Did World War II CAUSE the Holocaust?

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

This was a fascinating argument I saw in Kurlansky's "Nonviolence: The History of a Dangerous Idea" after I had already read "Human Smoke."

Some ground rules: if you are a "Holocaust denier" (by which I mean someone that holds the view that the Jews were not subject to an extermination campaign by the Third Reich), then this is not your thread. I don't have a problem with you doing your shit elsewhere, but I don't want a million poltards shitting up the thread arguing a completely different argument. You have a thread for that. This question ASSUMES that the Holocaust was real.

Kurlansky's argument, that got me, was that Hitler never did have a grand master plan (true) and he resorted to more and more extreme methods to deal with his Jewish Question (true). At first it was to be segregation, then voluntary deportation, then voluntary deportation with payment, then involuntary deportation, then a more intense form of segregation, and so on. Internment was a policy carried out by basically everybody against everybody, and what differed with the Germans was their presumption that a sizable chunk of their own population (similar to Blacks in America) had to be interned due to their decision to antagonize them with a racial caste system. By Wannsee, the Germans had settled on their Final Solution, actual extermination.

What Kurlansky pointed out was that the Allies did not help at all. This isn't an "oy vey why didn't you bomb the railroads" argument. He points out, the Allies did not give a fuck, heavily limited the amount of refugees they took, quoted FDR and Churchill bitching about what a chiseling, subversive bunch of bastards they were (Allied society was casually "anti-Semitic" but still believed people have the right to not be arbitrarily murdered). The wartime blockade basically eliminates the possibility of shipping these people out.

Kurlansky's case is that if you don't have World War II, you actually wind up, most likely, with a mixture of slave labor, European Trail of Tears and ongoing segregation that would have eventually emptied Europe out of its Jewry, but would not have had mass slaughter.

None of his historical detail was much new to be, but it is the first time I have ever heard somebody make this so obvious - in hindsight - connection that WW2 wasn't just not fought to stop the Holocaust (that's kind of how it's presented, like the War between the States is dishonestly portrayed as fought to abolish slavery), but that it actually worsened it massively.

 

[DumbDude43]

without the war they would most likely have tried to continue with deportations yeah.
the mass murder only really kicked in when they saw the war turning against them, which kind of put them on a timer to resolve the issue befor losing the war would end their ability to do anything at all about it.
the founding of the state of israel was less than 10 years away at the time. without the war it is possible that the jews in german ruled europe would simply have continued dwelling in their gettos for a few more years, and then emigrated (or rather, been deported) to israel rather than being murdered.
but this is all really speculative, cause there's no way to know if israel would have been founded at the same time without the war happening first, so it's hard to tell how these "what if" scenarios would have played out.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

This question ASSUMES that the Holocaust was real.

Sir, yes, sir, I will choose to comply with § 130 paragraph 3 of the German criminal code, to avoid incurring a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or a fine.

what differed with the Germans was their presumption

I take an issue with this, "the Germans". The reality was that a ruling apparatus imposed its policies on millions of people, most of whom had no say. I dispute that a collective will ever existed.

A larger point is that I have no reason to believe the Nazi project had a natural ceiling or stopping point. The record shows constant escalation, there was never a point where the regime signaled that a limit has been reached and they're going to hold it there. From this alone, I think the notion that, without war, it would have stopped at ghettos and deportation is baseless conjecture.
I mean, I reject the notion that the war itself caused any of this, even if we assume for the sake of argument that war did foreclose deportation options and put Nazis on a path to extermination, that would be a catalyst and not a cause. The Allies' indifference proves nothing about causation, it only shows that states do not go to war for humanitarian reasons.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

A larger point is that I have no reason to believe the Nazi project had a natural ceiling or stopping point. The record shows constant escalation, there was never a point where the regime signaled that a limit has been reached and they're going to hold it there. From this alone, I think the notion that, without war, it would have stopped at ghettos and deportation is baseless conjecture.

And this is a good point too.
I was exploring this a little and apparently historians call it an "intentionalist" vs "functionalist" split. Was the Holocaust itself the ultimate goal, or was it just a way to achieve the goal of no Jews. And Kurlansky would be a functionalist.

The thing is, my own read on Hitler, psychologically, is that he was a nasty little man that would have had to keep finding enemies, extending his war against humanity to more and more kinds of people. If he'd had no Jews left, no more Polands to conquer, he'd have found reasons to start massacring "Aryans" because he'd redefine Aryan. Which that - and that's just a vibe, an intuition, I get - is intentionalist. I think it for two reasons. One is, like my rambling on slavery in America and its connection to abortion, I think you see other patterns where dehumanization campaigns don't end, they just escalate and expand until they're checked with violence. The other is the way Hitler took no blame for his fucktardedness and even ordered the Army to sack his own country out of spite.

It has fascinated me for a while what a contrast of personalities Eisenhower (a modern-day Washington) and Hitler were, as two Germans fighting each other.

