By Thomas Dalton
Joseph Goebbels was nothing if not disciplined. Since
his 26th birthday in late 1923, he maintained a near-daily diary until his
death more than 21 years later.[1]
These entries are at once unique and invaluable in their ability to provide
insight into the Nazi hierarchy, ideology, and operation. Nothing else like
them exists. No other leading Nazi figure recorded such personal and intimate
thoughts on an on-going basis throughout the war. Hitler’s Mein Kampf
was written in 1923 and 1924, but he published nothing later. The comments
recorded in Hitler’s Table Talk (1953) are the closest to Goebbels’
writings, but these cover in detail only the period July 1941 to September
1942, and they furthermore have not much to add to the topic at hand. We of
course have the speeches by Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler and other leading
figures, but such words were designed for an intended effect and did not
necessarily give an honest and unvarnished representation of ideas or events.
Goebbels’s diaries were held private for his entire life. He never intended to
publish them, although he clearly expected them to survive the war as a
permanent record of his thoughts, for posterity. They offer us an irreplaceable
look at Nazi history and evolution, the lead-up and conduct of the war, and,
especially, Nazi policy on the Jews.
Joseph
Goebbels 1942. In his diary entry for July 26, 1940, he writes: "The big
plan for the evacuation (Evakuierung) of the Jews from Berlin was
approved. Additionally, all the Jews of Europe are supposed to be deported (deportiert)
to Madagascar after the war."
Having earned his PhD in
history and philology at Heidelberg in 1921, Goebbels first encountered Hitler
in Munich the next year. He joined the NSDAP in 1924, and began editing an
early Nazi newspaper in 1925. Goebbels quickly earned the attention of Hitler,
and was named Gauleiter (district leader) of Berlin in October 1926. He
founded a major Nazi periodical, Der Angriff, in 1927, and by 1929 was
named Reich Propaganda Minister. Goebbels was thus well-placed by the time
Hitler and the NSDAP acceded to power in 1933. He was the most intelligent and
well-educated of the Nazi leaders.[2]
In a very short time Goebbels, along with Hitler and Göring, came to comprise
the leadership ‘trinity’ of the early Nazi party. As the war progressed Göring
fell from grace, leaving Goebbels as the de facto second-in-command of the
Third Reich. He eclipsed even Himmler, who was in the end more an enforcer than
leader. Into the 1940s, Goebbels “was the most important and influential man
after Hitler…[B]y 1943, he was virtually running the country while Hitler was
running the war.”[3]
Thus Goebbels was uniquely situated to comment on, and help resolve, the Jewish
Question (Judenfrage). To this end, his diaries are absolutely essential
for understanding the Jewish holocaust.
The diaries themselves first
surfaced a few years after the war. An unknown scavenger came upon the bundles
of originals – some 7,000 pages in total – in the ruins of the official German
archives. Pages were burned, soaked, and many were missing. They “passed
through several hands,” eventually becoming acquired by an American diplomat.[4] In 1948 a (very)
partial English translation by Louis Lochner appeared, on selected entries from
1942 and 1943. Unknown at the time, the Soviets had acquired a full set of
glass plate prints of the entire diary series, amounting to roughly 75,000
individual sheets. By various obscure means, portions leaked out over the
years. Then in 1992, David Irving (re)discovered the full set in the Soviet
archives, and was able to fill in all the missing gaps. These were put to good
use in his 1996 work Goebbels: Mastermind of the Third Reich – the only
complete biography published to date.
Today, there are four English
translations of different parts of the diary: (1) the original Lochner
translation; (2) Oliver Watson’s “early entries,” from the years 1925-1926; (3)
Fred Taylor’s translation of the period 1939-1941; and (4) Richard Barry’s
“final entries” of 1945. These four books combined constitute not more than 10%
of the total; a full 90% of the diaries have never appeared in English.
Fortunately, though, with
Irving’s discovery in 1992, the German publisher Saur was able to produce a
complete and authoritative set, in the German original: Die Tagebücher von
Joseph Goebbels. The full set runs to 29 volumes of roughly 500 pages each,
and is divided into 2 parts (or Teils): Part 1 from 1923-1941, and Part
2 from 1941-1945. The final volume was released only in 2006, and so the
complete set is still relatively new to researchers. Very few have made good
use of it.
Of particular interest here
are Goebbels’s disclosures about Nazi policy toward a final solution (Endlösung)
of the Jewish Question, which of course directly relate to our conception of
the Holocaust. On the standard view, the entire Nazi leadership, Hitler above
all, were rabid anti-Semites who would settle for nothing less than the mass
murder of every Jew they could get their hands on. They allegedly pursued this
objective even to the detriment of the war effort, and rounded up and gassed
Jews until the final few months. Their alleged 6 million victims were burned,
buried, or otherwise made to vanish, such that traces of a mere fraction of
these bodies have ever been found.
There are, as we know, many
problems with this account. First is the fact that no ‘extermination order’
from Hitler has ever been discovered – nor even any tangible reference to such.[5] Hilberg was reduced to
nonsense in his “mind reading” statement of 1983,[6] and even as late as 2003 he was compelled
to write:
The process
of destruction…did not, however, proceed from a basic plan. … The destruction process
was a step-by-step operation, and the administrator could seldom see more than
one step ahead. … In the final analysis, the destruction of the Jews was not so
much a product of laws and commands as it was a matter of spirit, of shared
comprehension, of consonance and synchronization. (2003: 50-52)
Even preeminent British Hitler
expert Ian Kershaw could not do much better. The Soviet archives were opened up
in the early 1990s; “predictably, a written order by Hitler for the ‘Final
Solution’ was not found. The presumption that a single explicit written order
had ever been given had long been dismissed by most historians” (2008: 96).
Rather, this most momentous destruction of human life occurred via “improvised
bureaucratic initiatives whose dynamic prompted a process of ‘cumulative
radicalization’ in the fragmented structures of decision-making in the Third
Reich” (p. 94) – a statement hardly more coherent than Hilberg’s.
Nothing in Goebbels’s diaries
changes this situation. As Irving (1996: 388)[7] observes, “Nowhere do the diary’s 75,000
pages refer to an explicit order by Hitler for the murder of the Jews.” On the
contrary: we find repeated and consistent reference only to expulsion and
deportation.
Second, and more importantly,
once the alleged extermination process was underway, we have no direct evidence
that either Hitler or Goebbels knew anything about it – which is inconceivable.
Below I consider the account given by Kershaw (2000). He undertakes an amazing
series of gyrations to argue that Hitler both planned the genocide of the Jews
and knew about its progress, despite the lack of any evidence. His points
overlap with the diary entries, which I will cover below. Suffice to say here
that, on Kershaw’s reading, Hitler was incredibly aloof on the Jewish Question.
