be refused. It then remains for us, however, on the other hand to guarantee that the examination process will be speeded up. Once more reference must be made to the regular submission of the expert opinions to the Higher SS and Police Leaders. * * *"
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=56438
a November 1940 decree of the office of Hitler's deputy for party affairs held that no party member, or member of a party organization, could marry a person who had at least two grandparents who were members of the Czech, Polish or Magyar "Volk groups" without permission of the regional party official (Gauleiter).
Ehrenreich, p. 11.
To "preserve the purity . . . [of their] own racial and ethnic foundations," farmers who were members of the NSDAP were subject to a ban on marriages with Poles and Czechs, in order to "prevent . . . [the latter from] marrying into German farmsteads." Otherwise, all NSDAP members, as well as all members of its various organisations (the SA, the SS, the National Socialist Motor Corps, the Hitler Youth, the German Lecturers' Association, the National Socialist Student League, the Nazi Women's League) required permission from the local Gauleiter if they desired to marry "members of the Czech, Polish, or Magyar ethnic groups." Although marrying without the required permission did not nullify the union (sec. 13 of the Marriage Law and sec. 14 of the First Implementing Decree), it did have disciplinary consequences.
Majer, p. 105.
Himmler informed the office of the Führer’s deputy that in the event of sexual intercourse or “other immoral acts” between Germans and Polish workers, he had ordered the immediate arrest of the responsible Germans. Poles who had had sexual relations with German women were either executed (“special treatment”) or, if they proved to be capable of Germanization, committed to preventive detention, depending on the personal decision of the Reichsführer-SS and chief of the German police. If a Polish woman was involved, she was to be sent to a brothel. Himmler further declared that such measures by no means implied a desire to “suppress the justified indignation of the German people at such shameful behavior”: he found public defamation (through “spontaneous reactions of indignation”) to be a powerful deterrent. He would have no compunction if in such cases “the hair of the German woman, say, was cropped in the presence of the girls of the village or she was led through the streets carrying a notice telling of her offence.” But defamation should “more or less stay within such limits.” Initially a general ban on sexual intercourse between Germans and all foreign workers was even decreed. As the labor shortage worsened, however, the terms of the ban were relaxed again by the circular order of December 7, 1942, referred to above, since for political reasons Italian workers and other foreigners coming from allied countries could not be included in it. This was also the case for the French, who were to be integrated as a nation in the “new Europe.” Thus, sexual intercourse with people of these nationalities remained merely “undesirable,” and intervention was envisaged only in the case of “intolerable conduct” (cohabitation, etc.), but externally this should under no circumstances appear to have any national or racial basis.

In contrast, sexual relations between Germans and members of Eastern European nations were relentlessly prosecuted by the Gestapo on grounds of the “risks for the racial integrity of the German nation,” and as usual only two sanctions were applied: committal to a concentration camp if the foreign offender was capable of being Germanized, or execution (“special treatment”).Preventive detention was demanded in the case of German offenders. This concerned above all Polish workers,the first to arrive in the Reich, but also Polish prisoners of war, over whom hung the threat of committal to a concentration camp, at least provisionally. A leaflet on the “duties of civilian workers … of Polish nationality” confirmed explicitly that the death sentence would be meted out for the offense of sexual intercourse with persons of German blood. Russians (“Eastern workers”), Czechs, Serbs, and others later came to be included in this category, as will be discussed in detail later.
Majer, p. 180.

For details about the Reich Citizenship, read:

Das Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht des „Dritten Reiches“ und seine Auswirkungen auf das Verfolgungsschicksal deutscher Staatsangehöriger
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Pyrrho
Administrator
Posts: 9827
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:31 am

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Pyrrho » Wed Dec 19, 2018 12:42 am

Yeah, uh, please note the rules regarding copyright, and please do not post large excerpts from other sources.

Cambridge requires license for reproduction, for example:

https://www.cambridge.org/about-us/rights-permissions/

Please reduce the amount of content you have posted here.
For any forum questions or concerns please e-mail skepticforum@gmail.com or send a PM.

The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 3:47 am

John Connelly published a 33-page pamphlet titled, "Nazis and Slavs: From Racial Theory to. Racist Practice" in which he described the contradictions and racism of the Nazis' view of the Slavs.

Connelly basically summed up the various thoughts as:

- Before 1939, there were only vague statements made about the views. However, most German nationalists considered the Slavs as racially inferior to the Germans.

- In 1938 the Slavs were still regarded as racially related to the Germans. The Early Slavs were considered to have been Nordic.

- After the invasion of Poland, the Slavs were considered to be of a non-European status.

- Allied nations and neutral nations such as the Bulgarians, Czechs and Slovaks were still regarded as inferior, but were not treated as harshly as the state enemies such as the Poles, Russians, Serbs and Ukrainians. This can also be found in Nazi material such as the which stated as a general outline, in the Strictly confidential — Not for publication Zeitschriften-Dienst, "Do not say that the Slavic peoples are inferior. (The Slovaks and the Croats are our allies, the Bulgarians our friends)".