I mean, I reject the notion that the war itself caused any of this, even if we assume for the sake of argument that war did foreclose deportation options and put Nazis on a path to extermination, that would be a catalyst and not a cause. The Allies' indifference proves nothing about causation, it only shows that states do not go to war for humanitarian reasons.

Well, I did literally say cause, but I meant it as catalyst. That's Kurlansky's argument, moral blame is always on the Nazis, but they only resorted to extermination (if one believes, as he does, that they were sincere in just wanting Jews gone and not as such wanting them dead) under pressure.

 

[Nox Was Right]

The holobunga is fake and gay, that's not "pol tard", that's the truth, and jews wouldn't need to throw 90 year old grandmas in jail otherwise.

By Wannsee, the Germans had settled on their Final Solution, actual extermination.

Coming to you from the same jews who pretend ausrotten means extermination. The Final Territorial Solution was always expelling them.

And yes obviously it's the Allies who caused the actual deaths by bombarding supply lines to the camps on purpose. The camps were built as transit camps, that's why they were all on the Eastern side, and they only became used for war effort and using (and not that much to be fair) prisoner labor because they couldn't be sent East anyway since the other countries refused. The camps had pretty good living standards and prisoners could even earn camp-specific money and spend it on bonuses. The living conditions only became bad due to Allied bombing.

None of this is really a revelation unless you're treading the landmine that is not offending jews, and considering Pétain did all he could to help them and he's treated as an evil monster today, one can easily see that the jews are not a grateful people.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

ausrotten means extermination

Except it does?
The meaning of ausrotten is to render something extinct.

 

[Nox Was Right]

The thing is, my own read on Hitler, psychologically, is that he was a nasty little man that would have had to keep finding enemies, extending his war against humanity to more and more kinds of people. If he'd had no Jews left, no more Polands to conquer, he'd have found reasons to start massacring "Aryans" because he'd redefine Aryan. Which that - and that's just a vibe, an intuition, I get - is intentionalist. I think it for two reasons. One is, like my rambling on slavery in America and its connection to abortion, I think you see other patterns where dehumanization campaigns don't end, they just escalate and expand until they're checked with violence. The other is the way Hitler took no blame for his fucktardedness and even ordered the Army to sack his own country out of spite.

This is such a jewish-brainrot take. Germany literally had a positive propaganda campaign to the benefit of Poland, criticism of Poland was for years not tolerated in the press. Pilsudski and Hitler managed to find common ground and an elegant long-term economic and diplomatic solution to solve the Danzig issue, it was only after Pilsudski's death and the insane military leaders taking over and listening to (((France and the UK))) that the plan failed.

Hitler never wanted enemies, he never thought himself as needing to fight anyone but the communists, who had been murdering his brethren left and right for a decade and attempted a bloody revolution in 1918 after sabotaging the war on the German side.

Next time, don't take as gospel the words of US Jewish psychologists who never talked to him or anyone in his private circle but still said he literally "was aroused by eating feces and being dominated by women in latex".

 

[Nox Was Right]

Except it does?
The meaning of ausrotten is to render something extinct.

it does in jewish owned dictionaries that changed the definition. In actuality, it just means outroot, and you don't need to be a genius to notice this.

 

[DumbDude43]

Coming to you from the same jews who pretend ausrotten means extermination.

it means exactly that you retard lol
any native german speaker will die of cringe when exposed to those laughable linguistic bullshit arguments, reapeating this nonsense completely ruins whatever credibility you might otherwise have had

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

it does in jewish owned dictionaries that changed the definition. In actuality, it just means outroot, and you don't need to be a genius to notice this.

That would be entwurzeln
Are you sure you're not mistaking ausrotten and entwurzeln?
Medium high German roten/reuten means to completely annihilate. There's no word for root other than Wurzel in German (medium high German wurzel, old high German wurzala, shown to be in use for over 1100 years). The only alternative I can think of is Rhizom as rhizome, but that's literally the first time I've ever seen or used that word in German.

 

[Fester Chavez]

it does in jewish owned dictionaries that changed the definition. In actuality, it just means outroot, and you don't need to be a genius to notice this.

Looks like you may be wrong here.

I do find the testimony of Fred Leuchter pretty compelling though.
His finding no poison residue in any of the areas where the exterminations were supposed to happen.
As well as the fact that Jews never argue by merit of the Truth, but rather by lawfare or propaganda.
They wouldnt need to do that if it really happened.

Edit: As well as their using the 6 million number propagandistically several times before the 1940s.

 

[Nox Was Right]

Ver archivo adjunto 7989855

The works of many people, Leuchter, Faurisson, Reynouard, Irving... prove the Holobunga fake beyond belief. The holobunga consists in 3 points, none of which has ever been proven and in fact all have been profoundly disproven and the only solution of the jews is to jail 90 year old women for not believing their lies: 6 millions jews were killed, the main weapon was the use of gas chambers with Zyklon B, the NS government sent an order of extermination.