“Even in his inner circle Hitler could never bring himself to speak with
outright frankness about the killing of the Jews” (p. 487) – in other words, he
never, ever spoke openly about this most-vital aspect of the entire Nazi
program. Hitler’s comments were always “confined to generalities,” sprinkled in
with the “occasional menacing allusion.” Thus, with a mere wink and a nod, the
mass murder of 6 million Jews was effected.
Given the striking lack of
evidence, and the inconceivability that mass murder of millions was underway
without awareness at the top, only two alternatives are possible: (1) the Nazi
hierarchy knew all about the mass murder but mutually agreed to never discuss
it, or to refer to it only in euphemisms and code language – even in the most
private of settings; or (2) no systematic mass murder occurred at all, and the
reality was in fact just as they said: expulsion and deportation, along with a
certain degree of incidental death. I would suggest that a detailed look at Goebbels’s
diary entries, in conjunction with the alleged ‘extermination’ actions that
were occurring at the same time, may shine some light on this dispute.
* * *
To the best of my knowledge
only two English books cite the diary in any detail: Irving’s Goebbels
(1996) and Kershaw’s Hitler 1936-1945: Nemesis (2000).[8] Irving, especially in the longer Internet
version, captures many important passages on the Jewish Question, but this is
clearly not his main concern. Kershaw has a large number of quotations, but
most are only partial, out of context, and designed to cast a certain light on
Hitler. To his credit, and unlike many other works, Kershaw does a good job of
including the original German words for the key terms, especially those
relating to expulsion, evacuation, ‘elimination,’ and the like.
There are at least three
concerns for any foreign-language translation, and these loom particularly
large here. First, inclusion of the original language on key words and phrases
is essential; it allows the reader to be fully informed about the actual
original text. Second, passages should be cited as fully as possible, in order
to retain context. Third is the translation itself, which is always
problematic. Again, particularly so in this case, as many traditionalist
writers are anxious to portray Goebbels’s language – which ranges from benign
to ambiguous – in as ominous a light as possible. On these three counts, Irving
does a reasonably good job, lacking only the extended quotations that are
preferable. Kershaw does well on the first point, but fails on the other two – as
I will show. Of the published (partial) translations, Lochner comes in for
notable censure.
In what follows I cite
Goebbels’s reflections on the Jews and Jewish policy in full. This is quite easy
because, in virtually every case, the entry consists only of a few sentences or
a short paragraph or two. I also include the German original for every
contentious word or phrase. To maintain context, all entries are in
chronological order. Following the date for each entry is original citation
information from the Tagebücher: Part # (Teil), Volume # (Band),
and page number. Hence, (II.3.478) refers to Part 2, volume 3, page 478.
In total, I include below the
entries for 123 different days, ranging from May 1937 to April 1945. Of these,
43 appear in one of the published translation books; the remaining 80 entries
are previously unpublished, and appear here for the first time in English. (Of
course many scattered portions of these entries do appear elsewhere, primarily
in the Irving and Kershaw books. But none in full.) Where the entries are those
found in existing translations, I have identified them with asterisks
(*=Taylor, **=Lochner, ***=Barry). Furthermore, I have maintained their
wording, except when essential corrections were necessary – cited in the
subsequent commentary.
To be as thorough as possible,
it was my original aim to include every significant entry on the Jews or the
Jewish Question. But in a 29-volume set these proved too numerous for the
present essay. Hence I will focus on the key time period, bounded by two
significant events: Kristallnacht, and the deportation of the Hungarian
Jews. Thus for the period from 1 September 1938 through 30 June 1944, I have
included literally every noteworthy entry by Goebbels.[9] This exhaustive survey, covering nearly
six years, gives the most complete picture possible of his perspective on the
Jewish holocaust.
Before addressing the central
period I want to mention a few early passages. The first passing reference to
the “Jewish Question” (Judenfrage) appears very early in the diary: 15
March 1924 (Part 1, vol. 1) – coincident with the first reference to Hitler. It
was clearly a concern from his earliest days in the Party. But serious action
against the Jews did not begin until more than a decade later, in the late
1930s. For example:
May 5, 1937 (I.4.124)
The elimination of Jewish
influence (Entjudung – lit. ‘de-Jewing’) in the Reich Chamber of Culture
moves forward. I will not be at peace until it is completely free of Jews\.
Nov 30, 1937 (I.4.429)
Long discussion on the Jewish
Question. My new law is almost finished. But that is not the goal. The Jews
must leave Germany, and get completely out (aus…heraus) of Europe. It
will still take some time, but it needs to happen. The Führer is
determined to do so\.
Here we have, I believe, the
first reference to the complete removal of the Jews – a full year prior to Kristallnacht.
Then into 1938 we find the first mention of the ‘Madagascar plan’:
Apr 11, 1938 (I.5.256)
Long discussion at breakfast,
on the Jewish Question. The Führer wants the Jews completely squeezed
out (herausdrängen) of Germany. To Madagascar, or some such place.
Right!
Apr 23, 1938 (I.5.269-270)
Speaking with Helldorf on the
Jewish Question. … We will take from Berlin the character of a Jewish paradise.
Jewish shops will be identified. In any case we will now proceed more
radically. Negotiations with Poland and Romania. Madagascar would be the most
suitable for [the Jews]\.
At least into early 1942 (see
entry for March 7), it was seriously proposed to round up all the European Jews
and ship them to Madagascar, which was to be forcibly acquired from France.
This fact, of course, is of central importance to the holocaust: if the Nazis wanted
to ship them out, then obviously there was no plan for mass murder. To further
complicate the traditional account, we need only observe that Chelmno,
Auschwitz, and Belzec were all allegedly underway in March 1942. And in fact it
is worse than this, because talk of deportation continues right up until the
end of the war.
I would further note
Goebbels’s use of the word ‘radical,’ which evidently means the mass expulsion
of several million Jews, with little regard for their long-term well being.
Also, the focus on Berlin: as local Gauleiter, Goebbels placed top
priority on cleansing the city of its Jews. We see this over and over in the
entries to follow. In fact this often seems to take priority over a total
cleansing of the Reich – which again does not fit well with the
exterminationist thesis.
I now begin with the entries
from 1 September 1938. The first notable item is an early observation on
America:
Sep 17, 1938 (I.6.95)
Afternoon meeting with our
diplomat in Washington, Dieckhoff. He expresses a similar situation as
Gienandt. At the moment it is hopeless. Everything depends on our position with
England. Roosevelt is our enemy. He is surrounded by Jews. In a European
conflict, if England stands against us, then so too will America\.
In the run-up to Kristallnacht,
we find evidence of Goebbels’s involvement with anti-Jewish actions the month
before:
Oct 12, 1938 (I.6.142)
Helldorf gives me a report on
the status of the Jewish action in Berlin. It proceeds systematically. And the
Jews now gradually withdraw\.
