Polish concentration camps...

Remove all ads!

Watching the news on the TV, I've just heard about Baroness Ludford's "Polish concentration camps" (the exact translation was "Polish death camps"). Only because of the protest of Polish EU Parliament members (it was for a resolution of the European Parliament) has the misfortunate wording been changed. Someone demanded that it should be changed to "German concentration camps", to which the Baroness replied that it would be a dangerous focus on the national aspect of the problem and chose to call it "Nazi camps".

Now, I'm not saying that "Nazi camps" is bad, but how can "German camps" be too national, if "Polish camps" were not?

Back to school, Baroness. Recommended focus: history and basic logic.

Makes me wonder why the New York lawyers famous for trying to sue Poland in US courts haven't demanded damages for Auschwitz from the Polish government yet. Or maybe they have... can't be sure any longer.

We already had to make a diplomatic intervention in Australia when they wrote in history books that the camps were Polish, suggesting it was Poles who did that. See the letter issued by the President of the Polish Community Council in Australia in the matter: http://www.polish.org.au/sbs_reply_ryg.htm .

This is especially tragic because not only did Poles NOT build or run the camps, but also many of the Jewish people who were taken there were Poles as well as they were Jews, and many ethnically Polish people went there, too, and now we're being blamed for the camps. It's perfectly recognised that one shouldn't put the blame on Germans, but say "the Nazi" instead (which is a good thing) because not all Germans followed the Nazi vision of the world, but somehow "Polish death camps" are OK, even though they weren't made or run by Poles.

It's criminal here to deny that Holocaust took place. Perhaps I should talk to an MP and ask him to talk to his party colleagues about enhancing that law a bit. Sooner or later, some of those people will come to Poland or a country with which we have a treaty about extradition. As if it weren't already slander. And yes, slandering a country can be prosecuted on the principle of reciprocation. Too bad some of the people who repeat those lies have diplomatic immunity. In a court, they would at least have to admit ignorance and apologise in order to escape punishment.

Why don't we hear or read about, let's say, French camps? Everyone will say, because it was the Nazi and not the French. Correct. Just wonder why it doesn't apply to Poland equally.

Example: a site entitled "Map of Polish Death Camps" as a part of "Teacher's Guide to Holocaust" from a real university (University of Florida). I have already e-mailed the project leader.

Additional reading:

A comment on auschwitz.org (the official site of the Auschwitz museum): http://www.auschwitz.org.pl/html/eng/aktualnosci/news_big.php?id=669

A press release from the Polish Embassy in Canada: http://www.polishembassy.ca/news_details.asp?nid=199

[ January 25, 2005, 20:20: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

Well I kind of understand and accept them being called Polish deathcamps because if I don't remember all incorrectly all of the big death camps were in poland with gas chambers and all. Calling them German deathcamps would also be correct though and I don't see anything wrong with it but when I think of Polish deathcamps I kind of think it as deathcamps for poles as a great deal of those who died in the holocaust were Poles.

I'm not very fond of definitions and do not tend to get too attached to them. Anyway nazi camps suit fine and there's definently a double standard in claiming that "German deathcamps" is wrong but "Polish deathcamps" is right. I'm sure most of us who have not been living in a barrel for the last 100 years know that Poles did not build nor run the camps.

 

Why not call them nazi death camps in Poland? There were camps all over the place, from France to Czechoslovakia and Russia. The more brutal ones tended to be in the east though.

 

Hm. I dont see a double standard. For the simple reason that "polish death camp" merely describes the geographical location of the KZ, but does not refer to the nation responsible for this madness, whereas "german death camp" does. One must have dwelled somewhere behind Titan to be ignorant of that.
As far as I am concerned call it Nazi or german death camp. Not much of a distinction to many anyway... So there.

And I dont understand what all the racket in Poland and its embassies is about, when its clear to all that Poland is not accused of having had a part in killing the jewish people, but was merely one of the place where it happened.
Or is there any doubt about that, chevy?

 

The problem is that some people actually believe that phrases like "Polish death camps" actually describe camps run by Poles, implying collaboration of some kind or at least a blind eye. There's a difference between "Polish" and "in Poland". The former implies some kind of belonging. Only the latter is purely locative (as in, used to denote location).

I remember a Jewish person who wouldn't talk to me because the camps were built in Poland.

