5 ms·

The Polish holocaust debate is rather interesting, because Polish people (as in, ethnic Poles) were both victims and perpetrators; millions of Polish were kille

by arp242 3y ago

The Polish holocaust debate is rather interesting, because Polish people (as in, ethnic Poles) were both victims and perpetrators; millions of Polish were killed during the holocaust, and the plan was to kill up to ~85% of them and use the rest in forced labour (i.e. slavery, basically) to make lebensraum for more worthy people. Slavs weren't considered as bad as Jews, but still untermenschen. At the time same, it's obviously true that some Polish people were also perpetrators. It's interesting to watch the debate; it's not just far-right extremism or fascism that opposes the more nuanced view. There are a lot of emotions involved and it raises interesting questions about what it means to "be Polish", to "be a victim", group identity, shared national identity, etc.

agentgumshoe 3y ago
You hit the nail on the head there with "that opposes the more nuanced view." It seems no one wants that in the current age of point scoring in the twitter-shout wars. I'm not so sure the powers that be aren't gleefully stoking these big topic arguments to distract us all from the atrocities and corruption going on in the background. Yes, everyone get enraged and shout slogans about birth control, race, gender, war, celebrities! Just don't check on all the deals we're making behind your back, that's misinformation.
- arp242 3y ago
  There's no doubt some people using emotive topics such as this for "quick point scoring", and/or use it to distract the news cycle from other less favourable stories. But these sort of "distractions" do fall in to very fertile ground with the general public, so I'm not sure it's actually all that meaningful really.
throw0101c 3y ago
> Slavs weren't considered as bad as Jews, but still untermenschen. The plan to exterminate Slavs: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost was actually formed before the plan to exterminate Jews: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wannsee_Conference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wannsee_Conference Germany itself actually didn't have a large Jewish population (as a percentage), and would probably have been happy to simply have them leave (though they didn't make it easy for people, and no one was really welcoming): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan but when the Nazis conquered (half of) Poland, suddenly they had millions more to 'deal with', and so they needed something on an industrial scale. Generally, all the folks stuck between Stalin and Hitler had a bad time in the 1920s and especially 1930s: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodlands
- slaw 3y ago
  I agree with what you say, but Nazis didn't conquer Poland. Germany did. Word Nazi was invented in 1980s. There were no Nazi soldiers speaking Nazi language from Nazi country conquering Poland.
  - arp242 3y ago
    Aside from being wrong, this is also exceedingly pedantic. Even if it was correct (which it's not) everyone understands "Nazi" means "Germany under control of the NSDAP". "After the NSDAP's rise to power in the 1930s, the use of the term "Nazi" by itself or in terms such as "Nazi Germany", "Nazi regime", and so on was popularised by German exiles outside the country, but not in Germany. From them, the term spread into other languages and it was eventually brought back into Germany after World War II. The NSDAP briefly adopted the designation "Nazi" in an attempt to reappropriate the term, but it soon gave up this effort and generally avoided using the term while it was in power." Peak usage: 1940s: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=nazi%2Cnsdap&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=nazi%2Cnsdap&y... Letters using "Nazi" in 1933: "I was in Hanover about two years ago, just when the Nazi movement was gaining strength" https://www.theguardian.com/world/1933/apr/01/secondworldwar.thefarright https://www.theguardian.com/world/1933/apr/01/secondworldwar...
    - slaw 3y ago
      Everyone today understands "Nazi". During the WW2 it was almost completely not used. It was reinvented and popularized later in the 1980s. See for example wiki article Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact [0]. It says it was between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. While in the actual Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact[1] there is no mention of any mythical Nazis, even the title says Nichtangriffsvertrag zwischen Deutschland und der Union der Sozialistischen Sowjetrepubliken, 23. August 1939 [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pac... [1] https://www.1000dokumente.de/index.html?c=dokument_de&dokument=0025_pak&object=facsimile&pimage=1&v=100&nav=&l=de https://www.1000dokumente.de/index.html?c=dokument_de&dokume...
nme01 3y ago
If you’re interested in what those who criticize people like the scholar mentioned in the article have to say, I can provide some background (I live in Poland). Basically many Poles feel like they’re being framed as perpetrators (as a whole nation) instead of victims (6 million Poles were killed during WW2). There were many people who helped Jews during war. Among Righteous Among Nations Poles are the majority. Also some historians, like the one from the article, are considered to be biased by neglecting the majority of sacrifices of Poles while showing only wrong doings of some minor groups, which were never supported by Poland as a country. At the same time they fail to mention the scale of collaboration among Polish Jews during WW2 and after, which very often was punished by death by the Polish Underground Government.
- mimd 3y ago
  Question, since your there. How much of this fight is linked to modern fights or Soviet Union era fights in your opinion? Or is this mostly just related to fights over people/remembrance over WW2?