Then we have the event itself,
triggered in part by the murder of Ernst vom Rath, German diplomat in Paris. He
was shot by a Jewish teenager, Herschel Grynszpan.
Nov 10, 1938 (I.6.180-181)
In Kassel and Dessau there
were large demonstrations against the Jews, synagogues burned and shops
demolished. In the afternoon the death of our [Paris] diplomat vom Rath was
announced. I go to the Party reception in the old town hall. A huge operation.
I present the Führer. He states: let the demonstrations continue. Police
are to withdraw. The Jews should feel the public wrath. That is only right. I
give appropriate instructions to the police and Party. Then I have a short
discussion with Party leadership. Everyone rushes to the phones. Now the people
will act\.
We must not
let this cowardly murder [of vom Rath] go unanswered. Let things follow their
course. The Hitler Patrol cleans house in Munich. A synagogue is smashed to
pieces. I try to save it from the fire; but I fail\.
The Patrol
has done some vicious work. A message runs out across the Reich: 50-75
synagogues burned. The Führer has ordered the immediate arrest of
25,000-30,000 Jews. That will have an effect. They will now see that our
patience has run out\.
When I go
into the hotel, all the windowpanes rattle. Bravo! Bravo! In all large cities
the synagogues burn. German property is not threatened\.
The first
reports come early in the morning. It has been a raging fury. Just as expected.
The whole nation is in turmoil. This murder will be very expensive for the
Jews. The dear Jews will think carefully in the future before shooting German
diplomats\.
To this day it is unclear to
what extent the riots were spontaneous outbreaks of anti-Semitism, or well-planned
instigations by plain-clothed security men.
Nov 13, 1938 (I.6.185)
Heydrich reports on the
actions: 190 synagogues burned and destroyed. Conference with Göring on the
Jewish Question. Hot battles over the solution. I argue for a radical solution.
Funk is somewhat soft and yielding. The result: a fine of one billion Marks is
imposed on the Jews. In the shortest period of time, they will be completely
excluded (ausgeschieden) from economic life. They can no longer run
businesses. … A whole series of other measures is planned. In any case, a clean
sheet has now been made. I work well with Göring. He also attacks this sharply.
The radical view has prevailed. I draft a very sharp public communiqué\.
Again, more talk of the
‘radical’ solution as total exclusion from public life. Then two follow-up
entries:
Nov 22, 1938 (I.6.195)
We are planning a series of
new measures against the Jews. I have a long phone call with Göring, who is
coordinating all the actions. He approaches it harshly. In Berlin we do more
than anywhere else in the Reich. That’s also necessary, because we have so many
Jews. But the actions have also destroyed much. Good that it’s over\.
Nov 26, 1938 (I.6.202)
Situation report: almost
exclusively on the Jewish Question. Partly positive, partly negative. We must
enlighten the public, and especially the intellectuals, on the Jewish
Question\.
In late November, two more
interesting observations on America:
Nov 27, 1938 (I.6.203)
Roosevelt speaks out ever
harsher against us. He is totally in the hands of the Jews. A Jew-slave,
perhaps even of Jewish ancestry\.
Dec 17, 1938 (I.6.223)
America is strongly against
us. On the Jewish Question it makes impertinent remarks. It is surely also a
Jew-state!
The year 1939 opened with this
entry, as a follow-up to the 5 May 1937 comment:
Jan 26, 1939 (I.6.239) *
The elimination of Jewish
influence (Entjudung) in the Reich Chamber of Culture continues. But now
considerable financial difficulties are apparent. We shall overcome them\.
Four days later, on January
30, Hitler gave his famous Reichstag speech of 1939. This was remarkable on
several counts. It was sprinkled with many references to international Jewry (internationale
Judentum), the Jewish world-enemy (jüdischen Weltfeind), and the
Jewish Question generally. It was a grand event, the equivalent of a
presidential joint session of Congress. The cameras and microphones were
running. Among some initial remarks on the Jewish Question, he states that the
“foreign peoples” must be “pushed out” (abzuschieben) in order to allow
the Germans to arise. The key section occurs in the middle of the speech:
“Europe cannot find peace until the Jewish Question is resolved.” Jewry too
often lives off the work of others; unless they begin to perform true,
productive work, they will sooner or later “succumb to a crisis of unimaginable
proportions.” He continues:
Many times in my life I have
been a prophet, and was often laughed at. At the time of my struggle for power,
it was primarily the Jewish people who accepted my prophecies with laughter. …
I believe that this time the laughter of the Jews in Germany is stuck in their
throats. Today I will again be a prophet: If the international Jewish
financiers in and outside Germany should succeed in plunging the nations once
again into a world war, then the result will be not the Bolshevization of the
Earth and with it the victory of Jewry, but rather the destruction (Vernichtung)
of the Jewish race in Europe\.
Here, for all the world to
see, Hitler is predicting the ‘destruction,’ or perhaps ‘annihilation,’ of the
Jews. At issue is the meaning of this word Vernichtung. Its root, nicht,
means ‘none’ or ‘nothing’. Bilingual dictionaries translate it as either
‘destruction’ or ‘extermination.’
So what can the “Vernichtung
of the Jewish race” mean? On the standard view, of course, this means mass
murder: literal genocide, the killing of every Jew. But there are two problems
here. First, Vernichtung, along with the English equivalents
‘destruction’ and ‘extermination’, are inherently ambiguous. To ‘destroy’ is
literally to ‘de-structure’ or ‘deconstruct’ (Latin: de-struere). To
destroy an individual person or animal is to kill it, but to destroy a
collective – a city, a nation, a race – is to ruin its structural coherence,
and cause it to cease to exist as a collective entity.[10] This of course would happen if every
individual member were killed, but it in no way demands this. Likewise with
‘extermination’, which means, literally, to ‘push beyond the boundaries’
(Latin: ex-terminus). To exterminate is simply to ‘get rid of
completely’, by whatever means. And in fact the leading traditionalists
evidently agree with these benign interpretations. Kershaw, for example, goes
to great pains to argue that there was neither plan nor intention of mass
murder prior to September 1941. Browning (2004: 371) comes to a similar
conclusion.
The second problem is this:
How likely is it that Hitler would declare to the world his intention to murder
an entire race? Kershaw (2000: 522) pointedly emphasizes Hitler’s “intense
preoccupation with secrecy”; the mass murder scheme was “a secret to be carried
to the grave.” But wait – he already announced it to the world in January 1939!
Does it even make sense to then keep such a thing secret? Or perhaps there was
no secret to keep.
For some unknown reason,
Goebbels does not comment on the Reichstag speech – at least, in the days and
months that followed. (Down the road he would see it as something of a
milestone.) In fact for the next 10 months one finds no substantial reference
to the Jewish Question at all. Perhaps pressing matters of war intervened.