 

How to change history?
1. Change the wording.
2. Suggest different interpretation of the original phrase.
3. Put it forward and start pushing it.
4. After you pushed it just enough, it will become historical canon.
5. After it becomes historical canon, wipe the traces pointing to actual history.
6. Change the oppressors into the victims.
Voila! Instant history!

Examples? Civil War in the USA. Nowadays, most people assume it was a war that broke out because the North was opposed to slavery in the South. No word of slaves in the Union, no word of secession because of unfair treatment of southern states, now word of the fact that the abolition happened when the Civil War was already being waged for a long time. President Abe Lincoln? A noble man, vehemently opposing evil, but ruthlessly murdered when he was enjoying a play in the theatre.

That's the problem. The absolute majority of the people in the world has absolutely no experience of WWII: no personal experience, no familial experience, not even actual and fair research into the matter. Polish Death Camps? Well, if Poles built Death Camps, it was damn right of England and France not to assist them even if they were allies.

Beyond that, one very important thing:

Ah, but wasn't Poland a province of the Third Reich for the major part of the war? If it was, it should officially be called "German Death Camps," as they were -- located in Germany (Third Reich) and run by Germans (Nazis).

 

First of all - I'm from Poland, and it was very nice for me to read above posts. Thanks chev for this topic !

Well, the biggest problem with naming is "political correctness" - sadly dominating in Europe. To put it simple : "Nazi camps" sounds too harsh for most politicians, and choosing between "German camps" or "Polish camps"...It has nothing to do with logic or history. Which country will have the upper hand in UE parliament will have it its own way. Let's guess who'll win....

Sorry for any inconvenience, but ,obviously, English is not my native language......

 

No, witaj, Arendil...
We hope you'll find a good home here on SP.

BTW:
chev's right. The adjective 'Polish,' in its primary meaning, means 'having to do with Poland.'
"Polish people" does not necessarily denote people living in Poland, and certainly not all the people that live in Poland, either. Locative case in English, in almost every instance, appears as a prepositional phrase postmodification of the noun phrase. 'In Poland,' is a good example of that rule. Therefore, since there exists a locative case phrase, using adjective to denote the location is:
-- gramatically incorrect;
-- not ambiguous -- the first, and only, assumption it creates (or should create, in an educated individual) is the fact that the "death camps" in the phrase "Polish death camps" were actually to do with the Polish. Ie. estabilished, ran, and/or supported by the Poles. This may be in Polish territory, but not necessarily.

[ January 26, 2005, 03:11: Message edited by: toughluck ]

 

I think the Poles should take it a little calmly. The Poles were not very fond of the German occupation but dont pretend that the Polish people were overly worried about what happened to the jews, the gypsies and the fags. We like to blame the Nazis and well we should, but we should always keep in mind that in that no one liked the jews, gypsies and the fags. The nazi treatment of them was not something other countries thought to be anything bad until after the war when they saw to what extension it had been fulfilled. You could probably easily and democratically have pushed through legislation in any European nation during the 30's about putting jews, gypsies, fags and other people who are different in camps.

 

What about Ireland? They did not have 'death camps' but they (and more specifically the IRA) openly supported the Nazi regime which you could say is worse.

 

This all sounds very outlandish.
As if there are people trying to blame Holocaust on Poland, by making details a bit... blurry.
Well, perhaps there are. I havent heard a single thing about it though.

I am honestly curious now: What is their purpose for doing that? Who are these people? The oppressors who want to look like victims, as toughluck suggests?! While I can understand chev's fear of misinterpretation I find this sentiment to be outrageous, and too silly to really care about it at the same time.

Before yesterday I havent given the entire business much thought. This thread, however, piqued my interest. A quick search and short sifting through the results changed that. I found it very enlightening.
Now its understandable why Poland is so very sensitive on this topic. Jedwabne anyone?
here
here

With a past like that I, too, would be very careful of phrasings. Anyone who can bring himself to care for details will know how to use a search engine to obtain more infos on anti-semitism in Poland - nowadays and during the occupation. Oh, and the role the Catholic Church has in it.
chevalier, perhaps that jewish person of yours wasnt prepared to speak to you for far more dire reasons than the simple location of those german death camps (what a funny notion)?

 

Time for a ramble...