- The Nazis did not regard the Slavs as a race, there was no call for a complete extermination policy.

- During the war, Hitler saw many Ukrainians that were blonde hair and blue-eyed children that he considered those people to be descended from the peasant German tribes that never migrated. Slavs that were consider racially suitable were eligible to be Germanised. Hitler declared that Ukrainian women should be assimilated. As much as half of the Czechs were considered suitable to be Germanised.

- Himmler aimed to destroy any ethnic groups in the East by splintering them all up.

The pamphlet can be read here.
Last edited by Goody67 on Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 3:58 am

Konrad Heiden in The Fuhrer which was written in the mid-1930s wrote about Hitler's ancestry:
But there is one curious fact which cannot be argued either way: the later National Socialist racial legislation requires everyone desiring to pass as an Aryan to prove four Aryan grandparents; if brought before strict judges, Adolf Hitler might have difficulty proving the identity of his paternal grandfather.
p. 38.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26490
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by scrmbldggs » Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:25 am

:hmm: You might have overlooked this post, Goody?

Pyrrho wrote:
Wed Dec 19, 2018 12:42 am
Yeah, uh, please note the rules regarding copyright, and please do not post large excerpts from other sources.

Cambridge requires license for reproduction, for example:

https://www.cambridge.org/about-us/rights-permissions/

Please reduce the amount of content you have posted here.
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:30 am

Since Poles were considered Aryans by the Nazis, why did they publicly hang Polish males found guilty of having sexual relations with a German women? Why did the German woman have her head shaved and marched through her city/town with a placard detailing her crime? Why were only Poles, Ukrainians and Russians hanged for having sexual relations with German women? Germans were permitted to marry Czech women. Remember, even Goebbels had an affair with a Czech actress.

Although it is true that Hitler wanted to punish the French, English, and Belgian prisoners with the death sentence for having sexual relations with German women, it was not passed because the Nazis feared it would upset the local populations too much.

The RSHA on 14 January 1941 tried to racially distinguish between the'workers of Germanic ethnicity' which included workers from the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, the Flemish and the others were considered 'racially inferior', those were the French, Walloons, Italians, Czechs, Slovaks, and the Yugoslavians which were all categorised the same as the Poles (Gellately, p. 188).

Also, as noted earlier, the Poles were used as examples of related blood at the Nuremberg Laws in 1936. In 1940, things were totally different:
Since 1940 the authorities had been complaining that the Poles, whether married or not, had been following Polish propaganda slogans to preserve "Polishness", to "reproduce in great numbers," and to "have large numbers of children without inhibition" and that pregnant Polish women were no longer registering with the welfare offices because they were of (forced) abortions. As early as November 7, 1939, Reichsstatthalter Gresier had summarily stated in an order of the day that marriages between Poles and marriages between Jews where provisionally banned, that marriages between ethnic Germans must "comply with the Nuremberg Race Laws," and that "if at all possible," there should be no marriages between Germans and Poles.
Majer, p. 247.

The Nazis even went to the extreme of setting up age-marriage requirements amongst the Poles. Polish men were allowed to marry after the age of twenty-eight and Polish women were allowed to marry after the age of twenty-five. For further information read Majer, p. 248.

Here is a photo of a German woman who was sent to a concentration camp for having sexual relations with a Polish man:

Image

https://archive.org/details/BackingHitl ... tGellately
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:31 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:25 am
:hmm: You might have overlooked this post, Goody?

Pyrrho wrote:
Wed Dec 19, 2018 12:42 am
Yeah, uh, please note the rules regarding copyright, and please do not post large excerpts from other sources.

Cambridge requires license for reproduction, for example:

https://www.cambridge.org/about-us/rights-permissions/

Please reduce the amount of content you have posted here.
I did not. Small paragraphs from books are allowed, it is only excessive copyrighting that is forbidden. Fair use is permissible. Books on the archive.org website are free for anyone to copy and paste, save, etc. I deleted the two posts and made a single post here.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26490
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by scrmbldggs » Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:33 am

I guess that depends on what the definition of is small is. :-P
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:38 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:33 am
I guess that depends on what the definition of is small is. :-P
I removed the full text of Connelly's pamphlet and posted my own conclusions from the pamphlet. I provided a link to the full text.

The other text is available online. I am not posting walls of text, I have provided snippets of paragraphs from the books when relevant.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26490
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by scrmbldggs » Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:42 am

How about links to Hutton and Gerlach/Mazower?
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:47 am

The RuSHA Case at the Nuremberg Trials also mentioned the punishment for sexual relations/sexual intercourse with Germans. See, The RuSHA Case - The Judgment of the Tribunal and The RuSHA Case - the Indictment.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:51 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
Wed Dec 19, 2018 4:42 am
How about links to Hutton and Gerlach/Mazower?
Are you just deliberately trolling me? I referenced the books and page numbers.

