Holocaust Supremacism Slights Poles Example Steinlauf

Bondage to the Dead, by Michael C. Steinlauf. 1997

Holocaustianity: The Mystification of the Holocaust Taken to Egregious Extremes. Polokaust Openly Belittled

This book has a few good points, and then rapidly goes downhill.

RECIPROCITY OF PREJUDICES

Michael C. Steinlauf recognizes the mutuality of Polish-Jewish prejudices: “For the Jew, both peasant and noble, each in his own way, manifested those characteristics of brutality, ignorance, and loutishness that were the antithesis of the Jewish ethos; they were, in a word, goyim (gentiles).”(p. 6). He realizes the fact that the 1918-era and 1945-era pogroms occurred within the context of generalized violence (p. 19, 45).

WHY PRE-WWII POLAND DISCRIMINATED AGAINST JEWS

Remembering that Polish Jews constituted only 10% of the prewar general population, Steinlauf is rather candid about prewar Jewish economic dominance:”Jews were vastly overrepresented in commerce and in the professions. In 1921, more than 60 percent of those in commerce were Jews; in 1931, more than half the doctors in private practice and one-third of the lawyers were Jews. Although foreign investment and state-run enterprises had begun to displace Jewish-owned industry, on the eve of World War II Jewish firms still employed more than 40 percent of the Polish labor force, while certain industries, textiles and food most notably, were predominantly in Jewish hands.”(p. 16).

AMERICAN AND BRITISH JEWS INDIFFERENT TO THE HOLOCAUST

Steinlauf faults: “…American and British Jews, who found denouncing Polish anti-Semitism easier than criticizing their own governments’ inaction in saving Jews.”(p. 37).

DO NOT MINIMIZE GERMAN-OCCUPATION SURVIVING FUGITIVE JEWS TO ONLY 40,000-60,000

To his credit, author Steinlauf admits that there is no way of even estimating how many Polish Jews survived the Holocaust (p. 46). So much for the nonsense of Jan Grabowski and company.

DO NOT ASSUME THAT POLISH RESCUER SECRECY WAS MOTIVATED BY (WHAT ELSE?) ANTI-SEMITISM

Steinlauf (p. 129) cites an example of postwar Polish reluctance to acknowledge the hiding of Jews as being motivated by fear of being robbed of the suspected Jewish wealth left behind. This contradicts the likes of neo-Stalinist Jan T. Gross, who would have us believe that such secrecy stemmed from fear of the anti-Semitic disapproval of neighbors.

—–

The remainder of the book is frankly abysmal. For example:

OPENLY MINIMIZING THE SCALE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SUFFERINGS OF THE POLES

Victimhood competition is alive and well. In his transparent attempt to belittle the POLOKAUST, Steinlauf attacks various historians, notably Richard C. Lukas and Norman Davies, for “blurring” the deaths of Poles and Jews (p. 105, 153). This is not surprising because, as so many others before him, Steinlauf tries to exalt the deaths of Jews above that of all others, using the time-worn but fallacious “Not all of the Victims of the Nazis were Jews, but all Jews were victims of the Nazis” argument. To begin with, nearly 2/3rds of the world’s Jews were out of Germany’s reach and, short of literally conquering the world, neither Hitler nor his successors could possible have killed all the world’s Jews. (In contrast, nearly all ethnic Poles were at Germany’s complete and permanent mercy in the event of a German victory). Moreover, far from all accessible Jews were killed. Finland’s (Germany’s ally) Jews were never molested, and Bulgaria’s Jews were only pursued halfheartedly. The neutrality of Switzerland and Sweden was consistently respected despite their Jewish populations (notably the famous escaped Danish Jews sheltered by the latter). Known Jewish Allied POWs were spared. Thousands of European Jews were used by Germany for forced labor and, with some exceptions, were not killed in the latest days of the war. As for permanent acceptance of known Jews by the Nazis, thousands of full-blooded German Jews were arbitrarily declared Aryans, and thereby spared (the SCHUTZJUDEN).

