Talk:History of the Jews in Latvia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Latvia, a WikiProject related to Latvia.
Latvia Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of the Jews in Latvia article.
Article policies

[edit] About this page

Need some help Wikifying this article!

Where did you get his material? -Will Beback 07:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
  • This article was reproduced, with permission of the publisher, from the forthcoming Encyclopaedia Judaica, Second Edition.

[edit] Holocaust

A couple of points: the statement that the Aizsargi participated in the Holocaust has been repeated and reiterated and is a stock feature of accounts of this horrible period. But there is a problem with it: the Aizsargi as an organization did not exist at this time.

The Soviets had identified it, no doubt correctly, as a hostile element, and they wasted no time in abolishing it. The high-ranking officers in this paramilitary organization were among the deportees to remote parts of the USSR. When the Nazis replaced the Soviets as the occupying power, they did not permit any country-wide organization other than those that they themselves invented, and certainly the last thing they would have tolerated was an armed, trained group such as the Aizsargi. What they did was to organize so-called "self-defense" units, in part imitating the organizational structure of the Aizsargi and including some former Aizsargi among their members. And of these "self-defense" groups, some were indeed used in actions against Jews--mostly arresting and transporting them but in some cases directly participating in the murder of Jews. But the Aizsargi as such did not exist; there were former members, but no command structure, no organizational structure, nothing of the sort. That some individual former Aizsargi committed crimes during the Holocaust is true; that the Aizsargi as such did so is misleading assertion.

The Pērkonkrusts party, which had been illegal in independent Latvia, is another story. It was small and powerless, but not without a baleful influence in some circles, and since it was viciously anti-Semitic the Nazis thought that it might be useful and allowed it to operated in return for cooperation. The Pērkonkrustieši turned out a few anti-Semitic pamphlets in 1941, but the honeymoon was short-lived--the inherent incompatibility between German and Latvian nationalism, even if the latter came in a fascist form as was the case with the Pērkonkrustieši. So before long the Nazis in their turn outlawed the Pērkonkrustiesi, who never met a government that could tolerated them. That the leaders of the infamous Arājs Commando (and the two similar groups that operated only locally and were disbanded early) were members of Pērkonkrusts is simply not so, no matter how often it is repeated. It is hard to think of anything good to say of this party, but they were not at all as important in the Holocaust as the stereotype account depicts them.

This sort of thing is simply recycled, quoted and quoted from quotations ad infinitem. What we need is articles that are based on the work of Margers Vestermanis, Andrievs Ezergailis, and the other historians who at last are giving us serious, source-based histories of the Holocaust in Latvia. Stephen.r 03:59, 17 March 2007 (UTC) (Is that how I'm supposed to sign?)

I have to agree. Latvian "fascist" coup? The fascist party was outlawed and their leader thrown in jail! Ulmanis was not inimical to the Jews--the authoritarian actions which applied to all politically oriented movements and parties at the time are incorrectly portrayed here as focused on Jews. Most notably missing: as soon as the Soviets occupied Latvia, Stalin deported the Jewish merchant class by the thousands to their deaths in Siberia. There is no mention of this--instead, we have the parroting of Soviet propaganda that the Latvians were Fascists (aka Nazis). As mentioned by Stephen.r, the Latvian extremists/fascists-and this is not the Ulmanis government--were anti-everyone (especially the Germans and the Nazis who were just more Germans). It's tragic that this sort of shallow and misrepresentative material is appearing in an encyclopedia on Judaica. —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 23:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Daugavas Vanagi, Who are They? et al.

