What if the AJC hadn't declared war on Germany in 1933?

Sounds like Obama and liberals calling for boycotts of Arizona when they tried to enforce our immigration laws and the calling for boycotting Indiana today.

Boycotts or embargoes only divide the people and lead to blood shed and wars.

FDR cuts off oil imports to Japan and Japan attacks Pearl Harbor.

America during the 1980's are forced to boycott South Africa that leads to thousands of black South Africans being murdered by ANC black socialist terrorist which forces South Africa to destroy their nukes when they see that the terrorist were to be elected into power.
This would lead to a South African taking over John Stewart's job at Comedy Central.

The Second World War in Europe was just the last battle of the First World War to be fought.

 

I might be able to answer that.

The world first of all wasn't globalized to the point in 1933 as it is today, so the economic dependence would be pretty small, since the US was not a big trading partner of Germany back then. Hitler was a fanatic and he was at that point in power already. He learned Antisemitism here in Austria prior to World War 1, so his views by the 30s were pretty firmly established.

But Antisemitism was at a high not only in Germany you have to understand. As things go wrong, there was a huge tendency of blaming the Jewish people. So after the Wall-street crash in 1929 Antisemitism came also quite naturally to a new high even in the US. Very few saw in Hitler the threat he later turned out to become, it was still 1933 and at that point the Nazi regime wasn't established yet. They won the election in 1932 with only 33.1% which made them the biggest party in Germany, but didn't insure their full rule. The first step came with what was called "Ermächtigungsgesetz" in March 24th 1933 and was followed with further laws to centralize the power under Hitler. These laws continued to February 1934 at which point Hitler became the "Führer". So it took some time.

At the time the Nazis tried to gain more power, so an official Antisemitic regime would naturally find disapproval among Jewish communities even if they lived in another country.

Whether or not the AJC declared war on Germany or not was irrelevant, because the Nazi regime at that time was still focused on gaining more power and they were unofficially already with war with the Jews. The first enemy of the Nazis at that point were the communist party and the socialist party as they were seen as the political enemy with also a reasonable voting power. The Jewish community didn't have a party and if memory serves me right only 1 to 2% of the German population was Jewish anyway. The first antisemitic laws followed in September of 1935 at which point the Nazis didn't have to fear internal opposition anymore.

 

Well said and a thorough rebuttal to Margo's attempt to blame the Jews.

 

I didn't even look at it from that point of view. I assumed it was just a fair question, primarily because many believe that they understand what happened in the 30s. In truth it is so complex that it is really hard to understand, and if I didn't go to college and focus on that myself, I might think something like that might be of bigger importance too. The internal workings of countries back then changed so quickly that there is a huge difference whether we are talking about Germany in 1933, 1935 or 1936.

 

So someone who hates Jews wants to blame Jews for the Shoah the week before Passover. The more things change the more they stay the same. Maybe we will see someone accuse us of making Matzah with the blood of Christian Children today.

 

Well there was the Transfer Agreement which I know little about.

 

I didn't realize it was Passover... Do you Jewish people forget the Holocaust before and during Passover?

 

It is really strange indeed. Coming from another generation it is always shocking to an extent to talk to older generations here in Europe. You can still see their antisemitic upbringing at times. I don't understand it myself, because I to this day don't know if I talk to anybody on regular bases who's Jewish. The Nazis completely destroyed that culture here.

It is such a shame. An hour drive away from me is an old synagog, which is now used as a museum (unfortunately) and which was build in the 1400s. The only way you really encounter Jewish traditions these days is to attend classes in college about "Jewish studies" which makes it feel like an ancient people long ago. It was interesting but it felt wrong somehow. I'd prefer to just have someone I could call and simply ask about this or that tradition rather than to listen to university professors about what seems a lost European culture...

 

Why is it that one immediately assumes its all about hate????????

I thought that the AJC was important because of their fund raising success and influence in the US.