Michael C. Steinlauf cites figures that degrade the number of Poles killed by Germans from 3 million to 2 million (p. 152) without mentioning the fact that it could also be as high as 4.4 million [See Materski POLSKA 1939-1945].

Steinlauf continues to belittle the POLOKAUST. He now tries to discount the eventual extermination of Poles by claiming that Poles were only to be resettled. But everyone knows that “resettlement” is a euphemism for extermination. In fact, Jews were supposed to only undergo “resettlement”. Finally, Hitler, Himmler, and others had repeatedly stated that all Poles must be destroyed, not merely relocated. Finally, Steinlauf should read up on GENERALPLAN OST before making his ignorant statements.

THOSE DANGEROUS CATHOLIC NUNS

Steinlauf clearly takes the contra side in the Carmelite Convent controversy, as if the fact that Jews were 90% of the victims at Auschwitz entitles them to dictate terms to all others. [Imagine an airplane crash in which 90% of the victims were Christians, and so Christians began to dictate to others that non-Christians have no rights of ceremonies at the crash site. How well would that fly? (Pardon the pun).

Disappointingly, Steinlauf takes the low road of blaming Christianity for the Holocaust, even though Nazism had been a racist, secularist, pan-German ideology that had nothing to do with Christianity, and historical Jewish attitudes towards Christians had been no less negative than historical Christian attitudes towards Jews. Finally, exterminationist philosophies originated not with Christianity but with the Jacobins of the French Revolution.

THE “WHO” OF PROPERTY ACQUISITION

For all his fantastic thesis (see ensuing paragraphs) Steinlauf at least puts Polish post-Jewish property acquisitions in proper perspective: “While the Germans certainly took the lion’s share of factories, warehouses, luxury residences, fancy furniture and clothing, the leftovers went to Poles.”(p. 31).

THE HOLOCAUST ELEVATED TO A VIRTUAL RELIGION: HOLOCAUSTIANITY

Michael C. Steinlauf quibbles with semantics (guilt vs. responsibility). The reader may be amazed to learn that Steinlauf (pp. 57-61, 114-117) actually believes that Poles are responsible in a sense for Jewish deaths, not for having caused them, but for having witnessed them! This is a MYSTIFICATION OF THE HOLOCAUST with a vengeance!

Of course, Steinlauf’s thinking is entirely one-sided. He fails to inform the reader if those Jews (especially those who did not like Poles) who witnessed the death of Poles in the hands of the Germans are therefore responsible in some way for the Poles’ deaths. Instead, Steinlauf (following Jan Blonski, and more recently Jan T. Gross) take the MYSTIFICATION OF THE HOLOCAUST [MYSTIFIKACJA HOLOCAUSTU] thinking to new levels of absurdity by “psychoanalyzing” the Poles. As if Jews were higher beings of some sort, anyone witnessing their deaths or acquiring post-Jewish properties is now supposed to be ipso facto responsible for their deaths, and/or uniquely and permanently traumatized. The fact that Poles generally do not think this way is only proof that they are engaging in denial and repression. How convenient! Moreover, any movement of modern Poles towards Judeocentric thinking is therefore hailed as a Polish overcoming of the foregoing psychological defenses.

ARE JEWS SUPPOSED TO BE MADE OF BETTER CLAY THAN EVERYBODY ELSE?

Without intending to, Blonski, Steinlauf, and Gross are playing along with one of the worst caricatures of Jews. According to this caricature, Jews think themselves superior to the GOYIM, even to the point of thinking of the GOYIM as virtual animals. On this basis, the murder of a Jew is a profound event, while the murder of a Pole is no more significant than the death of a horse. Why do Blonski, Steinlauf, and Gross tacitly engage in this kind of repulsive, frankly quasi-racist Jewish supremacist thinking, and moreover expect to be treated seriously.