Brendan Daly's essay on Hutton's book is worth a read.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Pyrrho
Administrator
Posts: 9827
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:31 am

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Pyrrho » Wed Dec 19, 2018 10:58 am

Also good to intersperse excerpts with commentary. Rather important topic and I appreciate the posting of relevant sources.
For any forum questions or concerns please e-mail skepticforum@gmail.com or send a PM.

The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 5:10 pm

In 1942, Egon Leuschner published Nationalsozialistische Fremdvolkpolitik, and with regards to the Poles he wrote:
Polen
Das uns stammesfremde, uns zahlenmäßig am stärksten berührende polnische Volk ist rassisch stark gemischt. Ostische und ostbaltische Rassenmerkmale treten am häufigsten in Erscheinung, daneben sind aber sowohl nordische Rassenbestandteile als auch vereinzelt asiatische Einschläge festzustellen. Die Entwicklung der letzten 20 Jahre, in denen das polnische Volk alle Bewegungsfreiheit für die Entfaltung etwa vorhandener völkisch-rassischer Kräfte besaß, hat das Unschöpferische und den Leistungsmangel dieses Volkes vor aller Welt offenbart. Die polnische "Kultur", die nur in einem Nachäffen westlicher kultureller Einrichtungen und westlichen Kulturlebens bestand, zeigt den Tiefstand völkisch-eigener Kultur. Die Wesensart, die Gesittung, der Charakter und die kriecherische Gesinnung des polnischen Volkes sprechen für die abgrundtiefe Verschiedenheit des polnischen und des deutschen Volkes eine beredtere Sprache, als alle rassenwissenschaftlichen Untersuchungen darzulegen vermögen. Der überwiegende Teil des polnischen Volkes ist nicht umvolkbar. Sein Eindringen in den deutschen Blutskörper würde eine Entnordung des deutschen Volkes und eine Verlagerung seiner rassischen Substanz nach der ostischen und ostbaltischen Seite zur Folge haben. Das Fernziel rassenpolitisch ausgerichteter Fremdvolkpolitik kann nur die restlose Entfernung des größten Teiles der Polen aus dem Reiche sein. Da aber heute noch nicht zu übersehen ist, wann dieser Zeitpunkt gekommen erscheint, muß energisch aller Assimilationsgefahr entgegengesteuert werden. Aber nicht nur vom rassischen, sondern auch vom volkspolitischen Standpunkt her ist die säuberliche Trennung aus politischem Interesse und aus nationaler Würde notwendig. Der Pole, der neiderfüllt aus dem dumpfen Gefühl seiner rassischen Unterlegenheit keinen anderen Menschen mehr haßt als den deutschen, ist unser Feind, zu dem wir niemals mehr in ein freundschaftliches Verhältnis treten werden. Die tierische Ermordung von nahezu 60.000 Volksdeutschen hat endgültig den letzten Trennungsstrich gezogen. (...)
https://archive.org/stream/LeuschnerEgo ... )_djvu.txt

I hope an online translate can help.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:48 pm

After the Nuremberg Laws were announced and the clear lack of a consistent definition of a 'Jew' became apparent, a commentator in the journal for the League of German Jurists commented:
While logic and consistency have traditionally been a special province of jurists and lawyers, it appears that since the seizure of power these faculties have eluded them. In looking through our racial laws it becomes apparent that we are lacking a certain conceptual clarity in using such terms as 'race', 'racial hygiene', 'eugenics' and others which fall into the same category. They are frequently used with different and contradictory meanings.
Michael Burleigh, The Racial State: Germany 1933-1945, p. 145.

Image

The distinction between an 'Aryan' and a 'Jew' came more down to religion than racial science.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:13 pm

It's also worth noting that although the The Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour applied to men and women, only men were imprisoned. Hitler himself did not want women (Jewish or not) to be punished. Nevertheless, in 1937 Heydrich issued a secret order to the Gestapo which made Jewish women, non-Jewish women who had Jewish relatives or opponents of the Nazis who were guilty of violating the law to be taken into custody.

Robert Gellately, The Gestapo and German Society: Enforcing Racial Policy, 1933-1945, p. 172.

Robert Proctoe, Racial Hygiene: Medicine Under the Nazis, p. 133.

Majer, p. 329.

The question over whether German women were to be punished for having sexual intercourse with non-Germans remained undecided. (Majer, p. 333.)
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:23 am

Nazi propaganda often emphasised Hitler's ancestry, especially that he was a German.
Hitler the “Foreigner”
“Hitler is a foreigner, a Czech!”

Why?

He was born in Braunau in Lower Austria. Braunau on the Inn — not to be confused with Braunau in German Bohemia — is a small, purely German town on the Bavarian border, part of the “Inn district” that was cut off from Bavaria and given to Austria in 1779. Three generations before Adolf Hitler’s birth it was still Bavarian, and it is only the result of dynastic disputes that it is today part of Austria.
Adolf Hitler: German Worker and Front Soldier (1932)
“Hitler — A Czech!”