Czechoslovakia disintegrated in March and Germany was thereby compelled to
occupy the territory. With much inducement from England, Poland undertook a
series of belligerent actions, resulting in the German-Polish war that began on
September 1. Two days later this regional war became a European one, when
France and the UK declared war on Germany. Comments by Goebbels resumed in
October:
Oct 7, 1939 (I.7.141)
The Jewish problem will
probably be the hardest to solve. These Jews are no longer human beings. [They
are] predators equipped with a cold intellect, which must be counteracted\.
Oct 17, 1939 (I.7.157)
This Jewry must be destroyed (vernichtet)\.
…taking a cue, perhaps, from
Hitler. The remainder of the year includes comments again consistent with
removal, and no evidence of contemplated murder. The mention of typhus
(December 6) is significant; as we know, this was undoubtedly the cause of
death for many in the ghettos and camps, both Jews and non-Jews.
Nov 3, 1939 (I.7.179-180)
With the Führer. I give
him a report on my trip to Poland, which interests him greatly. Above all, my
exposition on the Jewish problem earns his full support. Judaism is a waste
product. More clinical than social issue\.
Dec 5, 1939 (I.7.220-221)
[The Führer] shares my
view on the Jewish and Polish questions. The Jewish danger must be banished (gebannt)
by us. But it will still return in a few generations. There is no real
panacea\.
Dec 6, 1939 (I.7.222)
Du Prel reports on the
situation in the General Government. Horrible! There is still much to do.
Nothing has changed in Warsaw. A typhus epidemic and famine have broken out. In
Lublin, they're waiting for the expelled (abgeschobenen) Jews\.
Dec 19, 1939 (I.7.236-237) *
The Jews are attempting to
infiltrate cultural life again. Particularly half-Jews. When they are serving
with the armed forces, they have some reason on their side. Nevertheless, I
reject all requests in this area\.
My thoughts on the Jewish
Question in wartime meet with the Führer’s approval. He intends to clear
(heraushaben) all half-Jews from the Wehrmacht. Otherwise there
will be continual ‘incidents.’
Through the entire first half
of 1940 we find, again, no entries on the Jews. Germany was racking up military
successes, culminating in the invasion of the Low Countries on May 10 and the
push to the Channel. France was quickly overwhelmed, and German troops marched
into Paris on June 14. Things were going very well; the war appeared to be
heading toward a rapid conclusion; and then the Jewish Question could be
addressed in earnest.
Jun 6, 1940 (I.8.159)
We will quickly be finished
with the Jews after the war\.
Jul 6, 1940 (I.8.207)
The American Jewish press is
entirely on Churchill’s side. Now, suddenly, France is no longer the ideal
democratic nation. Riff-raff that must be eradicated (ausgerottet)\.
Jul 20, 1940 (I.8.229)
One must neutralize the
habitual criminal before the crime, not after. Our lawyers will never
understand that. The Jews also belong in this category, and one must make short
shrift (kurzen Prozess) of them\.
By July the question of Berlin
had again arisen, as had the Madagascar plan:
Jul 26, 1940 (I.8.238)
The big plan for the
evacuation (Evakuierung) of the Jews from Berlin was approved.
Additionally, all the Jews of Europe are supposed to be deported (deportiert)
to Madagascar after the war\.
Aug 17, 1940 (I.8.276) *
Later on, we want to ship (verfrachten)
the Jews to Madagascar. There they can build their own state\.
Sep 2, 1940 (I.8.301)
I fly to Kattowitz [Katowice,
Poland, near Auschwitz]. … Bracht reports to me on the various concerns of the
Province. The Poles are resigned to their fate, and the Jews have been pushed
out (abgeschoben)\.
Nov 2, 1940 (I.8.406)
With the Führer. Epp
has colonial questions. Koch and Forster, questions about the East. All want to
unload their trash onto the General Government: Jews, the sick, the lazy, etc.
And [Hans] Frank resists. Not entirely without reason. He would like to make
Poland a model nation. But that goes too far. He cannot, and should not.
According to the Führer, Poland is a large labor pool for us – a place
to hold failed people and use them for lowly work. We have to get them from
somewhere. Frank does not like this, but he has to. And the Jews will later be
moved out (abschieben) of this area\.
We see here a growing
vocabulary of terms relating to the status of the Jews. The large majority refer to
removing, deporting, or expelling: aus-heraus, herausdrängen, ausscheiden,
abschieben, evakuieren, verfrachten, deportieren. Later we find other related
terms: beseitigen, herausbringen, aufräumen, herausschaffen, and others
– some 18 in total, by my count (not including conjugates). This group is the
most numerous, and the most benign. Two of these, evakuieren (evacuate)
and abschieben (expel or push out), are especially popular with
Goebbels.
A second group of terms
include those that I will call ‘ambiguous’, in the sense that they have
somewhat more ominous implications: vernichten (verb form of Vernichtung),
ausrotten, liquidieren, eliminieren, and auslöschen. I’ve
discussed the first of these already, and in the July 6 entry Goebbels first uses
a form of ausrotten. This word, literally meaning ‘to root out’,
translates to the ambiguous ‘exterminate’ or to ‘eradicate’ (ex-radix,
lit. ‘up-root’). Once again, none of these meanings entail death, killing, or
murder. A plant that is ausrottet can be replanted and live; a family
can be ‘up-rooted’ and reestablished elsewhere. The exterminationist suggestion
that either vernichten or ausrotten necessarily imply murder is,
quite literally, nonsense.[11]
I should note, by the way,
that the German language does indeed have words for ‘killing’: morden,
ermorden, töten, totschlagen, totschiessen. Goebbels had no shortage of
alternatives if he wished to discuss literally killing the Jews. This is, after
all, a personal and private diary. Consider his situation: Should the Germans
win, he has nothing to fear. Should they lose, he must have known that his own
death awaited, along with the ‘destruction’ of greater Germany – again, nothing
to fear. Why hold back? So the reader might be wondering: Does Goebbels ever
use such explicit terms? In fact he does: once. If I may temporarily leap ahead
to one of his final entries, 14 March 1945, we read that certain
soon-to-be-victorious Jews are calling for no mercy on the Germans – to which
Goebbels replies, “Anyone in a position to do so should kill (totschlagen)
these Jews like rats.” There we have it – an unambiguous call for murder.
Except that it’s three years too late. One wonders, though, why, on the
exterminationist thesis, Goebbels didn’t resort to such language much sooner.