Not a single person has ever been autopsied as dying from gassing in any German camp. No order was found and they had to invent ridiculous "orders" found by exiled jews in their attics. The Red Cross itself inspected the camps and estimated a maximum of 271k deaths, and none from poisoning (funnily enough, this is when the apologists insist that the Einsatzgruppen killed 6 gorillions jews everywhere and nowhere so we can't find the bodies, oopsies)

The holobunga is a closed case to anyone who seriously looked into it, it's a jewish farce, and it's atrocity propaganda to its highest degree because no logical argument exists against NS, which would immediately destroy the power of jewry. "Look where it led to!"

 

[Smoltine Kiminal]

"oy vey why didn't you bomb the railroads"

but they did bomb the railroads

if you don't have World War II, you actually wind up, most likely, with a mixture of slave labor, European Trail of Tears and ongoing segregation that would have eventually emptied Europe out of its Jewry

the motto of the konzentration camps was always "Arbeit macht Frei", meaning "work will set you free"
the idea behind it goes back hundreds of years, martin luther already wrote about it.
the jew should be taken out of his comfortable life that he financed through exploiting the work of the christians, and do hard, manual labour to earn a living, this would cure him of his wicked ways.
from the view of a german protestant this is just holding the jews to the same standards they set for themselves.
the konzentration camps served a dual purpose, the jews had to be taken out of society so they dont undermine the war efforts, but they where also tools to finally properly integrate jews into german society.

This question ASSUMES that the Holocaust was real.

it never happened, but that doenst matter for my argument

 

[Forgive Me Im Retarded]

Im into history but my WW2 history is hazy at best (more modern than my main interest).

I was under the impression that Hitler never really had any plan except “we hate communism and ze juuuz…. but we also don’t want to be capitalist”, and then went after ‘undesirables’ fairly quickly before escalating hard. But if the argument is “without the pressure of WW2 and the incoming loss, would it escalate to that point?” I think there are more variables at play (like Hitler’s circle of influncers, and how much meth he consumed?) to say for sure. I think it would have escalated for sure either way, but maybe not to the degree where history took it. Desperation from seeing the end in sight is definitely a convincing motivator.

 

[draggs]

im impressed we got 3 whole posts (not counting op) before some poltard came in to shit the thread up

i think the answer to the question is yes and no. did hitler plan to assembly line murder all the jews under german control before the war? no. basically all the nazi atrocities followed the classic mission creep process. removing retards and other congenital defected started out with banning them from marrying, then moved on to forced sterilization, and then you get Aktion T4. answering the slavnigger question started with we will push them beyond the urals for our lebensraum, then moved on to we'll work them to death as slave labor, finally settling on both the slave labor to death and also killing them en masse by any means, especially starvation, works too. they dont all gotta be worked to death over a generation. the same process happened with the jews

hitler and the nazi bureaucracy in general pretty consistently postdated their more barbaric orders to after the start of the war. the reason most historians give for this is they were uncertain that the great mass of german normies would accept such things in peacetime, but would be more tolerant of them as war measures. the end goal was the extirpation of untermensch from germany, and eventually the face of the earth entirely (mission creep coming in again). that was equally as important as germany taking her rightful place as the dominant power of europe, and eventually the world (mission creep coming in again again). the two were inseparable. couldn't have one without the other. the war provided opportunity for the mission creep to go harder and faster

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Kurlansky's case is that if you don't have World War II, you actually wind up, most likely, with a mixture of slave labor, European Trail of Tears and ongoing segregation that would have eventually emptied Europe out of its Jewry, but would not have had mass slaughter.

Issue is that the Germans started ww2 with aggressively conquering Europe, so whether the Holocaust was planned ahead or just "fit in" as a means of placating idiots in conquered territories/pillaging money from a relatively wealthy population, the Nazi leadership are responsible either way. Especially as a good chunk of Jews killed during the conflict were dirt farmers in East Europe, not really the "subversive socialite" the Nazis claimed.

 

[Smoltine Kiminal]

im impressed we got 3 whole posts (not counting op) before some poltard came in to shit the thread up

please count again

 

[draggs]

please count again

i will not

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Issue is that the Germans started ww2 with aggressively conquering Europe, so whether the Holocaust was planned ahead or just "fit in" as a means of placating idiots in conquered territories/pillaging money from a relatively wealthy population, the Nazi leadership are responsible either way. Especially as a good chunk of Jews killed during the conflict were dirt farmers in East Europe, not really the "subversive socialite" the Nazis claimed.

That's another good counterpoint. One issue with Kurlansky (faggot pacifist) is that his idea depends on there being a place for Jews to flee to, when the Nazis were going straight into Yiddishland.

 

[Slap47]

the mass murder only really kicked in when they saw the war turning against them

They started in 1940-41 when they thought they were winning.

My theory about this is actually quite simple. War has a way of sorting out what you actually believe. The Union started the US Civil War focusing heavily on keeping the union together, but that transitioned into a moral crusade to annihilate slavery. The second world war in Europe was started to reclaim German land, but that crystalized into a genocidal war of annihilation against a perceived international Jewish banking cartel. As things get more violent the cause of the true believing radicals starts to take front and center as their passion infects people around them. In the case of Nazi Germany this happened amongst the top brass behind closed doors.