Hitler was born in Braunau am Inn. Those opponents who spread the lie of a “Czech Hitler” depend on the confusion of Braunau am Inn with the Braunau in Czechoslovakia. Braunau am Inn is on the Bavarian border, with only the Inn River between them. It is over 80 kilometers as the crow flies to the Czech border, twice as much as the distance between Dresden and the Czech border. Up until the second half of the 18th century, Braunau belonged to Bavaria.

Hitler, therefore, was born within Greater Germany. Both parents are of German blood. They could not even speak Czech (and Hitler lived many years of his youth with his parents on Reich German soil, in Passau). Hitler became a German citizen before he became a candidate for Reich President by act of the National Socialist government in Braunschweig. He himself always refused to ask the Reich government to give to him what it gave without hesitation to tens of thousands of Galician Jews, even though he had long-since earned it through four years of service at the front in the German army during the war.
Facts and Lies about Hitler (1932)

Hindenburg confused Hitler's birthplace Braunau on the Inn with Broumov (Braunau in German) in the Czech Republic and referred to him as, "that Bohemian corporal".

Hitler described Braunau am Inn in Mein Kampf as "Bavarian by blood", he was right. The town began as part of the Dutchy of Bavaria and changed between Austrian rule and Bavarian rule several times, it was last part of Bavaria in 1816. Anyway, even if it had always been under Austrian rule, back then the Austrians were seen as just another type of Germans. A separate Austrian identity only came into existence after WW2.
Youth

Today Adolf Hitler’s birthplace belongs to Germany. He was born on 20 April 1889 in Braunau am Inn in Upper Austria. But he is German. He does not feel like an Austrian. When war breaks out in 1914, he volunteers for the German army. As Point 1 of the National Socialist program states: “We demand a Greater German Reich.” On page 1 of the Führer’s autobiography Mein Kampf we find these words: “Common blood belongs in a common Reich.” We can better understand the first point of program of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party when we realize that Adolf Hitler himself is a German who was born outside of Germany. We affirm that the law of common blood transcends state borders. Austria fulfilled this German longing on 13 March 1938.
The Life of the Führer (1938)

Hitler publicly declared in 1924:
The loss of my Austrian citizenship is not painful to me, as I never felt as an Austrian citizen but always as a German only . . . . It was this mentality that made me draw the ultimate conclusion and do military service in the German Army.
Brigitte Hamann, Hitler's Vienna, p. 204.

Hitler's feeling as a German was even noted by the judge at the Beer Hall Putsch, he refused to deport Hitler back to Austria because:
The court explained why it rejected the deportation of Hitler under the terms of the Protection of the Republic Act: "Hitler is a German-Austrian. He considered himself to be a German. In the opinion of the court, the meaning and the terms of section 9, para II of the Law for the Protection of the Republic cannot apply to a man who thinks and feels as German as Hitler, who voluntarily served for four and a half years in the German army at war, who attained high military honours through outstanding bravery in the face of the enemy, was wounded, suffered other damage to his health, and was released from the military into the control of the district Command Munich I.
Ian Kershaw, Hitler 1889–1936: Hubris, p. 217.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26490
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by scrmbldggs » Thu Dec 20, 2018 1:11 am

Quite in contrast to the many Jews, who considered themselves to be German, who thought and felt as German as Hitler, who voluntarily served...in the German army at war, who attained high military honours through outstanding bravery in the face of the enemy, were wounded, suffered other damage to their health...
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Thu Dec 20, 2018 1:49 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 1:11 am
Quite in contrast to the many Jews, who considered themselves to be German, who thought and felt as German as Hitler, who voluntarily served...in the German army at war, who attained high military honours through outstanding bravery in the face of the enemy, were wounded, suffered other damage to their health...
That’s very true. For example, Jews in Poland and Russia suffered a lot of antisemitism, whereas in Germany the vast majority of Jews (and people of Jewish descent) were assimilated into German society.

I’m sure many people assume that the Nazis came to power by using antisemitism, when in fact during the early 1930s antisemitism was not used as a political tool by the Nazis because they knew that the the majority of Germans did not share their views about the Jews.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2782
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Balmoral95 » Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:57 am

Goody67 wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 1:49 am
scrmbldggs wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 1:11 am
Quite in contrast to the many Jews, who considered themselves to be German, who thought and felt as German as Hitler, who voluntarily served...in the German army at war, who attained high military honours through outstanding bravery in the face of the enemy, were wounded, suffered other damage to their health...
That’s very true. For example, Jews in Poland and Russia suffered a lot of antisemitism, whereas in Germany the vast majority of Jews (and people of Jewish descent) were assimilated into German society.

I’m sure many people assume that the Nazis came to power by using antisemitism, when in fact during the early 1930s antisemitism was not used as a political tool by the Nazis because they knew that the the majority of Germans did not share their views about the Jews.
Really? Do tell....