by arp242 3y ago

agentgumshoe 3y ago

You hit the nail on the head there with "that opposes the more nuanced view." It seems no one wants that in the current age of point scoring in the twitter-shout wars. I'm not so sure the powers that be aren't gleefully stoking these big topic arguments to distract us all from the atrocities and corruption going on in the background. Yes, everyone get enraged and shout slogans about birth control, race, gender, war, celebrities! Just don't check on all the deals we're making behind your back, that's misinformation.

arp242 3y ago
There's no doubt some people using emotive topics such as this for "quick point scoring", and/or use it to distract the news cycle from other less favourable stories. But these sort of "distractions" do fall in to very fertile ground with the general public, so I'm not sure it's actually all that meaningful really.

throw0101c 3y ago

> Slavs weren't considered as bad as Jews, but still untermenschen. The plan to exterminate Slavs: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost was actually formed before the plan to exterminate Jews: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wannsee_Conference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wannsee_Conference Germany itself actually didn't have a large Jewish population (as a percentage), and would probably have been happy to simply have them leave (though they didn't make it easy for people, and no one was really welcoming): * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madagascar_Plan but when the Nazis conquered (half of) Poland, suddenly they had millions more to 'deal with', and so they needed something on an industrial scale. Generally, all the folks stuck between Stalin and Hitler had a bad time in the 1920s and especially 1930s: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodlands https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodlands

slaw 3y ago
I agree with what you say, but Nazis didn't conquer Poland. Germany did. Word Nazi was invented in 1980s. There were no Nazi soldiers speaking Nazi language from Nazi country conquering Poland.
- arp242 3y ago
  Aside from being wrong, this is also exceedingly pedantic. Even if it was correct (which it's not) everyone understands "Nazi" means "Germany under control of the NSDAP". "After the NSDAP's rise to power in the 1930s, the use of the term "Nazi" by itself or in terms such as "Nazi Germany", "Nazi regime", and so on was popularised by German exiles outside the country, but not in Germany. From them, the term spread into other languages and it was eventually brought back into Germany after World War II. The NSDAP briefly adopted the designation "Nazi" in an attempt to reappropriate the term, but it soon gave up this effort and generally avoided using the term while it was in power." Peak usage: 1940s: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=nazi%2Cnsdap&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=nazi%2Cnsdap&y... Letters using "Nazi" in 1933: "I was in Hanover about two years ago, just when the Nazi movement was gaining strength" https://www.theguardian.com/world/1933/apr/01/secondworldwar.thefarright https://www.theguardian.com/world/1933/apr/01/secondworldwar...
  - slaw 3y ago
    Everyone today understands "Nazi". During the WW2 it was almost completely not used. It was reinvented and popularized later in the 1980s. See for example wiki article Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact [0]. It says it was between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. While in the actual Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact[1] there is no mention of any mythical Nazis, even the title says Nichtangriffsvertrag zwischen Deutschland und der Union der Sozialistischen Sowjetrepubliken, 23. August 1939 [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pac... [1] https://www.1000dokumente.de/index.html?c=dokument_de&dokument=0025_pak&object=facsimile&pimage=1&v=100&nav=&l=de https://www.1000dokumente.de/index.html?c=dokument_de&dokume...

nme01 3y ago

If you’re interested in what those who criticize people like the scholar mentioned in the article have to say, I can provide some background (I live in Poland). Basically many Poles feel like they’re being framed as perpetrators (as a whole nation) instead of victims (6 million Poles were killed during WW2). There were many people who helped Jews during war. Among Righteous Among Nations Poles are the majority. Also some historians, like the one from the article, are considered to be biased by neglecting the majority of sacrifices of Poles while showing only wrong doings of some minor groups, which were never supported by Poland as a country. At the same time they fail to mention the scale of collaboration among Polish Jews during WW2 and after, which very often was punished by death by the Polish Underground Government.

mimd 3y ago
Question, since your there. How much of this fight is linked to modern fights or Soviet Union era fights in your opinion? Or is this mostly just related to fights over people/remembrance over WW2?