It has to be said I've never even considered that Poland had anything to do with the death camps other than geographical location. I would find it incomprehensible to think that anyone of my generation (or older ones) in Britain might think otherwise. We are rather known for banging on about the war, (a fact frequently criticized by German politicians) and that usually includes the fact that Hitler fought against and invaded Poland.

English Grammar was a badly taught subject in my school days, but Toughluck’s statement about it being "in [country]" in almost every instance for location is misleading. Take The English weather and The English countryside as cases in point. I believe the difference actually lies with whether something is a natural or manmade feature and therefore where ownership/responsibility lies – with geography or nation.

Therefore in this case, because the camps are of human construction rather than a natural feature the implication of ownership is made to the Polish people - and therefore very wrong. Back to school Sarah indeed, but I would recommend English Grammar. That said, I doubt her intentions were to implicate the Polish people in being responsible for the Nazi concentration camps.

I would also challenge Toughlucks statement of assumptions that might be made by the educated on the grounds that properly educated people should actually know their history! (OK, maybe only localised history, non-Europeans not involved in WW2 might make the wrong assumption)

 

Well actually usually when I've heard people talking about death camps they meant the big ones in Poland (Treblinka, Auswitsch, Sobibor, Belzek with gas chambers and with the only purpose to kill. The other camps did not have gas chambers and were mainly working camps or concentration camps, but this is once again matters of playing with definitions.

Well I'm sure when you look on the casualty numbers of the war and find Poland on the top in civilian casualties you can imagine that all those killed were not jews, gupsies or fags. A lot of normal Poles died as well.

 

Morgoroth -- in fact, it has been argued that more Poles died in the war (both in KZ and on the battlefield) than Jews -- in all countries combined. And I wouldn't be surprised if that was actually the case.

Hopefully... Hopefully... However, the views on history of another continents might very well be blurry at best. You've seen the 'Civil War' argument I've posted. This is the typical outlook on it as seen by an average, even educated, individual. Heck, that is, or at least was, the viewpoint of my friends (the ones that study English philology on the same year as me). Therefore, it is very important that wording does not change.

English weather and countryside. Well yes, but they are talking about abstract concepts. "English weather" is something that is seen as a concept -- rainy, lukewarm. Ie. climate of England. Furthermore, you'd not ask "What's the English weather today," (it doesn't change) but rather "What's the weather in England today." Same goes for countryside.

Case in point: Mrs. Erika Steinbach. A great example. She would LOVE it if it was possible to put Germans as victims of Poles in WW2. For those that do not know it -- she leads the movement that wants to receive reparations from the Polish government for the German territories taken after the war. If she would be able to victimise the Germans, and put Poles as oppressors siding with Nazis, she would be able to push anything.
Furthermore, what is so outrageous or silly? Two hundred years from now, there would be huge change. One flake of snow rushes an avalanche. Change the subtle wording here, change some fact there, and you create instant history. Case in point? Crusades -- for most people before 'enlightenment' they meant simply military campaigns against the Arabs. Sack of Constantinople? An unfortunate fact, caused by artless rabble who were in the war for profit. Then enlightenment happened and the 'learned' wanted to 'shed light on the subject.' Just to attack the Church, they twisted some facts, said that Arabs were peace-loving and that sack of Constantinople occured because the clergymen (who, undoubtedly, wanted to grow fat in profits, too) preached sermons on how those that will participate will receive absolution. Absurd? To most people it will be seen as such. Those that receive a textbook in school, however, will not look for the truth, and take that for granted.
War always compromises morals on both sides. Yet the American Rebels, and then the Union soldiers are seen as idolised and idealised heroes, whilst the other side is viewed with scorn and hate for the wretches they were.

 

Morgoroth, I never said that Poles didnt die, I just said that one of the few things the Nazis did in Poland which didnt greatly antagonize the Poles was the killing of the jews, gypsies and fags.

 

Well, compared to killing heterosexual, "normal" Poles, maybe it was viewed as less bad. There were probably some anti-Semites and racists in Poland that even supported it, but I think they were a small minority, and the majority did not like the fact that people were hauled off and killed just for being of different ethnic group or homosexuals. At the very least because of the easy pretext it provided for getting your gluteus maximus in one of the death camps either if someone in the occupation forces does not like you

 

toughluck. Bringing Steinbach into this is sort of not so great. Or better: Its only a great example of polish paranoia and a monument how ****ed up your idea of Germans is over there.