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Thu Dec 20, 2018 4:56 pm

Balmoral95 wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:57 am
Really? Do tell....
In the November 1932 German federal election the Nazi Party's popularity was decreasing and the Communist Party of Germany popularity was increasing. Hitler never managed to get more than a third of the Germans to vote for him in a free election. The Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses on 1 April 1933 did not last long and many Germans still shopped at Jewish-owned shops.

Even as late as 1938 the Germans were appalled with the Kristallnacht. Alfons Heck once said:
Many Germans up until the Kristallnacht, believed Hitler was engaged, not in genocide certainly, it seemed to be a minor form of harassment of a disliked minority, but after the night of broken glass or Kristallnacht no German could any longer be under any illusion, I believe it was the day that we lost our innocence. But, it would be fair to point out that I myself never met even the most fanatic leader of the Hitler Youth who advocated the extermination of the Jews. Certainly, we wanted the Jews out of Germany, but we did not want them to be killed.
The Fatal Attraction of Adolph Hitler 42:40.

There were even Nazi Party members that expressed disapproval of the Kristallnacht.

There were protests throughout the whole of the Third Reich when certain information became known. There was no joy when WW2 broke out, unlike the scenes on the streets of Germany when WW1 was declared. The outrage of the Aktion T4 which made Hitler stop the programme (although it continued privately). The Rosenstrasse protest in 1943, etc.

It's true that many Germans stayed indifferent and ignored the persecution of the Jews. However, one must bear in mind that there were two leaders that were passed very early on in the dictatorship of the Third Reich which made it illegal to criticise the Nazi government, the Nazi Party and any of the leaders. The first law was passed on 21 March 1933, known as the "Malicious Practices Act 1933" (Verordnung zur Abwehr heimtückischer Diskreditierung der nationalen Regierung). The second law was passed on 20 December 1934, known as the "Treachery Act of 1934" (Heimtückegesetz, officially, Gesetz gegen heimtückische Angriffe auf Staat und Partei und zum Schutz der Parteiuniformen.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Thu Dec 20, 2018 8:57 pm

Although I doubt it, does anyone own Alexandra Przyrembel's book Rassenschande: Reinheitsmythos Und Vernichtungslegitimation Im Nationalsozialismus (Veroffentlichungen Des Max-Planck-Instituts Fur Geschichte)?

I'm interested to know whether the crime of Rassenschande was more prominent in southern Germany which was predominantly Catholic or northern Germany which was predominantly Protestant.

Sarah Ann Gordon detailed in Hitler, Germans, and the "Jewish Question" about the fact that not even all Nazi Party members conformed to the Nuremberg Laws. The Deutschland-Berichte recorded 1,683 cases of Rassenschande between 1935-1939. (Gordon, p. 172.) The average time spent in jail for being convicted of Rassenschande was four and a half years. One Nazi Party member was even sentenced to death for the crime of Rassenschande. (Gordon, p. 265.) Despite it being illegal, personal relationships between Germans and Jews still continued after the Nuremberg Laws. (Gordon, p. 265.)

Robert Gellately detailed in The Gestapo and German Society: Enforcing Racial Policy, 1933-1945 the cases recorded of sexual relations between Germans and Jews. (Gellately, pp. 48, 161-162, 165.)

It's also important to note that the Nazis defined the term "sexual intercourse" in a different way to the normal way it is defined. Majer wrote:
to cover all sexual activities carried out with the intent to "satisfy the sexual urge of at least one of the partners." If this in fact already equates sexual intercourse with "lewd acts, the Reich Supreme Court would ultimately expand the term sexual intercourse to such an extent that its definition as an act was annulled, so that even simply looking at another "with lascivious intent" was punishable as "race defilement." How this could still be considered a "threat to German blood" remained the secret of the nation's highest judges and their interpretive arts; one has only to read the nonsensical opinions with which culpability was construed in such cases. Along the same lines, the definition of attempted "race defilement" was expended beyond all bounds, in order to extend the spectrum of punishable acts as far as possible into the realm of the intent or preparation to commit an act. Even amorous caresses exchanged prior to intended intercourse by the persons involved were held to bee attempted "race defilement," indeed even mere casual physical contact without the intent of procuring "sexual gratification." This breakdown in the concept of a legally punishable act reached its peak in decisions of the Reich Supreme Court according to which merely verbal expressions, together with preparatory acts (in themselves not seen as punishable)—indeed even a mere verbal invitation to participate in sexual intercourse—were punished as attempted race defilement, because they were held to have an "immediate affinity with the sexual act."
Majer, pp. 330-331.

As is clearly demonstrated, the Nazis often used words in such an arbitrary way to cover all of their legal terms and offences.

