Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Discussions on all aspects of Poland during the Second Polish Republic and the Second World War. Hosted by Piotr Kapuscinski.
User avatar
Steve
Member
Posts: 946
Joined: 03 Aug 2002 01:58
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by Steve » 21 Jul 2020 21:07

Hi gebhk, that’s a great anecdote about the sparrows in China. I used to have quite a lot of sparrows in the garden but a couple of years ago the neighbour acquired two cats. Sparrows and cats do not mix.

gebhk
Member
Posts: 2136
Joined: 25 Feb 2013 20:23

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by gebhk » 23 Jul 2020 13:47

Steve - cats and sparrows have coexisted for hundreds of years without any evident catastrophe to sparrow numbers. I suspect that in your case someone in the area has chosen to 'improve' their garden or open space by removing a thicket of shrubbery or hedge. The council did something equally 'enlightened' in my area with the same impact as you are seeing. :roll:

But I suspect we are straying too far from the topic and I see administrative sanctions on the way if we continue it. :oops:

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 9903
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 25 Jul 2020 09:37

Hi Guys,

In order to kick start the thread again before errant Maoist sparrows bring down the heavy hand of admin down on It, I will repeat my largely unanswered earlier post to wm for a third time:

"You post, "You didn't have the money you had to die."

So, are you saying that the problem wasn't lack of food being made available, but lack of money to purchase it? If so, why were specific calorie levels prescribed at all?

More importantly, you are going to have to explain, "This is why the Holocaust made sense. Disregarding any moral consideration, the Jews consumed lots of food but delivered nothing of value."

Is this your opinion - that "the Jews consumed lots of food but delivered nothing of value."? As you haven't qualified it in any way, it looks as though it is. You might like to qualify it in your reply."

You also post that Jewish emigration would have been "beneficial to both sides". How does it benefit Germany?

No, time did not just "run out" on emigration. The fact that emigration was halted by the war wasn't due to some independent decree from the Gods, it was because of Hitler's differential policy decisions.

Finally, the minutes of the Wannsee Conference of 20 January 1942, although it has a preamble about events leading up to then, makes absolutely no reference to food shortages as being a motivating factor. (The text is on line in English)."

Cheers,

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7463
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by wm » 26 Jul 2020 17:55

Shouldn't you read up on the subject first? For example, the summary of the "Haavara Agreement" on Wikipedia is quite sufficient. It's tiresome to explain such elementary history, especially that I did it a few times already.

Yes, people without money were going to die.
The specific calorie levels were prescribed because it was all the Germans could afford without endangering calorie levels in Germany.

Yes, it was the Nazis' opinion that the killed Jews consumed lots of food but delivered nothing of value, and they were right - disregarding any moral considerations.

The main benefits of Jewish emigration from Germany based on the Haavara Agreement were:
- dejudaization of Germany,
- breaking the devastating Jewish anti-Nazi boycott,
- profitable trade with Palestine (or rather with the outside world) without spending foreign currencies the Nazis didn't have - as their own currency was worthless abroad.
Actually it's self-evident because the Nazis did it and for six years in total.

The Wannsee Conference was about coordinating the Jewish evacuation to the East, not about reasons why they were evacuated.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 9903
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 27 Jul 2020 13:28

Hi wm,

So, we have estabesrablished, I think, that it is not your personal opinion that "the Jews consumed lots of food but delivered nothing of value.", but one you ascribe to the Germans.

However, you still haven't clarified whether you are you saying that the problem wasn't lack of food being made available, or lack of money to purchase it?

I asked you earlier if any Gernans died of starvation at home throughout WWII. You didn't reply. I presume from your silence that this is because none did. If the Germans could reduce rations later in the war without causing mass starvation of their own population, it rather looks as though this was an option in 1942 as well. Which makes the mass starvation of Soviet POWs, the murder of Jews and the hundred thousand deaths from hunger in Greece an elective choice done either in error or as policy.

Why is "dejudaization of Germany" beneficial for Germany? Again you are failing to differentiate what may be your opinion from what was the Nazi opinion.

I am trying to give you scope to clarify these confusions by asking you questions, but you are slow to respond.

Cheers,

Sid

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7463
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by wm » 27 Jul 2020 13:57

No, I'm not slow to respond. I'm tired of your sophistry and ignorance.