 

I am good friends with an old Jewish couple that both lost relatives during WWII to the gas chambers. It is interesting discussing history and their current fears. Both are very very smart, well versed on history. I have often asked them why they lean liberal when it appears so many liberals are against Jews and it seems that they fear Christians more due to past historical actions.

 

As stated by me before:

I didn't think about the hate aspect at all, but replied based on other comments later on.


The internal workings within the US were of no greater impact to Germany as far as I know. In 1938, if memory serves me right, Hitler made his famous speech at the Reichstag responding to FDR's request not to invade other countries. Probably if you google it you can find it. In assents I think that was one of the early interactions between the US and Nazi-Germany based on the expansion of Germany. I don't recall the US government ever openly opposing the treatment of Jews in the mid 30s though. Few individuals dared to oppose. Warner Brothers come to mind, who didn't want to trade with the Nazis starting in 1933 already...

Even during the war concentration camps were not considered important targets because there were "only Jews" in there.

 

You can't blame them.. I think (hope) it was a perfect storm and could NEVER happen again.

 

But, there were also gays and gypsies and non Jewish Communists and anyone that opposed them. They basically decimated college professors and all intellectuals... Jewish or otherwise.

 

I personally would be surprised to hear about Jewish people who would lean right wing. Maybe if the heritage is Russian and they had bad experiences with communism, but other than that it would make sense for them to be liberal. The reason for this is that back in the middle ages, when Jews would settle to what was then the Holy Roman Empire, they would settle near secular leaders, who promised them certain privileges if they chose to settle in his city/town. This is important because Jewish communities would govern themselves internally and only be responsible to paying the agreed upon tax to the secular leader. The clear command structure didn't exist back then like it did in Christian communities. The rabbi may have been an authority figure, but he wouldn't be the leader of the Jewish community within a city. Therefore the Jews had to learn quite early to self-govern and treat their people fairly to pay the tax the owed to the secular leader.

This was in many cases centuries before Christians ever had the opportunity to self-govern and not being dictated by a king or emperor or some other secular leader who went pretty unopposed. Because Jews had to self-govern they also had to protect themselves - or at least they felt like they needed to. The word "Ghetto" comes from that time and represents a district within a city with its own walls and guards. If everybody pays taxes and everybody has a say, there is a tendency of a wish to improve the system or a service provided by the community. Jewish communities often learned to work together, and improve on their previous structures within their community. This is a very forward thinking attitude which often is reflected in the left-wing or liberal policies, rather than the right-wing policies, which tend on idealizing something in the past. In the US the Reagan-era comes to mind, while the left-wing is moving towards policies which never existed...

Although greatly simplified, I hope it may explain why a large portion of the Jewish community in all countries tend to vote left-wing. This was true also here in Austria prior to WW2. I am sure there are many other examples to be found of that nature

 

The Nazis indeed destroyed. And the first country they destroyed was Germany. Germany was and to this day calls itself the country of "poets and philosophers". The over 1000 year history (and contributions) of Germany is now dismissed because of a 12 year fanatic period. In the ideal system, according to Hitler, Germany would only have 4 high-schools and one university left, and obviously women would be excluded from these institutions. If these morons had succeeded Germany would be back in the stone-age.

I have a hard time understanding why the Nazis were so popular among University professors. Especially the old aristocracy tended to oppose the Nazi regime. And one would think that highly educated individuals could see the fanaticism for what it is. I understand it in the medical field, because such a large portion of professors and students were Jewish. The best medical university at that time in the world were in Germany, and it was really hard to get into them. Without the Jewish professors and students, suddenly more people had access to these desired spots. But I never could figure out the overwhelming support from the professors of other majors. Here in Graz were I attended college, the support for the Nazi regime was overwhelming even prior to 1938. Students I understand, because the unemployment was horrid either way, and the Nazis spend money like crazy people and gave desired career opportunities, especially young people didn't get.

 

Wow, just wow.

Stereotype much, do you?

A "Ghetto" was a great many things, depending upon where and when you are talking about.