The second she would try to capitalize in any shape or form on the death of the polish jews would be the very second she would lose all support of the Germans. No one would accept it. No one would even come up with such an odd idea. Steinbach is 'the enemy' for the Poles, I know. And you have just made it all too clear. Sorry, but this is laughable.

Holocaust isnt something we perceive as a tool to use to our advantage. The respect for the victims forbids it. The nonsense of it all makes me wonder why I even respond. I guess I will exit this charade now.

Learned a lesson though: (Some) Poles think the Germans want to make them the force that drove Holocaust. Fascinating.

 

No, that's not correct. The perception of Ms Steinbach's activity is indeed that she twists things around a bit and for some people who don't have anything better to do, she probably is the enemy and the chief concern in this sad sad world, but the problem is about the lands Poland got back on the West after WWII in the Potschdam treaty and about all associated compensation claims. She remembers those lands were German before WWII, but won't remember they were Polish even before (in some cases up to the time when the Polish state formed) that and for a much longer period of time. Not like I would like to discuss territorial claims in this thread.

And I wouldn't bet a penny on how ****ed up your ideas of Poles is over there.

That's correct, at least for the former part. As joacqin said, you would pass a segregation bill democratically in just about any country in pre-WWII Europe.

We lost almost half the nation.

Well, but even in "the English weather" or "the English countryside", the actual purpose of the expression is connected with belonging, to denote that that weather or countryisde belongs there. As you say, something man-made wouldn't probably qualify, but that's because it would naturally be interpreted as a part of the culture rather than the land per se, as in "the English factories".

In this case, phrases uttered by people being televised or later quoted in the press include "Polish camps where jews were massively being exterminated" (Corriere della Sera), "the Russian army liberated the Polish concentration camp in Auschwitz" (La Repubblica), "Half again a million of people was sent to death in Polish camps" (The Sydney Herald).

Grown and educated people are likely to notice that something is wrong in those phrases, but come on... how much does an average uneducated citizen know about history to challenge the obvious interpretation of the statements? And it's not like modern teenagers care a lot about history and history classes. I think one could brainwash kids even in Polish schools if he really tried.

That's incorrect. It was the Polish government's (of the legal government, not the communist traitor scum recognised as the Polish government by the allied powers shortly after the was) agents who risked their lives to bring the news of the Holocaust but were not believed, such as Jan Nowak-Jezioranski, the head of Free Europe's Polish section, who died a couple of days ago.

The percentage of people who helped Jews in Poland(or tried to and died as a result) was greater than in any other country, which is in fact recognised by the more serious Jewish organisations, especially those actually related with the state of Israel. Don't know about Gypsies, but it's not like we had a lot of them, and same for homosexuals. I've never heard of any Polish citizen being put in a camp for being homosexual.

There's a fine line between not liking a group a lot and tolerating or effecting mass extermination of it. I could give you a number of reasons for social tension and conflicts between the Poles and some of the minorities in the pre-WW2 times, where a negative sentiment would be expected. But, as a said, there's a long road from a slight generalised negative sentiment resulting from bad experience, to hatred and one of such a strength as to build camps.

The very same article says:

"The fact that Poles were murdering is undeniable," historian Szarota said. "But to understand Jedwabne we would have to know whether the murder was done spontaneously by the local residents with the agreement of the Nazi soldiers, or whether it was done by scum instigated by Germans who had sent a police battalion to clean the town of Jews."

Another troubling question: Why did it happen in Jedwabne, where there is no prior evidence of anti-Semitism or civic unrest?

Until Hitler declared war on the Soviet Union, the Soviets controlled eastern Poland. Many Polish Jews felt safer under the Soviets than under the Nazis, and some have suggested the Jedwabne villagers acted out of revenge for what they saw as Jewish complicity with the Soviets.

Not like I approve of revenge or that I believe being a tool of murder is a good thing, but there is doubt raised even by that article alone, let alone the various other accounts of those events and conclusions from the investigation. It would be good to include some foreign experts in the investigation and Jewish experts as well, so that it would be unquestionnably impartial. And what they discover has a place in history books and should be taught in schools properly. Last time I heard, though, the relevant Jewish religious authorities refused to allow the examination of the bodies in question. The reasons are understandable, but one can't take people's word on events that are actually being explained. Anyway, it was a bloody murder and I want all the surviving perpetrators to be tried and properly exposed so that they no longer pass for law-abiding citizens and good Christians.

