What would have happened if the Holocaust victims were not pacifists?

What would have happened if the holocaust victims were not peaceful pacifists?

Could Hitler have killed so many Jews, Poles, Gypsies, disabled, homosexuals, religious, socialists, colored, etc etc.

If they had violently revolted and resisted him??


Is passive dissent really the answer to preventing a Holocaust? Or is it the enabler?

Remember, Hitler had gun confiscation programs right before the round ups started. Should these people have violently resisted and formed a insurgency/revolt?

Of course, Some did resist, but the vast majority accepted their fate without a whimper.

This is a general conspiracy because everyone always says violent dissent is wrong and bad. But after reviewing the Holocaust, it appears to me violent resistance is the only solution to preventing tyranny and genocide when things get way out of control.

If you agree or disagree, please list your reasoning and thoughts.

Reading Material for those who have not studied the "Holocaust"
en.wikipedia.org...

and read "The Diary of Ann Frank"
en.wikipedia.org...

Elie Wiesel
en.wikipedia.org...

Should they have revolted violently against Hitler??
And what does this mean for us and future tyrants?

Holocaust victims were just ordinary people made up of the elderly, families, men, women and children. It is only organised groups of people that resist.

The entire premise of your thread ignores what happens when a state mobilises against a civilian population. In the shoes of Holocaust victims, with your family next to you, you would have kept your mouth shut and jumped to the barking command of an armed trooper.

Same thing happens all the time with surly police officers bossing civilians. People are conditioned to obey.

[edit on 033030p://pm3046 by masonwatcher]

Originally posted by masonwatcher
Holocaust victims were just ordinary people up made of the elderly, families, men, women and children. It is only organised groups of people that resist.

The entire premise of your thread ignores what happens when a state mobilises against a civilian population. In the shoes of Holocaust victims, with your family next to you, you would have kept your mouth shut and jumped to the barking command of an armed trooper.

Same thing happens all the time with surly police officers bossing civilians. People are conditioned to obey.

You said it better than I could.

The victims of the holocaust weren't all pacifists. Many were regular citizens who lived lives in which they had never had to violently (or evasively) resist authority figures. There's a difference.

reply to post by muzzleflash


I have often thought of this very point. What if the Holocaust victims or any large group of people revolted against their "masters"? I think it would have turned out differently if people were more resisitant. Not that I am blaming the Jews for their demise at the hands of the Nazis.

Just think there was probably one armed man per 100's of prisoners. If they all rushed the gun holders they could have easily gotten control.

I think to insure your freedom you must be able to see being captive as way worse than being dead. Thanks for bringing this up.

[edit on 16-6-2009 by grapesofraft]

Originally posted by Romantic Rights


You said it better than I could.

The victims of the holocaust weren't all pacifists. Many were regular citizens who lived lives in which they had never had to violently (or evasively) resist authority figures. There's a difference.

That is why i said "of course, some did resist"

But your not answering my question. What IF the others did resist? How would things have been different?

[edit on 16-6-2009 by muzzleflash]

Violence is the only way to defend yourself from tyranny - but you can't act alone - and organizing armed resistance will be defined as terrorism - and the state has good intelligence.

Choose your poison.

Originally posted by masonwatcher

The entire premise of your thread ignores what happens when a state mobilises against a civilian population. In the shoes of Holocaust victims, with your family next to you, you would have kept your mouth shut and jumped to the barking command of an armed trooper.

Same thing happens all the time with surly police officers bossing civilians. People are conditioned to obey.

I disagree. The premise of my thread is asking "What IF". You cannot say it ignores "what happens", I am asking "What would have happened?"

How am I ignoring that the Holocaust is "what actually happened?"

And yes i would keep my mouth shut - and let the M1 Garand do the talking, personally.

Police officers bossing people around is NOT a fair comparison to Nazi SS Stormtroopers shooting people in the heads and throwing them into the furnace. Huge Difference there, your comparing apples to plastic.

My great great grandfather did not take tyranny lightly, he fought in the American Revolution and was captured by the Brits and almost died. His spirit compels me to post this thread and ask this question.

Would the Holocaust have been different had they revolted in mass?
And how does this correlate to any future "Holocaust"?

The French were as much victims of the Nazi invasion as any other race.

Not on such a large scale as the gypsies, jews and polish, but Let us never forget that many of the french were killed in huge groups.

The French acted as excellent sabateours, working with under cover SAS units, from the UK.

The french blew up ammuntion dumps, assasinated german officers, created distractions and generally caused a lot of bother for the Germans in WW2.

I think they would have perished eventually, take Warsaw for example. Hitler took on the English, French, Belgians, Russians etc. I don't think a minority of civilians "rising up" would have deterred him...

Originally posted by masonwatcher
Holocaust victims were just ordinary people made up of the elderly, families, men, women and children. It is only organised groups of people that resist.

The entire premise of your thread ignores what happens when a state mobilises against a civilian population. In the shoes of Holocaust victims, with your family next to you, you would have kept your mouth shut and jumped to the barking command of an armed trooper.

Same thing happens all the time with surly police officers bossing civilians. People are conditioned to obey.

[edit on 033030p://pm3046 by masonwatcher]

I have given you a star for an excellent post.