It was a separate area of a city, primarily for Jews. That much is true. No different then say a Chinatown, or Koreatown, or Little Italy in a great many cities to this day. Sometimes the Jews were forced to live there, sometimes they themselves made the decision to live there and wall themselves off from the rest of the community (such as the Netherlands, where the Jews walled themselves up after fleeing pogroms in Eastern Europe).

Often times they were even a small city onto themselves. With their own guards at the gate, their own police force and council of elders (like a mayor and city council), and sometimes even their own laws and legal system (the Krakow ghetto is one of the most famous examples of the latter). Not unlike a "city within a city" or a "nation within a nation", say the Holy See inside of Rome, inside of Italy.

In many ways, it is not unlike what some Muslims in Europe want to set up, with special separate areas of cities all following Sharia Law.

But the history of the Ghettos is not simple, but it is not always what is thought of by the word today.

 

I didn't realize that Jews voting left-wing was a stereotype in the US. Oddly enough I was only referring to the election results, in which by quite a big margin Jews tend to vote left-wing. Is that stereotype negative as well?

However, I do hope that you read the rest of my post where I explain why the left-wing tendencies have evolved in the middle ages. It is nice that you confirmed what I was talking about though, although you look at a very contemporary example while I mentioned the middle ages...

 

Hitler was looked upon as a savior by many even outside of Germany. My mother had a friend in Paris at the time that just adored Hitler (before the war started). From what I understand, many looked the other way about Hitler's antisemitism for two reasons, some did not think he could possibly be serious and the biggest one, everyone had troubles and if they were not Jewish, they did not care that much. Of course there were also the fanatical that believed everything Hitler said about the Jews. Even in the recent past I have run into German brides from WWII that loved Hitler and did not believe the Holocaust happened.

 

It is always shocking and sad when you hear of holocaust deniers. The ignorance (I don't know another word to describe it) infuriates me, I must admit. I am not surprised about a Nazi-following prior to WW2, I am surprised about a Nazi-following prior to the great depression. You have to keep in mind that the Nazis got only 2.6% of the votes in 1928. Those are the key fanatics. By 1930 it was already 18.3%, and by 1934 you didn't get much of an opportunity to oppose really...

I guess the support is surprising among groups you'd wouldn't naturally assume. Farmers, yes; youth, yes; but why would university professors approve of the Nazi regime so much? (as mentioned previously)

I have a video somewhere of a swastika being raised by an American SS-group near Washington D.C. in the late 30s. Being a Nazi was considered quite cool at that time. And unfortunately it spread way further than just Germany or Austria.

Another "trend" at the time was to name your children very "German" especially if the last name didn't sound too German. The political orientation of a generation is quite obvious if you meat someone called "Adolph" or "Siegfried". You can often guess in which year they were born. One of my college professors introduced himself by saying that his first name was "Siegfried" and we could easily guess how old he was and that he'll retire soon...

 

In many ways, the things Hitler and the Nazi party did were miraculous.

They took a collapsed economy in a country rife with internal conflict and civil war, and completely turned it around.

One thing about Socialism, is that it can do things in the short term to help an economy, but in the long term it is not sustainable.

But the Nazi's did restore faith in the country, got people back to work, and the rearmament did put millions back to work, as well as restore the national production cycle and pride in their country. And the internal security did put down the dozens of dissenting parties and got most of the country to work together on the same goal, which was said to be internal strength.

And to many in the world, National Socialism seemed to be the solution to their problems. Italy, Germany, China, Yugoslavia, even many in the US and UK looked at it as the wave of the future. But the thing to remember is that other then in Germany and the parties inspired by the Nazi's, the others did not take on a genocidal racist viewpoint. Italy (the birthplace of modern National Socialism along with China) never went in that direction, and in Yugoslavia the NS Government spent years actually keeping the more radical separatist groups from attacking their new partners.

If not for starting another war and the Holocaust, Hitler might have gone down as one of the greatest leaders of the 20th century. But the positive things he did would never make up for his atrocities.