Perhaps it was only at the end, when the Jewish-backed Allies were slaughtering
innocent Germans by the tens of thousands, that the Nazis began calling for
their deaths. And perhaps by then it was justified.[12]
Into 1941 we start to move
strongly toward – on the traditionalist view – systematic murder. But not until
the second half of the year:
Mar 18, 1941 (I.9.193) *
Vienna will soon be entirely
Jew-free. And now it is Berlin’s turn. I am already discussing the question
with the Führer and Dr. Frank. He puts the Jews to work, and they are
indeed obedient. Later they will have to get out of Europe altogether (aus…heraus)\.
Mar 19, 1941 (I.9.195)
Early flight to Posen. … Here,
all sorts have been liquidated (liquidiert), above all the Jewish trash.
This has to be. I explain the situation to Greiser\.
Mar 22, 1941 (I.9.199)
I am deeply troubled about the
cultural impact of foreign laborers working in the Reich. There are several
hundred thousand. The harsh line towards prisoners of war is also somewhat
mitigated. The Jews themselves cannot be evacuated (evakuiert) from
Berlin because 30,000 are working in the armaments industry. Who, earlier,
would have thought this possible?
In the March 19 entry we find
the first occurrence of another troublesome word, ‘liquidation’. It proves to
be rather popular, appearing in eight different entries. The troublesome part
is that, in many cases, it means something other than killing. Goebbels speaks
of liquidating the “Jewish danger” (30 May 1942) and of liquidating Jewish
marriages (6 December 1942). The word ‘liquidation’ means, primarily, ‘to make
fluid.’ And this in fact is a fairly apt description of the deportation
process: a large, entrenched Jewish community who had to be uprooted, made
liquid, and then to flow out across the borders. Nothing in this entails
killing. Nor at the time, in the 1940s, did the word necessarily mean murder.
An article in the London Times had this to say: “The rest of the Jews in
the General Government…would be liquidated, which means either transported
eastward in cattle trucks to an unknown destination, or killed where they
stood” (4 December 1942; p. 3). Holocaust survivor Thomas Buergenthal (2009:
49) writes of his experience in the Kielce ghetto: “The ghetto was being
liquidated or, in the words bellowing out of the loudspeakers, Ausseidlung!
Ausseidlung! (‘Evacuation! Evacuation!’).” And later he comments, “After
the liquidation of the labor camp…” (p. 56). Clearly the word means, and meant,
something other than killing.
Obviously, ‘liquidate’ can
mean killing, as can a huge variety of words under contrived circumstances. In
Mafia circles, a ‘kiss’ can mean death. Motion pictures use a variety of silly
terms: whack, pop, bump, waste, take for a ride, off, do in, and so on. In the
case of Goebbels, we must ask once again, why would he go to lengths to use
euphemisms or silly code words in a personal diary? And one in which, when
motivated, he was happy to call a spade a spade?
June 1941 was an important
month: the Germans invaded Russia, and the Einsatzgruppen were activated
to protect the troops from partisan attacks. Here I refer back to Kershaw’s account
of events. Through mid-1941, Kershaw admits, there was no true genocidal plan –
despite Hitler’s infamous prophecy of January 1939. As of June 1941, “shooting
or gassing to death all the Jews of Europe…was at this stage not in mind” (p.
463). Even through the end of the year, the alleged physical extermination plan
“was still emerging” (p. 492). Hence the plan in mid-1941 was just as Goebbels
had recorded: one of confinement, deportation, and ethnic cleansing.
Anti-partisan actions of the Einsatzgruppen
began in June and July 1941; Jews were prominent among the partisans, and hence
they were prominent among the victims. Then “there was a sharp escalation from
around August onward,” both in the death toll and in the ranks of the shooters.
Allegedly, the 3,000 Einsatzgruppen men recruited large numbers of
“native collaborators” to help with the slaughter; Kershaw cites Browning
(1995: 106) as stating that the combined troop levels rose to more than 300,000
by January 1943![13]
Jun 20, 1941 (I.9.390)
Dr. Frank talks about the
General Government. There one is already happily looking forward to expelling (abschieben)
the Jews. Judaism in Poland gradually decays. A just punishment for inciting
the people and instigating the war. The Führer has also prophesied that
to the Jews\.
Jul 13, 1941 (II.1.58)
We are again getting reports
from the eastern front on the terrible atrocities being committed by the
Bolsheviks. The Moscow Jews continue to apply their infamous procedure, in
order to push the outrages committed by them into our shoes. But the whole
world agrees that there is not a word of truth in it\.
Kershaw then cites a
mysterious meeting between Hitler and Himmler in mid-July, during which the
former “effectively…placed the ‘Jewish Question’…directly in Himmler’s hands”
(p. 469). After this, we are to believe that Hitler was content to speak only
of deportations, removals, and evacuations, all of which allegedly reconfirmed
the implicit genocide command. When Hitler is quoted as saying, “Where the Jews
are sent to, whether to Siberia or Madagascar, is immaterial,” Kershaw offers
an amazing response: “The frame of mind [here] was overtly genocidal. The
reference to Madagascar was meaningless.” Evacuation to Siberia was “genocide
of a kind” (p. 471). But never mind this; as of July 1941, “no decision for the
‘Final Solution’ – meaning the physical extermination of the Jews throughout
Europe – had yet been taken. But genocide was in the air.”
Aug 7, 1941 (II.1.189)
In the Warsaw ghetto there was
some increase in typhus; although provisions have been made to ensure that it
will not leave the ghetto. The Jews have always been carriers of infectious
diseases. They must either be cooped up in a ghetto and left to themselves, or
liquidated (liquidieren); otherwise they will always infect the healthy
population of the civilized nations\.
Aug 11, 1941 (II.1.213)
In the [occupied] Baltic
countries the tendency is to form their own governments, and to shake off the
Germans as quickly as possible, in order to become stronger. In the large
cities a punishment is inflicted upon the Jews. They are beaten to death en
masse in the streets by the self-defense organizations of the Baltic peoples.
That which the Führer prophesied comes true: that if the Jews succeeded
in provoking a war again, they would thereby cease to exist (seine Existenz
verlieren würde)\.
A very important observation:
the deaths of Jews in the Baltics were caused in large part by revenge-seeking
natives, not roving German death squads. And in fact there was a good basis for
this revenge, namely the murder and torture inflicted by the Jews of Stalin’s
GPU intelligence unit.[14 ]
In his “Table Talk”
discussions of this time, Hitler argued that Germany was justified in deporting
the Jews, and that furthermore they were doing it relatively humanely:
If any people has the right to
proceed to evacuations, it is we, for we’ve often had to evacuate our own
population. Eight hundred thousand men had to emigrate from East Prussia alone.