Soviet and Nazi lies have conspired to create the image that Latvians were even more efficient than the Nazis in their eagerness to eliminate Jews. I have obtained a copy of Ezergailis' book on the Holocaust in Latvia--notably, published in conjunction with the U.S. Holocaust Museum. I'll try and remember to put it in as reference, and I will check the other references to see what they are. I can't believe I missed D.V. Who are They? it in the citations list! —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 13:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Do we know if D.V. Who are They? is listed as a source by the Encyclopedia Judaica? I can't justify $1,400+ to buy the "plain bond" hard copy (currently published second edition) or $300+ for the CDROM just to satisfy my curiosity ($100-$150 no more than once a year is my upper limit!) —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 14:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Sadly, it would not surprise me if this were the case. Respectable Holocaust scholars like Gertrude Schneider and David Cesarani list it in their bibliographies, the latter even claims that "much of the material it presents has been verified independently"(!) (Justice Delayed, 2000, p. 304). — Zalktis 15:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, yes, verified in that, for example, Celmiņš was a Latvian fascist. Or that Tēvija was the main Latvian paper (Nazi controlled during their occupation, represented as Latvian). But nothing to do with DV or what the Soviets called Latvia's "fascist" government which threw Celmiņš in jail for three years for...being a facist! (Is there an inconsistency here?) After I finish up my first big re-publishing project, dealing with this Soviet trash is going to be next big project on the list. I don't see anything coming out of Latvia. sigh —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 02:02, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Not so. Ezergailis's latest book (Andrew Ezergailis, Nazi/Soviet disinformation about the Holocaust in Nazi-occupied Latvia: "Daugavas vanagi—who are they?" revisited: E. Avotins, J. Dzirkalis, V. Petersons; Riga: Latvijas 50 gadu okupacijas muzeja fonds, 2005; ISBN 9984961362) is a thoroughgoing deconstruction of DV Who Are They, with regards to both factual content and propagandistic intent. In your area, Pēters, NYPL has a copy. — Zalktis 07:03, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Probably time to spring for Ezergailis' book, which I am aware of. I should have been a bit more clear on my comment, which is that I don't see the Latvian government taking the offensive against Soviet propaganda which--through its endless repetition--is still accepted as fact even by otherwise reputable scholars. Pronouncements that those who matter "already know" are a poor substitute for making sure that even those who don't matter (i.e., those who make up the perception of Latvia's public image--haven't heard of Latvia, if they have, only that they are Nazis per Liz Holtzman--heard it in person-- et al. and that their country is a great spot for stag parties) know the truth. —  Pēters J. Vecrumba 18:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

What is the date of the latest edition of Encyclopedia Judaica? Works of this sort inherently require a bit of time to catch up with research. Prior to Ezergailis, there was hardly any serious history of the Holocaust in Latvia. Vestermanis was doing research, but during the Soviet period was very restricted in what he could publish. The result is that what was available until about 15 years ago was Soviet propaganda, together with the "eyewitness" accounts (which often delve into things of which the author was *not* an eyewitness, and as a result often contain misinformation), and a few articles by Dov Levin, always worth reading but dealing only with a few of the relevant topics. So there was simply not an adequate basis for any encyclopedia article on the topic, and if EJ references DV-Who Are They?, it is almost miraculously up-to-date. Of course, we all know that those Jews are pushy :) (Please, please, don't anyone take that literally--it's a *parody* of an anti-Semitic stereotype that I find ridiculous.)