 

Since you chose to look at a non-existant offensive in my previous posts, I feel I should use your attitude from this post:

And simply respond to the quote above with:


Got it, you're a fan of the Nazis.

_______________


However, I'd like to make this serious and explain why this happened. The hype of nationalism reached a peak during WW1. Known names were changed in order to accommodate the new trend to national countries. If you're curious more about these developments you could read up on the difference between state-nations and nation-states.

The nationalist tendencies were obvious in many countries. Probably one of the more famous ones may be the switching of the Russian capital city from St. Petersburg to Moscow. The first sounded too German, who had been the enemy in WW1. Also the Russian Tsar usually didn't speak Russian natively but French.

While the German version of fascism was more known because of its success, the reasons for the success are usually ignored. The Nazi regime spend much more money than it was capable of taking in. By 1937 Germany was pretty much bankrupt. In four years, the regime had spend all the money the country had, all the reserves the country had, and the country was unable to receive further international credit, because of its dire situation. Kurt Schuschnigg, who was at the time the chancellor and dictator of Austria banked on that fact, as he tried to postpone Nazi influence in his country. He knew that Germany would be completely bankrupt within a year and was just waiting for this to happen.

The fact that Austria got annexed in March of 1938 made it possible for the war to get postponed by another year. Austria's financial reserves far exceeded German reserves at that point, and the money Austria had could keep Germany solvent for another year.

It wouldn't differ today. The US has huge reserves although the country is in debt. If Obama would spend all the reserves (i.e. gold) the US has in one year by rebuilding the infrastructure, you could be sure that the unemployment would fall drastically.

The German economic system was build on the government overspending, and only the expansion of the territory and exploitation of other countries and peoples made Germany solvent. If for arguments sake, Hitler got successfully assassinated in 1938 the country would be in a worse crisis in 1939/40 than Greece ever was in the past years.

The economic short-term boom created with overspending got Germany out of the depression indeed, however it was not a longterm solution. You will see that the overspending of the government will create an economic boom in any country. Think of the US prior to WW2 and how the unemployment fell as a result of WW2...

 

Bumping an old thread.

 

Here's a post of mine from another thread that has info relevant to the discussion.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=459343&page=4&p=1066270129#post1066270129

 

Hi Scott, IHR has no relevence to serious discussion as it it an antisemitic web site run by a white supremist. Hardly worth the gum on the bottom of your shoes for objectivity.

 

I haven't read every article ever posted at IHR but I've never seen anything that gave me the impression that it was run by white supremists or antisemites. Could you please post something from there that would give that impression?


The mainstream has zero credibility. Here's something that I copied from another post.

http://www.thismodernworld.org/arc/1993/93short-attention-span.gif
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query=chomsky+media&aq=f
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=Wi5h3vZl6uo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5rdRlOSBoY
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/MediaControl_Chomsky.html
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199710--.htm
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/media_watch.html
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Propaganda/Propaganda_page.html
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media_control_propaganda/Media_Control.html
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/official_culture.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=trWcqxrQgcc
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Herman /Propaganda_System_One.html

We are lied to about history.
http://www.politicalforum.com/history-past-politicians/371897-american-imperialism.html


At about the 30 minute mark of this video a scientist says that science fraud is common.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buosgl6J3Kw

Scientists at the Rand Corporation say that depleted uranium is safe.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/b04151999_bt170-99.htm

There are other scientists who say the opposite.
http://www.google.es/search?q=depleted uranium&tbs=vid:1

Here's a scientists who says that it's impossible to get something published in a science journal if it goes against the official version.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bAE7FGdNmA
(00:16 time mark)

Here's another case of official mainstream journals publishing untrue information.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1m3TjokVU4
(1:36:40 time mark)

It's clear that the government can find scientists willing to sell out and lie.


Also, look at the top of post #1 here.
http://www.flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?t=12196&start=0

I pointed out a lie that Americans are taught. What do you think about that?