I have my own views on the Holocaust, but that aside, say that it did happen the way we have been taught. Most did go as sheep to the slaughter. America of today is different in many ways from those times. We are an armed Nation, consisting of a lot, and I mean a lot of veterans, sportsmen, and just plain gun nuts. Yes, some would willingly go to the gas chambers, but I have to believe the majority would not go silently into that cold, dark night. If the NWO ever does decide on day to force a coup and a complete takeover of the American people, there would be an almost immediate retaliation against anyone seen as the enemy. There would be no battle lines, or fighting for ground, it would be a war of attrition, a gurrela war in which there would never be a clear winner. As soon as the money for the industrial war machine ran out, so would the ones running it. They are few, people, we are many. America can have a revolution anytime it can get together on things, and lay aside religious beliefs, greed, and war mongering. America needs to take a lesson from those Iranian people I have been seeing on TV. they are not talking no for an answer, are they? It used to be that way here too, a few decades ago, and it can easily happen again. Shall we let them heard our women and children into the gas chambers, starving and heads shaved, begging for their lives, or do we do something when the time comes? This whole thing can happen without shedding a drop of blood. Just my opinion, nothing more.

Originally posted by mr-lizard
The French were as much victims of the Nazi invasion as any other race.

Not on such a large scale as the gypsies, jews and polish, but Let us never forget that many of the french were killed in huge groups.

The French acted as excellent sabateours, working with under cover SAS units, from the UK.

The french blew up ammuntion dumps, assasinated german officers, created distractions and generally caused a lot of bother for the Germans in WW2.

Your absolutely correct, we must not forget them.

The Danes, Belgians, and many others fought to free themselves.

In fact, this insurgency is one of the main reasons we defeated the Nazi's.

How many trains were derailed by ambushes? Thousands.

The question is though, how far could Hitler have gotten had the pacifist groups revolted?

Originally posted by Oatmeal
I think they would have perished eventually, take Warsaw for example. Hitler took on the English, French, Belgians, Russians etc. I don't think a minority of civilians "rising up" would have deterred him...

10 + million is not exactly a minority. *At least not by my standards*

The Death Camps were an International Community of people of all races/nationalities/beliefs

If you disagreed with Hitler, you were going to the camps. That is a broad brush that paints far more than a "minority".

Originally posted by autowrench
This whole thing can happen without shedding a drop of blood. Just my opinion, nothing more.

I agree with your assessment.

In America it can happen peacefully as we still retain power (although we like to pretend we do not).

However in Nazi Germany, the shedding of blood is an accepted reality. Things were very different then.

Good post.

OK...now the Jews that were rounded up and taken to Treblinka, Aushwitz, and other concentration camps had been locked in malnourished ghettos for years. They were weak and broke, not something you can build an uprising or resistance on.


Hitlers smartest move was slowly removing rights. He didn't jump into concentration camps. He started with not allowing Jews to own or run businesses.

He committed his atrocities in waves.

reply to post by muzzleflash


No offence meant muzzleflash. Civilians normally do not do extraordinary things and would rather slink by when some else gets it in the neck. A motto for your average every day pleb is 'better him than me'.

Case in point, every few years I hear of a news item reporting of a woman being raped in public view by a gang and pedestrians walking passed not wishing to get involved.

On the basis of my estimation of the general population, I suggest that the premise of your thread is not realistic. You need an unusual combination of individuals to intercede in extraordinary situations. An individual alone cannot do this on a spontaneous basis.

In fact I would suggest this topic of human dynamics in exceptional circumstances would be an excellent study for a phd student. I am not referring to mob reactions, which is often the by-product of a series preceding events and the reaction based on emotions rather than a rational acts of resistance.

A good example was what I heard about in the news a few years ago. A group of bank robbers raided a bank full of customers. The customers, who were unarmed, quickly rallied and attacked the robbers and disarmed them. What were the conditions in that event? What were the ratios of customers to robbers, did the robbers fail to intimidate, was the confrontation brought about because there was an adequate amount of physically able males, did the robbers display fear, etc?

The problem is, nobody wants to be the first one. Nobody wants to risk losing their life and leaving their family behind. It is this clinging to life which will ironically lead to your own demise.

We must let go of our stranglehold on life if we are ever to truly live.

reply to post by muzzleflash


I don't know where you come up with the number 10 million. The Nazi's took control over most of Europe, sections of Asia and Africa. If you disperse these people over such a vast amount of land area, then yes they were minorities. Hitler took one section at a time.

[edit on 16-6-2009 by Oatmeal]

Who ever said all the victims were pacifists?

Anyway, I'm not a huge gun person, but I think the fact the Germans were disarmed had something to do with it.

They weren't all pacifists and there were documented uprisings to the Nazis. I'll list a few as an example and there are more. There was the Bedzin Ghetto uprising and this was the response by the Jews during the last forced deportation in 1943. The most notable uprising was the Warsaw Uprising and the resisters used mainly small arms to attack the Germans. In both cases, the resisters were brutally crushed as the result but they stood up to the oppressors.

I'm sure many of the victims in Holocaust knew that resistance was futile and didn't want to exacerbate the situation any further and bring more harm to their families. I honestly think they believed the load of BS by the Germans that they were being resettled in the east. The reason I think they believed that, was the simple fact that savagery on that scale has never been witnessed in recent memory in 1930s-40s Europe. We can deliberate all we want but until we are faced with having a Mauser pointed at our children or the back of our heads we can't really say what is the right thing to do or not.

[edit on 16-6-2009 by Jakes51]