The Wikipedia article at this time (19 October 2007) is not bad; I take it that Peteris is the person to thank? One thing that still needs attention is the brief treatment of what became of the criminals after the war--it could easily be read as a smear of the DPs in general, in the manner of the notorious _DV--Who Are They?_. Stephen.r 03:05, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not to thank, (un)fortunately. Either way, it does miss basic items, such as Stalin deporting, proportionately, more Jews than any other ethnicity, eliminating the Jewish community's civic, political, and economic leadership. Haven't decided yet whether to put in work here or to work on putting up reference materials on the topic on our site. I'm considering tracking down a copy of D.V. Who Are They, reproducing and debunking it all, based on Ezergailis' and other reputable materials on the topic. That would me a huge undertaking, however. PētersV 14:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Just for the sake of clarity, you forgot to mention that Stalin saved big part of "the Jewish community's civic, political, and economic leadership" by deporting them before WWII. Not that he had this in mind, but he did save them nonetherless. Survival rate among deportees was ininitely more than among Jews who stayed in Latvia. RJ CG 21:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
No, that the Nazis inflicted the Holocaust is already in the article. My point was it doesn't mention Stalin's contribution while he was still in partnership with Hitler. An odd way to save Jews, since Stalin, a rabid anti-Semite (Khrushchev's words, not mine), made sure Jews not only suffered proportionally more than any other ethnicity but, once deported, subjected them to a harsher treatment than any ethnicity. Far fewer survived than you are implying. I'm sorry, but what point are you [RJ CG] trying to make by using "saving"? That Stalin was accidentally benevolent? Jews survived Hitler too.
   By your logic, Stalin saved Hungarians and Czechs by deporting them, thereby, if they survived long enough--twenty year deportations were a norm--avoiding his successors killing them while suppressing independence movements.
   Do you have anything more constructive to suggest for the article? PētersV 00:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Frankly speaking, I don't think Stalin was too concerned inserted by RJ CG 13:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
P.S. And you [RJ CG] have reputable sources examining the unintended consequence/phenomenon of Stalin "saving" Jews by deporting them? PētersV 01:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Haha, that joke never gets old. It's widely known fact that the soviet authority was as much antisemitic as nazis in their ideology. The propaganda claim "Saving people by deporting them to siberia" is always fun, specially in cases when someone takes it seriously. :) Suva Чего? 12:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I am sure you would not have a single problem providing proof for your claims that "the soviet authority was as much antisemitic as nazis". I mean, you would have to show Soviet analogs of Nuremberg Laws (may be not on paper, as Commies were great masters of "unwritten policies", but peer-reviewed sources showing that Jews were alienated as much by the Soviet system as they were by the Nazis, including 100%-enforced race-based prohibition of ownership, certain professions and so on), gas chambers and ghettos, to start with. RJ CG 13:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, RJ CG, did anyone here say those words in your quotes? No, they did not. This is only about you contending that Stalin "saved" (the word you did use) Jews by deporting them. Don't ask for "proof" of something ("'the soviet authority was as much antisemitic as nazis'") which no one contended--which by your mere request makes this a debate over whether Hitler or Stalin was the more genocidal maniac. It's an insult to the victims and survivors of both to argue who was more evil or more bent on exterminating millions of lives.
   Again, if you have encyclopedic reputably sourced information to add to the article, please discuss and contribute. Otherwise consider showing some respect for the dead. PētersV 14:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry, but I seem there's misunderstanding here. I quoted Suva's message from 12:38, 24 October 2007 and you can't see "anyone here say those words in your quotes". I would call it rather selected blindness. I am sure you will not have a problem apologizing for you baseless attack. And I see no point in debate over whether Hitler or Stalin was worse to Jews. I think six millions of Jews murdered by the Hitler's regime (all Jews he could kill) and approximately 1-2 millions of Jews who survived under Stalin's regime make your repeated attempts to equate fate of Jews under Hitler (and his local cronies) and Stalin rather sacrilegious. Fact that you have gall to call for respect for the dead in the same discussion just adds cherry to the top. RJ CG 14:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Just in case, I remind everyone the arbcom editing restriction on Eastern Europe related topics. Suva Чего?

Just in case, you still doesn't provide proof for claim that "the soviet authority was as much antisemitic as nazis". RJ CG 16:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I was possibly mistaking, I withdraw my claims. Sorry. Suva Чего? 16:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Read it twice and missed it, comment struck. However, RJ CG, I am not "equating" anything. If you read my original comment it was that the current article completely omits Stalin's actions against Jews. Addressing an omission is not "equating". It is you who are making the leap that I am making some sort of comparison or equating here and then getting on your moral high horse about it. My "repeated attempts to equate"? Please! (Even comments by others that Stalin was as anti-Semitic as Hitler does not equate the actual actions taken.) Since we're apparently both in agreement (and this is all a terrible misunderstanding) over the moral reprehensibility of debating evil, I believe we're done here. PētersV 14:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I would trust that the recent ArbCom editing restriction allows us to assume that taking note of missing content is a good faith observation that information needs to be added, not that there is some sinister plot to debate levels of evil. To RJ CG, again, if you have reputably source information to add, please contribute. However, postulating that Stalin saved Jews by deporting them is, as we've seen, sure to provoke needless and nonconstructive debate. Let's stick to presenting reputably sourced materials, not our personal postulations--on which I rather expect RJ CG and I are bound to disagree. —PētersV 16:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)