I've written: "it was the Nazis' opinion ... and they were right".
So how come "it is not your personal opinion" - it's my opinion.

"dejudaization of Germany" was the goal of Hitler and the Nazis.
Who cares if it was beneficial to Germany or not, it's a history site, not a philosophical one. It was beneficial to Nazi Germany - it was the only one that existed then.
I asked you earlier if any Gernans died of starvation at home throughout WWII. You didn't reply. I presume from your silence that this is because none did. If the Germans could reduce rations later in the war without causing mass starvation of their own population, it rather looks as though this was an option in 1942 as well. Which makes the mass starvation of Soviet POWs, the murder of Jews and the hundred thousand deaths from hunger in Greece an elective choice done either in error or as policy.
A fact-free statement, no evidence, speculations. When did they reduce the rations? How much? Why?

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7463
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by wm » 27 Jul 2020 14:49

Once more:
The Hunger Plan had arrived at the conclusion that millions of people needed to be killed, starting not from the principles of the racial struggle, but from the food balance. ...

If they could not be properly fed, the millions of foreign workers who were being imported would add little to Germany's effective labour power. Indeed, in maintaining large numbers of foreign workers in a vegetative state, Germany was burdening itself with a whole new population of 'useless eaters' (`unnuetze Esser').

It would be far better to return to the radical logic of the Hunger Plan. If there was not enough food to maintain everyone at an optimal level of efficiency, it would be far better to concentrate those rations that were available on a smaller group of productive workers. What the 'national war economy' certainly could not afford was to allocate food to foreign workers simply to keep them alive.
Food cut across the contradiction between economics and ideology, between the need for labour and the imperative for genocide. It provided the Third Reich with a starkly economic incentive for murder on a scale larger even than the Holocaust. ...
It was for want of food that the Soviet prisoners of war, the concentration camp inmates and the other Ostarbeiter died in such dreadful numbers even after they were supposed to be deployed for the purposes of the war effort.
...
When we place it alongside the ideological impulse for mass murder and the pragmatic needs of the war economy, many of the contradictions that appear to characterize Nazi policy, above all in 1942, resolve themselves into a ghastly pattern of coherence.
The Wages of Destruction

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 9903
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 27 Jul 2020 15:18

Hi wm,

The problem is that you are not differentiating your opinions from the opinions of the Nazis adequately when you write. I am trying to establish where one finishes and the next begins.

What does the following mean:

"I've written: "it was the Nazis' opinion ... and they were right".
So how come "it is not your personal opinion" - it's my opinion
"????

You posted earlier that Jewish emigration would be "beneficial for both sides".

You now write "Who cares if it was beneficial to Germany or not......"

Why did you write it in the first place?

It is extraordinarily difficult to find detailed information on German food rationing later in the war beyond generalisations about it getting chronic in 1944-45.

However, it appears that the meat ration went from 400grms per week over December 1942 to April 1942 to 300grms over April to October 1942 and by 1944-45 was 250grms. In addition, distribution of even this became problematical in 1945 when all except Danish imports had stopped. And yet it appears that still no Germans are reported as having starved to death.

Cheers,

Sid.

gebhk
Member
Posts: 2136
Joined: 25 Feb 2013 20:23

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by gebhk » 27 Jul 2020 15:25

Hi WM
"dejudaization of Germany" was the goal of Hitler and the Nazis.
True, but that does not prove it was beneficial for Germany.
Who cares if it was beneficial to Germany or not,
I assume you do, since you said so in your previous post!

With respect, your argument seems to be that you take a bear out of the woods, stick him in a cage, complain that it eats too much and that, therefore, shooting it is the right course of action. The right course of action is not to put him or her in a cage in the first place. Unless you are unimaginably stupid, you must be aware when you stick it in a cage that it will no longer be able to earn it's own keep and will need feeding.

The reality is that the due to an irrational delusion that some parts of German Society were 'bad', great big chunks were cut out of the body national leaving it weakened which, arguably, cost Germany the war. This cannot be considered rational policy by any sane person.

