Talk:Children of the Nazi era - Definition and Overview

Text moved here from elsewhere

I have moved material here that was originally overwritten onto Wikipedia:How to start a page by 80.213.32.137, since this appears neither to be a copyvio or an attempt at vandalism. This is a controversial subject, with lots of writing needed on this and related topics.-- The Anome 22:12, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Nonsense statement

Since the holocaust was launched in the 60s

What the heck does that mean? Evercat 22:15, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

It appears to be nonsense. I've deleted that bit.

Related topics

Related topics:

Children of SS "eugenics" programs in Scandinavian countries?

Children of German soldiers in these and other invaded countries

-- The Anome 22:19, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Article title

I dont like this title, seems that the kids were Nazis themselves. Moving to Children of the Nazism. Muriel 11:55, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I don't think that 'children of the nazism' is correct english, it certainly sounds strange to me. 'children of nazism' would be better but still not quite right. What do the children call themselves? Secretlondon 12:15, Nov 12, 2003 (UTC)

I think is very nice like this. Dont know what they call themselves. Cheers and congrats for the sysophood Muriel 12:23, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

The appellations "Nazi children" or "NS children" are historic as used popularly and officially, for example in Norwegian government papers from London, during the WW II and after. It was part of the winners' stigmatization of the losers to glue the offspring to the Nazism. Today it's important for these children to accept the history and this appellation in order to get free from the traumas. Kluwer Nov. 14, 2003

I agree with Kluwer: historically, the most correct title for this article would be "Nazi child" (BTW, note singular form as per Wikipedia policy) -- this is the term used in at least some of the affected areas (parts of occupied Europe with fraternization between civilians and Nazi-German soldiers). People of this distinction who have appeared in the media in Norway (an affected area) have used the term for themselves, probably since it remains, for good and for bad, the clearest identification "label" after all these years of its derogatory use. --Wernher 13:59, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Lebensborn

As part of Lebensborn, also children with aryan features from Poland and elsewhere were kidnapped and raised in German families. Most of those children never returned to their parents (well, sometimes it was impossible, since their parents are already dead). szopen

If you can give a cite for this, please stick this in the article. -- The Anome 20:26, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)

[1] (http://www.ipn.gov.pl/sled_gdansk_7.html) IPN is Polish government institutions aimed at tracking nazi and communist crimes against Polish Nation.

[2] (http://histclo.hispeed.com/essay/war/ww2/leb/leb-occpol.html) Another source which estimates that 200.000 Polish children were kidpnapped

[3] (http://www.holocaust-trc.org/poles.htm) estimates that 50.000 thousands were kidnapped

If you are blonde blue-eyed German and you suspect that you are Lebensborn off-spring, chance is that you are Pole. szopen

Historic articles give light or shadow to the past, also morally spoken. Informative articles on the Nazi children and the German soldier children will necessarily include blame on the postwar establishment of the winners who permitted ostracism of innocent persons. An article on kidnapped Polish children throws blame on the Nazis. Two different periods are scrutinized and different ideologies are blamed.

But why make a mixture ? Why imitate the Norwegian academic historians who mix German soldier children and general war children ? Does the postwar morally correct Western establishment need protection from the Nazi children ?

The kidnapped Polish children deserve a separate article, as do the Nazi children. Kluwer Nov. 29, 2003

Anti-Aryan propanda?

I have already seen this kind of anti-Aryan or anti-German WWII propaganda enough already, ie. "The Boys from Brazil" nonsense. The non-stop anti-Aryan or anti-German Mass Media propaganda is what really "instigated" all of this ill treatment of these innocent children, and everyone in Europe knows who really is to blame for it, and that is why there is such censorship and "hate crime" laws in virtually every nation of Europe, and likely soon will be in the USA, with the USA Patriot Acts, also eliminating the first Amendment American's rights of Freedom of political Speech, amongst others.

Article title, II

In an attempt to put too many eggs into one basket, we have an article with a way too wide title. In fact, it covers two separate issues, only superficially related: Children of Nazis and Lebensborn. Therefore I suggest to split the article in two accordingly. 10 days for voting should be enough. (Warning: please don't propose titles with synonyms of "persecution". Let's speak about "fate" (which may and may not involve persecution).) Mikkalai 18:29, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Article title, III

"Children of Nazis" are children who are mute about their destiny in the post-war democracy. Nazi children, NS children or Second Generation Nazis are mental survivors of the Humanist denazification campaign after 1945. The Nazi children carry the will of a European traditionalist continuum, the very reason why I wrote the article "Nazi Children" some months ago. But the title was quickly changed by others, and here we are with discussions.