Richard J. Evans in The Third Reich in Power wrote that between 1935 and 1940, 1,911 people were convicted of Rassenschande. He also mentioned the same as Majer, that over time the concept changed to even include simply greeting someone with a kiss.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Sun Dec 23, 2018 3:34 pm

Bryan Mark Rigg in Hitler's Jewish Soldiers: The Untold Story of Nazi Racial Laws and Men of Jewish Descent in the German Military wrote a whole chapter about the many cases in which Hitler exempted Germans from the racial laws passed in 1935. Hitler's own ancestry has been speculated for this reason.
Some have claimed that Hitler made exemptions for Mischlinge because of his own "Jewish" past. Since this issue was raised frequently during discussions of this study, it is explored in some detail. The facts seem to indicate that Hitler feared his paternal grandfather was Jewish. As Dr. Fritz Redlich, psychiatrist and author of Hitler: Diagnosis of a Destructive Prophet, said, "Hitler was mixed up about his descent. He was definitely scared about the possibility that he had a Jewish grandfather." However, no documents have survived to confirm or deny this allegation.
Although it's true that there is no evidence Hitler had a Jewish grandfather, once he became a known figure in Germany during the 1920s, there were many accusations, rumours and urban legends spread about Hitler's own ancestry. The rumours either stated he had Czech or Jewish ancestry and was therefore not a German. Many onlookers were shocked at how this unknown Austrian with questionable ancestry could convince millions of Germans that they were the racially superior Aryans.
In general, Hitler was very secretive about his origins, He tried to conceal many embarrassing stories about his relatives and forbade that anything about his family or youth be published. Hitler invented his own history, changing his origins and ethnicity. He even had people murdered who knew too much about his past. According to Hitler's nephew, Patrick, Hitler claimed that the public "mustn't be allowed to find out who I am. They mustn't know where I came from and who my family is." Several plausible explanations for Hitler's discomfort exist: his family had a history of mental illness and incest; his mother and father were second cousins; his niece and possible lover, Geli Raubal, had committed suicide allegedly because of his domination of her; his half-brother, Alois Jr., had an extensive criminal record; Hitler may have had a son; one of his relations married a Jew; his Aunt Johanna was a hunchback; his father was illegitimate; his father beat him, as well as his mother and his dog; his father was promiscuous; his father was a drunkard; Hitler feared that his father may have been half-Jewish. Rumors spread throughout the 1920s and 1930s about Hitler's "Jewish past," but they were mainly "fostered by sensationalist journalism of the foreign press." Only a few sources exist that refer to Hitler's potential Jewish heritage: one is a book written by Hansjurgen Koehler, an ex- Gestapo man who emigrated to England in the 1930s; another is the memoirs of Hans Frank, Hitler's notorious lawyer, written while awaiting the hangman in Nuremberg in 1946. Neither source is particularly reliable.

Koehler's book was published during 1940, a time when several "spurious books" were being published about the Fuhrer. Koehler reported in 1940 that he had come across information in SS files that proved that Hitler's grandmother had been impregnated by a Jew for whose family she worked as a domestic servant in Vienna. The fact that Koehler's book was published in 1940, and that articles about Hitler's past had already been printed in the 1930s, shows how widespread such rumors were about Hitler. Thus, they could not have escaped his notice.

Frank's book, published in the 1950s, is full of mistakes. Frank's son, Niklas, warned that his father "lied about everything" and his memoirs must therefore be looked at skeptically. Ian Kershaw wrote that Frank's memories were "dictated at a time when he was waiting for the hangman and plainly undergoing a psychological crisis, [and] are full of inaccuracies and have to be used with caution." Even so, the "psycho-historian" Robert Waite, author of The Psychological God Adolf Hitler, found "reason to believe [Frank's] story. He wrote his memoirs as a condemned man who had converted to Catholicism. He had no reason to misrepresent Hitler or to invent a story."

In 1946, Frank's memoirs substantiated allegations like Koehler's. In 1930, Hitler had asked him to research his family's past in light of some unpleasant rumors. Frank did so and allegedly found that Hitler's grandmother, forty-two years old and unmarried, became pregnant while working in the Jewish Frankenberger (perhaps Frankenreiter) household in Graz. It was unclear whether the head of this Jewish home or his teenage son was the father of the child, although based on the documents, Frank assumed it to be the youth. According to Frank, letters he found proved the Frankenberger family was responsible, since they paid child support to Hitler's grandmother for several years. The child in question was Alois Schicklgruber, Hitler's father, who later changed his name to Hitler. When Frank reported these findings, Hitler told him to keep quiet. Frank claimed that Hitler confirmed the facts that Frank found except one. Hitler maintained that his grandmother had been impregnated by Georg Hiedler rather than the Jew, and had only pretended the father was Frankenberger to extort money from them. But as psychotherapist George Victor wrote, "Hitler's version [via Frank] is doubtful on its face. It implies Maria was engaging in sex with Georg and the Frankenberger youth at the same time. If so, she could not have been sure who the father was, and Hitler could not have been sure, although he said he was."
Although modern historians know that the evidence about Hitler's Jewish ancestry is not reliable, after WW2 there were many historians that willingly accepted that Hitler had a Jewish grandfather. At least Alan Bullock did not claim it was true in his biography of Hitler - the biography was/is used as a reference.