Hi Steve
Which makes the mass starvation of Soviet POWs, the murder of Jews and the hundred thousand deaths from hunger in Greece an elective choice done either in error or as policy.
I think that is the nub of the matter, the problem being that while it is often possible to pinpoint the administrative decisions that lead to a particular result, it is often not so easy to interpret the underlying motivation for the decisions taken. This fuels the enduring controversy about the Bengal Famine of 1943 for example.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7463
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by wm » 27 Jul 2020 16:29

You asked "Why is "dejudaization of Germany" beneficial for Germany?"

I responded, "who cares"? "It was beneficial to Nazi Germany."

And now you ask me "Why did you write it in the first place?"

Are you sure you don't suffer from senility? You are doing it all the time, you don't remember or don't read responses.
Which makes the mass starvation of Soviet POWs, the murder of Jews and the hundred thousand deaths from hunger in Greece an elective choice done either in error or as policy.
btw that's ahistorical and against all known facts.

Herbert Backe was a competent administrator, not a political hack. He got his degree in agronomy at the University of Göttingen.
He and his subordinates didn't make such "mistakes."
The Hunger Plan had arrived at the conclusion that millions of people needed to be killed, starting not from the principles of the racial struggle, but from the food balance.
The author of the sentence dedicated an entire well-referenced chapter to show that. What evidence do you have he is wrong?

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7463
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by wm » 27 Jul 2020 17:03

Sid Guttridge wrote:
27 Jul 2020 15:18
However, it appears that the meat ration went from 400grms per week over December 1942 to April 1942 to 300grms over April to October 1942 and by 1944-45 was 250grms. In addition, distribution of even this became problematical in 1945 when all except Danish imports had stopped. And yet it appears that still no Germans are reported as having starved to death.
You've proved nothing. People can survive without meat.

The Germans didn't die but:
It has been estimated that nearly half of the total number of concentration camp deaths between 1933 and 1945 occurred during the last year of the war.

that would be lots of people starved to death because of lack of food.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 9903
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 27 Jul 2020 17:49

Hi wm,

You post, "People can survive without meat."

Yup, people certainly can survive without meat, even Germans in 1942! But they weren't asked to do so while others were allowed to die of starvation! You are making my point for me, surely?

Yup, the concentration camp deaths from starvation in 1944-45 would amount to a lot of people. You are not claiming that they were typical German civilians, are you? Because it appears, at this stage, that no Germans are known to have died at home of starvation.

Cheers,

Sid.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7463
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by wm » 27 Jul 2020 18:45

They had to die so the Germans could live.

And three years earlier the Soviets POWs had to die, and the Jews, and slave workers, and Ukrainian civilians - so the Germans could live and prosecute their war.
Do you understand that?

btw you still haven't provided any evidence for any of your statements.

How many times did Goebbels write in his diary that before any German suffers from hunger the others will die all?
I've seen it twice.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 9903
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 27 Jul 2020 20:28

Hi wm,

No, they did not have "to die so that Germans could live."

They died so that Germans could live a little better. Germans survived on less later and none appear to have died at home of starvation then.

This was an elective choice, not an unavoidable necessity.

The Germans may well have felt it would help them prosecute their war. However, this does not make it a necessity. Indeed, the Germans didn't have to be at war in the first place, so their situation was self inflicted.

The fact that Goebbels wrote that still doesn't make starving others to death a necessity. It was a differential choice of the Nazi regime of which he was a senior member.

It is worth noting that Polish Jews were allocated barely 10% of the calories in the rations of Reich Germans and some of it was not normally considered fit for human consumption. Thus it would take the removal of ten Jews to provide a barely digestable ration for just one German.

You post, "you still haven't provided any evidence for any of your statements." What? Not even one teeny weeny bit of evidence? I may not have provided evidence to your satisfaction, but that proposition is so patently untrue, I don't even have to address it. Be more specific, please.

Cheers,

Sid.

Futurist
Member
Posts: 3642
Joined: 24 Dec 2015 00:02
Location: SoCal

Re: Had the harvest in Poland been as good in 1941 as it was in 1942, would there have still been a Holocaust in Poland?

Post by Futurist » 14 Sep 2020 03:21

Sid, it's worth noting that considering that there were six million Jews murdered by the Nazis in total, their removal would have still allowed a whopping 600,000 Germans to be fed by your own calculations (since 6 million divided by ten equals 600,000)!

You are absolutely correct that the decision to spark World War II was exclusively Germany's own and was completely avoidable, though.

Return to “Poland 1919-1945”