Go ahead and read more on the internet, although the reliability of some of those accounts is questionnable. For each such extreme account, you will find equally extreme one to contradict it.

Even if the extreme version confirmed (which is doubtful), it still wouldn't be "a past like that". Regarding the past, here's something I wrote once:

While it is true that the relations between the Polish and the Jewish people of the land were not always perfect before the establishment of the Nazi camps, it must be pointed out that the Kingdom of Poland was the country to which persecuted Jews flocked from all European countries that expelled them or imposed discriminating laws strict beyond the human endurance since the late mediaeval period.

In Poland, Jews were not only received but welcomed and accorded special priviliges by the Polish kings and princes to facilitate the settling down and establishment of businesses. They were the only group entitled to become freeholders outside city grounds, while locals were only able to hold land from the nobility.

Living in separate quarters of cities was a result of royal laws according a large degree of autonomy to the Jewish communities allowed their own administration and jurisdiction in all internal matters. On the level of the whole state, an autonomous Jewish parliament existed. For the Jewish communities, it was of their own choosing to stand apart from the local Christian populace, unlike the other minorities which gradually intermingled, even though, by an act of the Polish parliament, Jews were also ennobled on embracing the Christian faith. There was a number of Jewish families ennobled without converting to Christianity, especially in the Eastern lands of the Polish state.

Minorities included ethnicities from all over Europe, representing a great number of diverse ethnic groups, nationalities and religions, among those equally Protestants expelled from Catholic countries and Catholics expelled from Protestant countries, Orthodox and Armenian Christians, Jews and even Muslims. Virtually all religious minorities persecuted in Europe were hospitably received, except perhaps for anarchistic antitrinitarians. Not only refugees, however, would seek shelter in Poland, but settlers from all over Europe were invited or arriving without invitation and found a new home in the Polish state including the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Ruthenian duchies in union with the Kingdom of Poland and under the same ruler. All those minorities coexisted in piece and good relations with the ethnic Poles, contributing to the greatness of the state with which they felt equally affiliated and which they called their homeland. Xenophobic incidents, if several were recorded, were far less frequent than in other European countries, while the level of autonomy and self-government was far broader.

Yes, you will probably find a lot of revelations on the bad, bad relations between Polish and Jewish communities in the Eastern regions of the Polish state in the pre-WW2 period. However, much of that is exaggerated and most deals with tensions and sentiments and those require two sides to participate, especially if it leads to a conflict. I could give you reasons for Jewish people to dislike the local Polish community, and I could give you reasons for the local Polish community to dislike the local Jewish community. Brutal conflicts, however, were not as frequent as some people would have us believe. In fact, against the Nazi, Poles and Jews would often fight arm in arm. The Nazi aggression united them rather than parted. In the Eastern lands, the situation was different under the Soviet occupation, with Soviets following the divide et impera rule, using minorities to thwart the majority. Such as they rallied the Jewish minorities against the Polish majority in the Eastern Polish lands, they rallied the Polish minority in Lithuania or Belarus against their own majorities. It's not like I'm going to be picky, but a great share of the self-proclaimed commie authorities coming alongside the Red Army
was Jewish in origin and what the commies did to the "reactionists" - landed gentry, officials, intelligentsia, military officers and soldiers (and their number went in thousands) - is a known fact, and some of those events were quite massive. Again, clashes between nationalities don't make an excuse for plain killing - not even a war does. It's already abhorrent that Polish villagers did that with their own hands, although the role of the occupation force in that is yet to be determined. If the villagers were not mere tools, the crime is even greater and there's no denying of that. However, it still doesn't validate the theory of Poles sucking anti-sentimitism along with mother's milk, as some people put it, nor even the supposed rampant militant anti-semitism in the pre-WWII period, which are exaggerated in the very least and I doubt the exaggeration is in all such cases accidental.

 

I'll throw one more thing into the discussion:
Poland was the only country, under occupation by Third Reich, in which there was capital punishment for helping Jews. In all other countries (even in Germany itself), helping them would land a fine or incarceration. But in Poland -- death. But Poles still helped Jews regardless. It is believed that more Jews were saved in Poland than any other country.