How humanely sensitive we are is shown by the fact that we consider it a
maximum of brutality to have liberated our country from 600,000 Jews. And yet
we accepted, without recrimination, and as something inevitable, the evacuation
of our own compatriots! (1953/2000: 24)
There seems to be no
independent verification of the 600,000 figure, so we cannot identify from
where they would have been deported, unfortunately. Meanwhile Goebbels
continued his actions in Berlin:
Aug 12, 1941 (II.1.218)
The Jewish Question has again
become especially acute in the capital. We count 70,000 Jews in Berlin at the
moment, of which 30,000 are not even working; the others live as parasites off
the work of the host nation. This is an intolerable situation. The various
departments of the upper-level Reich authorities still oppose a radical
solution to this problem. But I won’t let it go, for I don’t want to experience
the Jewish question solved again as it was in 1938 – by the mob. But this is
prevented in the long run only if we take timely and sweeping measures\. … I
also think it necessary that the Jews be given a badge. They are active in
public life as defeatists and mood-spoilers. It is therefore imperative that
they be recognized as Jews. They must not be allowed to speak on behalf of the
German people. They have nothing to do with the German people, but rather must
be excluded from (ausgeschieden) the German people\.
Goebbels clearly does not want
a repeat of Kristallnacht. Also, this is the first mention of the
“badge”, or yellow Star of David, that the Jews were ultimately forced to wear.
Aug 18, 1941 (II.1.254)
It’s different with the Jewish
Question. All Germans are presently against the Jews. The Jews must be put back
in the box. When one realizes that there are still 75,000 Jews in Berlin, of
which only 23,000 are working, it seems a grotesque fact. One cannot even
inform the German people, or else there would surely be pogroms. We Germans
thus have the honor to conduct the war, and meanwhile the parasitical Jews, who
are waiting for our defeat in order to exploit it for themselves, are sustained
by our national strength. This condition is absolutely outrageous. I will
ensure that it will soon be stopped\.
Aug 19, 1941 (II.1.265-266)
Regarding the Jewish Question,
I completely prevail with the Führer. He agrees that we will introduce a
large, visible Jew-badge for all the Jews in the Reich, and which must be worn
in public; then we can remove (beseitigt) the danger that the Jews will
act as defeatists and complainers without being recognized. Also, if in the
future they do not work, they will be given smaller rations than the German
people. That is only right and proper. He who does not work, should not eat.
It’s all we need in Berlin, for example, that of 76,000 Jews only 26,000 work,
and the rest not only don’t work, but they live on the rations of the Berlin population!
Additionally, the Führer tells me that, as soon as the first transport
opportunity becomes available, the Berlin Jews should be pushed off (abzuschieben)
to the East. There they will have to make do under a harsh climate\.
We discuss
the Jewish problem. The Führer is convinced that his prophecy in the
Reichstag – that if Jewry succeeded in provoking yet another world war, it
would end with their destruction (Vernichtung) – is confirmed. It is
coming true in the following weeks and months with an almost uncanny certainty.
In the East, the Jews must pay the price; in Germany they have paid in part
already, and they will pay more in the future. Their last resort is North
America, and there they will also have to pay before long\.
Jewry is a
foreign element among civilized nations, and its activities in the past three
decades has been so devastating that the people’s reaction is understandable – indeed,
one might say, a compulsion of nature. In any case, in the world to come the
Jews will not have anything to laugh about. In Europe today there is a united
front against Jewry. This is already apparent in the entire European press – and
not only on this question, but also on many other matters there exists a
thoroughly unified opinion\.
So here we have a clear and
unambiguous statement: that the Vernichtung of the Jewish race meant the
complete exclusion from society and, ultimately, its physical removal.
Aug 20, 1941 (II.1.278)
On the Jewish Question, I am
now beginning to take action. Because the Führer has allowed me to
introduce a badge for the Jews, I believe I will be able to accomplish this
marking very quickly, without carrying out the legal reforms that would
normally be required in such a situation. … Public life in Berlin must quickly
be cleaned (gereinigt) [of Jews]. If at the moment it is not possible to
make Berlin a Jew-free city, at least they should not appear in public any
longer. Additionally, the Führer told me that I may expel (abschieben)
the Jews from Berlin immediately after the end of our campaign in the East.
Berlin must become a Jew-free city. It is outrageous and scandalous that 76,000
Jews, most of whom are parasites, can roam the capital of the German Reich.
They destroy not only the streetscape, but also the mood\.
Although it
will be very different when they wear a badge, we can leave it at that until
they are removed. We have to approach this problem without any sentimentality.
One need only imagine what the Jews would do to us, if they had the power to do
so – as we have the power to do. In any case, I remain alert regarding further
action on the Jewish Question. If one must also overcome bureaucratic and
partly sentimental resistance in the higher Reich offices, I will be neither
surprised nor deterred. I took up the fight against Jewry in Berlin in 1926,
and it is my ambition not to rest until the last Jew has left Berlin\.
Throughout the summer Hitler
resisted mass evacuations. Then, according to Kershaw: “Suddenly, in
mid-September, Hitler changed his mind. There was no overt indication of the
reason” (p. 477). Here’s one overt indication: on September 12 Roosevelt
ordered the U.S. navy to begin sinking German ships. This was only the latest
in a string of aggressive and provocative actions by the Americans, which began
with their shadowing of German freighter and supply ships in late 1939, and
included the Lend-Lease Act of March 1941 that authorized military assistance
for the Allied nations, explicitly ending U.S. neutrality.
A Himmler letter from this
time cites Hitler’s authorization to begin with an initial shipment of 60,000
Jews to the Lodz ghetto. This action was key to the “gathering whirlwind of
extermination,” says Kershaw. But even this was no Final Solution order. “It is
doubtful whether a single, comprehensive decision of such a kind was ever
made.” Instead, “numerous local and regional Nazi leaders…seized on the
opportunity…to start killing Jews in their own areas” (p. 481). The killing was
as yet haphazard; a “coordinated, comprehensive programme of total
genocide…would still take some months to emerge.”
Sep 24, 1941 (II.1.480-481,
485)
Also with respect to the
Jewish Question, I have some important things to say to Heydrich. For the
Berlin Jews, we will drive away the desire to hide their badges; and anyway, I
am of the opinion that the Jews must be evacuated (evakuieren) from
Berlin as quickly as possible. This will be the case as soon as we have settled
the military issues in the East. In the end, they will all be transported (transportieren)
to the camps designed by the Bolsheviks. These camps were built by the Jews; it
is only right that they are now populated by the Jews\.
The Führer
is of the opinion that the Jews must, after all, be removed from (herausgebracht)
all of Germany. The first cities to be made Jew-free are Berlin, Vienna, and
Prague. Berlin is the first in line, and I am hopeful that in the course of
this year we are able to transport out (abzutransportieren) a
substantial part of Berlin’s Jews to the East\.
The first trains left Berlin
on 18 October 1941.