Ron Rosenbaum in Explaining Hitler: The Search for the Origins of His Evil described how some historians have suggested that Frank invented the story to either a) hide his own possibility of having Jewish ancestry ("his apparent belief that he might have been descended from a Jewish grandfather named Frankfurter") onto Hitler. b) Although Frank turned his back on Nazism, he remained antisemitic and claiming Hitler was of Jewish ancestry was a way to claim that the Third Reich's crimes were done by a Jew. Frank's claim is full of errors and there is no evidence of a Jewish Frankenberger family living in Graz at the time and Jews were actually barred from that area until the 1860s, by that time Alois was around 30 years old. Other claims like his paternal grandfather was a Baron Rothschild are baseless as well.

The claims that Hitler was worried about his own ancestry are pure speculation. There is no credible evidence that Hitler thought of himself as having any other ancestry than German Austrian (Deutsch-Österreicher). He seemed quite happy for the genealogist to publish his family tree. In 1937 the book Die Ahnentafel des Fuehrers (The Pedigree of the Leader) was published which showed Hitler's family tree back centuries and included Johann Georg Hiedler as his paternal grandfather; the book claimed that Hitler had an "unblemished Aryan pedigree".

The following material on the immediate ancestry of Adolf Hitler was extracted from Rudolf Koppensteiner, Die Ahnentafel des Führers, published in Leipzig in 1937 by the Zentralstelle für Deutsche Personen- und Familiengeschichte as Band III of the series Ahnentafeln berühmter Deutscher [Stamm- und Ahnentafelwerk, Band XIII]. The contribution of the undersigned is HTML-izing Herr Koppensteiner's work.
If this story is true, it might help explain Hitler's actions in Austria after the annexation of 1938. Supposedly, Hitler had the whole town of Dollersheim, where possible secrets about his family were, turned into an artillery field. However, according to Redlich, Waite is wrong in assuming that the Dollersheim documents about Hitler's family were destroyed by this "hostile act." A more likely scenario was that Hitler took away whatever documents he thought were incriminating from the Dollersheim parish archives and had them destroyed. We do know that Hitler's "frantic efforts" to locate the documents about his evasion of the Austrian draft were futile because they had been removed from the archive and hidden. But the fact that he looked for them proves that Hitler was searching out documents that might have harmed the identity he had created for himself. Hitler probably found most of the documents he wanted. His past occupied much of his time; Hitler had his origins repeatedly investigated (nine times in total) and reportedly had incriminating documents destroyed.
Although no evidence has ever supported the claim that Hitler deliberately destroyed the area (and the areas surrounding) to somehow hide his ancestry, the real reason may be because of the military aspect of the area.
We can assume that Hitler believed that his grandmother had been "taken advantage of" while working in a Jewish home. This belief may have intensified his already anti-Semitic writings, statements, and policies. Even before Frank told Hitler this story about his grandmother, Hitler feared that Aryan women might be "misused" as servants in Jewish homes. Mein Kampf often refers with horror to Jews sexually abusing Aryan women. Perhaps hearing the stories of his grandmother confirmed his fears and probably intensified his reactions to this sensitive subject. Hitler often flew into a rage when he heard about Aryan chambermaids in Jewish homes. This may explain why Hitler falsely accused Matthias Erzberger, a staunch Republican and representative of Weimar democracy, of being the illegitimate son of a servant girl and a Jewish employer. The fact that Hitler considered this kind of heritage a vile insult speaks volumes on how he felt about his father. Later, Hitler had a law implemented to prevent the situation he feared. The Nuremberg Laws of 1935 forbade Aryan women under forty-five years of age as of 31 December 1935 to work in Jewish households. Concerning these policies, Redlich wrote that they were "possibly motivated by Hitler's concern that his paternal grandmother was impregnated by a Jew when she worked in a Jewish household."
There is no evidence that Hitler ever believed his grandmother worked for any Jewish family.
The SS also investigated Hitler's ancestry. Usually the SS only looked for Jews in a person's family tree. In 1944, Himmler wrote Bormann about Hitler's dubious past: "It's rumored that some of the Fuhrer's relatives live in Graz-St. Peter, some of whom are half-idiots or insane .... The Schicklgruber line seems to have several abnormal people, as demonstrated by the mentally retarded ('idiotische') descendants." Hitler probably knew about mental illness in his family; namely, one cousin had committed suicide, another lived in an insane asylum, and two others were mentally retarded. The SS report did not mention any Jewish stains in his "bloodline." The race office had researched his ancestry with the "predictable outcome" that they found him to be 100 percent Aryan. Two facts emerge from this mass of rumor and inference. First, no one will ever know with certainty whether Hitler had Jewish ancestry unless new documents surface. Second, Hitler feared that the rumor about his Jewish past could have been true. He had expressed this implicitly to Captain Schuh in his regiment during World War I and later, during the Third Reich, voiced certain doubts about his ancestry to Speer. This personal identity crisis may have led him to make so many exemptions to the Nazi racial laws.
I've never read anywhere that Hitler discussed his ancestry to a Captain Schuh during WW1. It is highly unlikely as well considering Hitler had not yet been involved in politics and had by then for a long time considered himself to be a German.

