02.11.2013 Views

Sobibor - Holocaust Propaganda And Reality - Unity of Nobility ...

Sobibor - Holocaust Propaganda And Reality - Unity of Nobility ...

Sobibor - Holocaust Propaganda And Reality - Unity of Nobility ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

220 J. GRAF, T. KUES, C. MATTOGNO, SOBIBÓR<br />

des Hautes Etudes en sciences sociales and the Sorbonne, was held in<br />

Paris from 29 June through 2 July 1982. The proceedings were published<br />

in 1985 in a volume <strong>of</strong> the same name. 635<br />

On that occasion, Uwe Dietrich Adam analyzed the National Socialist<br />

policy on the subject <strong>of</strong> the Jews between September <strong>of</strong> 1939 and<br />

June <strong>of</strong> 1941, a period which “can be regarded as being the descent towards<br />

the ‘final solution.’” He stressed immediately, however, that: 636<br />

“[…] the precise date at which this ‘final solution’ was ordered<br />

constitutes a problem not yet resolved for German and for world history.”<br />

On the subject <strong>of</strong> the origins <strong>of</strong> the alleged genocide <strong>of</strong> the Jews,<br />

Adam took a decided stand against the radical intentionalist thesis supported<br />

by Eberhard Jäckel, stating that he “agreed with the vast majority<br />

<strong>of</strong> historians in thinking that the order to liquidate the Jews on the German<br />

territory was never given, not even planned, in any way whatsoever,<br />

prior to the beginning <strong>of</strong> the war.” 636 Given that “no written trace <strong>of</strong><br />

this order has ever been found” and that it is highly unlikely that it will<br />

be found in the future, Adam stated that: 637<br />

“[…] it becomes the task <strong>of</strong> the historian to date it in the most<br />

precise manner possible, using [the tool <strong>of</strong>] interpretation. Methods<br />

and hypotheses in this respect are limitless, we face very diverse<br />

opinions. Some people see the conception <strong>of</strong> the ‘final solution’ as<br />

having taken place at the time <strong>of</strong> Landsberg (Jäckel, Dawidowicz);<br />

another dates it to March <strong>of</strong> 1941 (Krausnick) or July <strong>of</strong> 1941 (Hilberg,<br />

Browning), still others to the fall <strong>of</strong> 1941 (Adam, Broszat).<br />

Neither the laws nor the measures taken by the Third Reich against<br />

the Jews allow us to fix a date for the issuance <strong>of</strong> the order. However,<br />

for those who are conversant with the institutional structure <strong>of</strong><br />

the Third Reich after the beginning <strong>of</strong> the war, each measure taken<br />

reduces the possibilities <strong>of</strong> interpretation and allows, in the end, to<br />

eliminate certain dates or to confirm others with some degree <strong>of</strong> certainty.”<br />

(Emph. added)<br />

At the outbreak <strong>of</strong> the war the Jewish question, as it had been formulated<br />

in the Party program and defined by the early protagonists <strong>of</strong> race<br />

legislation, had been resolved; Adam: 638<br />

635<br />

636<br />

637<br />

638<br />

Colloque de l’École des Hautes Études en sciences socials, L’Allemagne nazie et le<br />

génocide juif, Gallimard, Paris, 1985.<br />

Ibid., p. 177.<br />

Ibid., pp. 177f.<br />

Ibid., p. 179.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!