Oct 21, 1941 (II.2.169)
We are also now gradually
beginning with the expulsion (Ausweisung) of Jews from Berlin to the
East. Several thousand have already been put in motion. At first they go to
Lodz [Poland]. Thereupon commences a big excitement. The Jews send anonymous
letters to the foreign press seeking help, and in fact some messages seep
through to foreign countries. I forbid further information about that for the
foreign correspondents. Nevertheless, it will not prevent this from expanding
further in the coming days. Nothing will change. While it is, at the moment,
unpleasant to see this issue discussed in front of the world stage, one must
accept this disadvantage. The main thing is that the capital will become
Jew-free. And I will not rest until this goal is fully achieved\.
Four days later Hitler made
this well-known comment:
From the rostrum of the
Reichstag, I prophesied to Jewry that, in the event of war’s proving
inevitable, the Jew would disappear from Europe. That race of criminals has on
its conscience 2 million dead of the First World War, and now already hundreds
of thousands more. Let nobody tell me that, all the same, we can’t park them in
the marshy parts of Russia! Who’s worrying about our troops? It’s not a bad
idea, by the way, that public rumor attributes to us a plan to exterminate the
Jews. Terror is a salutary thing. (1953/2000: 87)
So we see here (1) continued
endorsement for literal deportation, (2) no talk of killing, murder, gas
chambers, etc, (3) an equation between ‘extermination’ and deportation, and (4)
a minimal concern for secrecy. The fact that Hitler finds some use in the rumor
mill is interesting, a kind of unanticipated fringe benefit. But he perhaps did
not anticipate how talk of extermination would play in the Anglo world. Two
months before he made the above comment, the New York Times (August 25;
p. 3) reported that, “unless the Nazis were defeated, wholesale extermination
would be the lot of all Jews” (…“including those in the United States and
Britain”!) – and here, ‘extermination’ means murder, no doubt.
Then an important Goebbels
entry that continues the account from August 11:
Nov 2, 1941 (II.2.221-222)
We fly early in the morning to
Vilnius [Lithuania]. … We were met by Lt Colonel Zehnpfennig, who drove us
through the city. Vilnius has a quarter million inhabitants, and nearly one
quarter are Jewish. However, the ranks of the Jews have been greatly thinned by
the Lithuanians after the invasion of German troops. The Jews were active
primarily as [Soviet] GPU spies and informers, and countless Lithuanian
intellectuals and citizens owe their deaths to them. The revenge tribunal
established by the Lithuanians and Poles, being the majority of the city, has
been horrifying. Thousands [of Jews] have been shot, and even now hundreds more
as well. They have now all been rounded up into their ghettos. That they have
not all been killed is due only to the fact that the Jews control the entire
Vilnian handcraft industry, and the Lithuanians are completely dependent on
them\.
The city
shows hardly any traces of war. But on a short drive through the ghetto, the
view is horrifying. Here the Jews squat in rows, hideous forms, not to be
looked at let alone touched. The Jews have created their own administration,
which also has a police function. They stand at the entrance to the ghetto,
which is separated from the rest of the city, on guard and at attention. Even
10 years ago I would not have dreamed that something like this would again be
the case. Terrible figures lurk in the streets, which I would not like to meet
at night. The Jews are the lice of civilized man. They must somehow be
eradicated (ausrotten), otherwise they will again play their tormenting
and troublesome role. Only if one advances with the necessary brutality can one
be finished with them. When they are spared, one will later be their victim\.
Nov 17, 1941 (II.2.304)
In a published telegram,
Churchill openly stands on the side of the Jews. He is a consummate servant of
the Jews\.
Nov 18, 1941 (II.2.309)
Heydrich told me about his
intentions regarding the expulsion (Abschiebung) of Jews from the Reich.
The question is more difficult than we had first suspected. In any case, 15,000
Jews will have to stay in Berlin because they are employed in the war effort
and other dangerous work. Also, a number of elderly Jews cannot be pushed off (abgeschoben)
to the East. For them, a Jewish ghetto in a small town in the protectorate will
be arranged. The third phase, which will begin early next year, will follow the
procedure I have proposed to clear the area city by city, such that when the
evacuation (Evakuierung) in a city begins, it will also be finished as
soon as possible, and the effect on public opinion will be neither too long nor
too harmful. Heydrich’s approach on this question is very consistent. He is
something I had not previously realized: a shrewd political thinker\.
So no evacuation either for
workers or the elderly. One wonders if genocide was still ‘in the air’.
Nov 22, 1941 (II.2.340-341)
Also, regarding the Jewish
Question, the Führer fully agrees with my views. He wants an energetic
policy against the Jews, but we do not want to cause any unnecessary
difficulties. Evacuation (Evakuierung) of the Jews will be undertaken
city by city. It is still uncertain when it will be Berlin’s turn; but when its
turn comes, the evacuation will be carried out as quickly as possible to the
very end\.
On the first of December,
Hitler offered some philosophical thoughts on the social effect of Jewry:
[The] destructive role of the
Jew has in a way a providential explanation. If nature wanted the Jew to be the
ferment that causes people to decay, thus providing these peoples with an
opportunity for a healthy reaction, in that case, people like St. Paul and Trotsky
are, from our point of view, the most valuable. By the fact of their presence,
they provoke the defensive reaction of the attacked organism. Dietrich Eckart
once told me that in all his life he had known just one good Jew: Otto
Weininger, who killed himself on the day when he realized that the Jew lives on
the decay of peoples. (1953/2000: 141)
It is in this month, as we
know, that the European war becomes a truly world war, as Germany – after some
two years of provocation – declares war on the U.S. in the wake of Pearl
Harbor. Also this month, on the orthodox view, a milestone occurs: Chelmno
begins its extermination process, with gas vans powered by diesel engines.
Evidently, then, genocide was more than in the air; it was on the ground
running. And Goebbels, in truth, does seem to ramp up his rhetoric; he makes
his first overt references to the deaths of Jews:
Dec 13, 1941 (II.2.498-499)
As concerns the Jewish
Question, the Führer is determined to make a clean sweep (reinen
Tisch – lit. ‘clean table’). He had prophesied to the Jews that if they
once again brought about a World War they would experience their own
destruction (Vernichtung). This was not just an empty phrase. The World
War is here, and the destruction of Jewry must be the necessary consequence.
This question must be seen without sentimentality. We are not here in order to
have sympathy with the Jews, rather we sympathize with our own German people.
If the German people have now once again sacrificed as many as 160,000 dead in
the Eastern campaign, then the authors of this bloody conflict must pay with
their lives (mit ihrem Leben bezahlen müssen)\.
Dec 14, 1941 (II.2.503)
The early curfew in Paris has
been abolished, but a plethora of Jews remain to be pushed out (abgeschoben)
of occupied France to the eastern region. In many cases this is equivalent to a
death sentence. The remaining Jews will think hard before stirring up trouble
or sabotage against the German troops. Meanwhile General von Stülpnagel can
conduct the execution of 100 Jews and communists. That will provide a very
plausible and psychologically-adept explanation for the Parisian population,
and will not fail to have an effect\.