The only other source for the claim is Hitler: Diagnosis of a Destructive Prophet - there are numerous of errors in the book, the same as OSS report by Walter Langer titled The Mind of Adolf Hitler.

I don't recall in any of Speer's books any mention of Hitler's worries about his own ancestry.

Hitler's own relative "Aloisia V" was gassed on 6 December 1940, at a mental institution in Austria.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4187823.stm
https://web.archive.org/web/20121027195 ... screen.htm

It is one of history's biggest mysteries how a man with such a bizarre family tree was able to convince millions of Germans that they belonged to a superior kind of people (Volk) when he resembled nothing like the ideal Nordic man and his own ancestry was questionable.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2782
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Balmoral95 » Mon Dec 24, 2018 6:10 am

It is one of history's biggest mysteries how a man with such a bizarre family tree was able to convince millions of Germans that they belonged to a superior kind of people (Volk) when he resembled nothing like the ideal Nordic man and his own ancestry was questionable.

This reads like some over-stated bs line from a 1943-era propaganda movie.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:39 am

Balmoral95 wrote:
Mon Dec 24, 2018 6:10 am
This reads like some over-stated bs line from a 1943-era propaganda movie.
The Nazis thought of the Nordic race as racially superior. Did Hitler look Nordic to you?

Hitler never knew who his paternal grandfather was, where is the propaganda in stating that fact?
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2782
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Balmoral95 » Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:02 am

"one of history's biggest mysteries", please.....

This is the kind of sensationalist sideshow horseshite that goes along with "Hiter was gay" and "Hitler escaped the bunker"....

User avatar
Anomaly
Poster
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 5:11 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Anomaly » Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:52 am

The implication such a "mystery" comes with is hilarious. A Jew responsible for the holocaust. A bold claim.

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2782
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Balmoral95 » Tue Dec 25, 2018 5:13 am

Anomaly wrote:
Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:52 am
The implication such a "mystery" comes with is hilarious. A Jew responsible for the holocaust. A bold claim.
Not so much "bold" as old....

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:07 pm

Balmoral95 wrote:
Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:02 am
"one of history's biggest mysteries", please.....

This is the kind of sensationalist sideshow horseshite that goes along with "Hiter was gay" and "Hitler escaped the bunker"....
That's a straw man argument.

It is a fact that Hitler never for certain who his paternal grandfather was, where is the sensationalism about stating that?
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2782
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Balmoral95 » Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:07 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:07 pm
Balmoral95 wrote:
Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:02 am
"one of history's biggest mysteries", please.....

This is the kind of sensationalist sideshow horseshite that goes along with "Hiter was gay" and "Hitler escaped the bunker"....
That's a straw man argument.

It is a fact that Hitler never for certain who his paternal grandfather was, where is the sensationalism about stating that?
"One of history's biggest mysteries" is sensationalist.

As for the rest:

"There is no evidence that Hitler ever took speculations about his supposed Jewish grandfather seriously--to say nothing of feeling threatened by them.". --V. Ullrich at p. 15.

User avatar
Goody67
Poster
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Goody67 » Fri Dec 28, 2018 9:48 pm

Balmoral95 wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:07 pm
"One of history's biggest mysteries" is sensationalist.

As for the rest:

"There is no evidence that Hitler ever took speculations about his supposed Jewish grandfather seriously--to say nothing of feeling threatened by them.". --V. Ullrich at p. 15.
Do you not find it strange that a man who wanted to create a society that was based on race and advocated an ideology in which race was one of (if not) the most important aspects could not even provide proof that all of his four grandparents were what he demanded every other citizen to do during the Third Reich?

Clearly Hitler did, hence why he published his family tree to disprove any rumours about Jewish ancestry.
"Social­ism is a phi­los­o­phy of fail­ure, the creed of igno­rance, and the gospel of envy, its inher­ent virtue is the equal shar­ing of misery." - Winston Churchill

Balmoral95
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2782
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:14 am
Location: The Free Nambia Healthcare Nirvana

Re: The contradictions of the Nuremberg Laws, proof of Aryan ancestry, and Rassenschande

Post by Balmoral95 » Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:04 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Fri Dec 28, 2018 9:48 pm
Balmoral95 wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 9:07 pm
"One of history's biggest mysteries" is sensationalist.

As for the rest:

"There is no evidence that Hitler ever took speculations about his supposed Jewish grandfather seriously--to say nothing of feeling threatened by them.". --V. Ullrich at p. 15.
Do you not find it strange that a man who wanted to create a society that was based on race and advocated an ideology in which race was one of (if not) the most important aspects could not even provide proof that all of his four grandparents were what he demanded every other citizen to do during the Third Reich?

Clearly Hitler did, hence why he published his family tree to disprove any rumours about Jewish ancestry.
I don't find it any stranger than Trump, who by all accounts is completely obsessed about his public persona and image, acting like a vulgarian and a buffoon...