The traditionalist attitude among the outspoken NS children becomes clear by reading Eystein Eggen's The Boy from Gimle. It will be interesting to see the choice of title made, if not both titles will be used for different articles.

"Lebensborn" is a bad title for the German Soldier Kids since the most among them who have raised their voice live in Norway where no real Lebensborn homes existed. Kluwer Apr. 06, 2004

I agree it is 2 separate questions. People who were born or adopted because of the Nazi racial programme & descendents of people who became wealthy or powerful under Hitler (or in some cases shortly after) & may not be as de-natzified as one would wish (for example a man accused but not charged with being the 2nd man in McVeigh's Oklahoma bomb van was the grandson of a minister in Hitler's cabinet & the son of a postwar democratic cabinet minister). It is 2 entirely separate problems.

Neutrality

The German article about Lebensborn says their were nine Lebensborn homes in Norway. I think it is excessively described here how badly the Norwegians treated the children. The German text just reports that there was discrimination and that the Norwegian Primi Minister apologized in '98. The actual Lebensborn program is not covered with enough detail here. And I think that sentences like " The winners did nothing to rescue the Nazi children from absorbing the guilt." (which I deleted) show that someone who contributed to this article did not want to informa but to bias. Get-back-world-respect 22:55, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Please do not remove dispute messages before you reach a consensus at talk. I still think that this article is not written neutrally. The introductory sentence is about "children of the members of Nazi or Fascist parties established before or during World War II." However, the article only seems to be about children of NSdAP members, except for a note about a son of Mussolini. Nearly all external links are to scandinavian groups of "nazi children", none to a neutral source. There is one further link to a private page with messy layout that wants "to provide the contemporary German high school student with a thorough explanation of the events that defined the Holocaust and the National Socialist ideology that created it", as if the topic was not treated in German schools. I do not think that it is neutral to start the second paragraph "Although innocent of any war crime". Furthermore, "The children read the map and did what was expected of them." is a dubious statement. Did all of the children act in the same way? What did they do that was expected of them and by whom? I also dispute that all of them "lived in an inner exile until the late 80s". The book title "Die Kinder der Täter" has no value here as it is not translated. The article has littel information about Lebensborn itself, but four times as much about Lebensborn in Norway, where "No documented Lebensborn breeding home existed", an information contradicted by the German page. Comparing the mistreatment of Lebensborn children to genocide is ridiculous. This article looks to me as if it was mainly composed by few personally involved people, often using anonymous accounts. No offense, but this needs to be rewritten. Get-back-world-respect 12:15, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia is full of incomplete articles. That's the way the process of creation works. A person adds what he knows. Another one add more or corrects the first one, etc.

If you can improve it - do it. If you don't do anything useful to the article, the note will be removed in a week. 192.73.228.4 17:50, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I am ok with incomplete articles. I am not ok if incompleteness is due to the personal interests of the main author and if it leads to a bias. I am not interested enough to spend much time on this page but unless you can reach a consensus here you cannot remove the note. Plus, an anonymous should not remove such a not in any case. Get-back-world-respect 20:26, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Anonymous writers have just as many rights as anyone else, Get-back-world-respect. That's the idea behind wikipedia - anyone can contribute, in any fashion. -- StellarFury 20:38, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I would also like to note that the redirect from Lebensborn to here is inappropriate since this article does not really cover Lebensborn but children of Nazis mainly in Norway. An article about Lebensborn should explain the program in more detail and not only focus on its "products". Get-back-world-respect 20:40, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I would also like to see a separate Lebensborn article. [[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade Arb Com election]] 14:18, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have now made a first hack at splitting off the Lebensborn article from this one. The major problem seems to be the Norwegian use of the term "Lebensborn" to refer to the children of German soldiers, which apppears to be a misnomer. -- The Anome 15:06, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

Real debate

Realities of the WW II and its aftermath are controversial subjects. There were at least two opponents during the war. One of these can not endlessly write the history or exclusively interpret the history. Get-back-world-respect claims neutrality. He or she says that "someone who contributed to this article did not want to inform but to bias". I was the one who wrote the article on the Nazi children. I am a Nazi child and i claim no neutrality. That does not mean that I wrote a bias. My opponent on this subject should learn to respect a different view, not exclusively define what is neutral and correct. On controversial subjects different views must appear clearly. But stop to make the Nazi children suspicious. For God's sake, 60 years have passed. Kluwer, 19th of June 2004