If deportation is sometimes
the “equivalent of a death sentence,” and many will “pay with their lives,” we
are left wondering how, exactly, and in what numbers, they will die. I trust
that there is a clear difference between (a) many dying from disease,
exposure, lack of medical care, periodic shootings, etc, and (b) all dying
in a complex and systematic gassing operation. There is no doubt that
concentrating and deporting thousands or millions of people in wartime would
lead to many deaths. But this is not genocide. The next entry is telling:
Dec 18, 1941 (II.2.533-534)
I speak with the Führer
regarding the Jewish Question. He is determined to take consistent action and
not be deterred by bourgeois sentimentality. Above all, the Jews must leave the
Reich (aus…heraus). We discuss the possibilities for especially clearing
out (räumen) Berlin as quickly as possible. Objections are sure to be
raised here – from the Four Year Plan, from the Economics Ministry – because
about 13,000 Jews are employed in the armaments industry in Berlin; but, with
some good will, they can be replaced by Bolshevik prisoners of war. In any case
we will tackle this problem as soon as possible, especially when we have the
transport capacity to move this body of people. Berlin cannot count as
absolutely consolidated as long as Jews are living and working in the capital.
Besides, the bourgeois Schlappmeier has ever-new excuses to save the Jews.
Earlier it was Jewish money and influence; now it is the Jewish workers. German
intellectuals and elite have no anti-Jewish instinct at all. Their vigilance is
not sharp. It is therefore necessary that we solve this problem, since it is
likely that, if it remains unsolved, it will lead to the most devastating
consequences after we are gone. The Jews should all be pushed off (abgeschoben)
to the East. We are not very interested in what becomes of them after that.
They have wished this fate upon themselves, they have started the war, and they
must now pay the price\.
“We are not very interested in
what becomes of them after that.” Harsh and brutal, perhaps, but clearly far
less than genocide. The same thought was echoed by Hans Frank, in a memo of
December 16:
What is to happen to the Jews
[after evacuation]? … We have in the General Government an estimated 2.5
million Jews – perhaps with those closely related to Jews and what goes with
it, now 3.5 million Jews. We can’t shoot these 3.5 million Jews, we can’t
poison them…[15]
Obviously he and Goebbels, at
least, were unaware of any program of genocide.
Notes
[1] The first 6 or 7 years of
entries were every 2nd or 3rd day. But by 1930 he was rigorously recording his
thoughts daily. Until mid-1941 he wrote them himself; afterward he dictated the
entries, and they became considerably longer.
[2] Alfred Rosenberg was also
well-educated, having earned a PhD in engineering in 1917. But in spite of his
role as chief ideologist for the NSDAP, he was not nearly as influential in the
Nazi hierarchy as Goebbels was. For most of the war years Rosenberg served as
Reichsminister for the occupied Eastern territories.
[3] L. Lochner, in Goebbels
(1948: 25).
[4] Ibid., p. viii.
[5] I discount the Eichmann
recollection of Heydrich: “The Führer has ordered the physical extermination of
the Jews.” Virtually no one on either side of the Holocaust debate accepts
Eichmann’s trial testimony as truth.
[6] “What began in 1941 was a
process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any
agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive
measures. [These measures] were taken step by step, one step at a time. Thus
came about not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of
minds, a consensus – mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy.” New York
Newsday, Feb 23, 1983; Part II, p. 3.
[7] Corresponds to page 694 of
the (much-longer) Internet version of the book.
[8] One book notably lacking
in much citation of the diary is Browning’s The Origins of the Final Solution
(2004). This massive work, published four years after Kershaw’s comparable
book, should have made equally good use of the diaries. But one struggles in
vain to find more than a half-dozen quotations. This is revealing: Browning,
publishing in the U.S., clearly did not want to draw attention to those many
troublesome entries referring to deportations, evacuations, and the like.
Kershaw was at least honest enough to cite them, even as he was papering them
over.
[9] Obviously this is a
judgment call. There are many minor or inconsequential references to Jews,
Jewish media or propaganda, Bolshevik Jews, Jewish films, etc. By a rough
count, one finds 25-30 entries per volume that mention Jews (about one
reference every third day, on average). Thus of the 16 volumes that I cover
exhaustively, there are some 450 potentially-relevant entries.
[10] Other definitions include
“to ruin structure or condition”, “to neutralize”, “to defeat.”
[11] The diary entry of 6
February 1945 shows this very clearly. Goebbels is discussing the common goal
of Germany’s enemies, namely, “to destroy (vernichten) Germany and to eradicate
(auszurotten) the German people.” In neither case is he even faintly
contemplating the literal mass murder of the entire German population.
[12] There are other
threatening passages, including those referring to ‘liquidation’ and to the
Jews ‘paying with their lives.’ I address these in due course.
[13] “Units of native
collaborators had already played a significant role in the killing process. At
the end of 1941, the strength of these units had reached 33,000. By June 1942,
it was 165,000; by January 1943, 300,000. As Nebe rightly indicated, the task
of killing Russian Jewry with the 3,000 men of the Einsatzgruppen was ‘impossible’.”
[14] A related event occurred
in the Ukraine in the 1930s; this was known as the Holodomor, and was a
state-created famine that killed some 5 million people.
[15] As cited in Kershaw
(2000: 491).
Sources
· Browning, C., Path to Genocide,
Cambridge University Press, 1995.
· Buergenthal, T., A Lucky
Child, Profile Books, 2009.
· Dalton, T., Debating the
Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides,Theses and Dissertations Press, 2009.
· Goebbels, J., The Goebbels
Diaries: 1942-1943, L. Lochner, trans. and ed.Doubleday and Company, 1948.
· Goebbels, J., The Early
Goebbels Diaries: 1925-1926, O. Watson, trans.H. Heiber, ed.Praeger, 1962.
· Goebbels, J., Final Entries
1945: The Diaries of Joseph Goebbels, R. Barry, trans.H. Trevor-Roper,
ed.Putnam, 1978.
· Goebbels, J., Die Tagebücher
von Joseph Goebbels, E. Fröhlich, ed.K. G. Saur Verlag, 1987-2006.
· Hilberg, R., The
Destruction of the European Jews, Yale University Press, 2003.
· Hitler, A., Hitler’s Table
Talk: 1941-1944, Enigma, 1953/2000.
· Irving, D., Goebbels:
Mastermind of the Third Reich, Focal Point Press, 1996.
· Kershaw, I., Hitler
1936-1945: Nemesis, W. W. Norton, 2000.
· Kershaw, I., Hitler, the
Germans, and the Final Solution, Yale University Press, 2008.
