Do you follow the Intentionalist or Functionalist school of Holocaust

>>566477

I haven't done much research at all, but I'd call myself a Functionalist. Hitler was too opportunistic for anything else to be likely, and his establishment of the sort of shifting hierarchy of underlings who tried to anticipate his desires and show him fait accomplis again argues for Functionalism.

Functionalist all the way. The Holocaust was too specific to have been preplanned from way before Nazi rule.

>>566483
Interesting.

>>566491

How so?

>>566477
Functionalism.

Intentionalism is great man theory.

>>566477
Could you briefly explain the difference between the 2 schools?

>>566477
Hitler was a negroid African so was Werner Von Braun

Functionalism. If you've ever worked within a bureaucracy you know how things easily gets their own life, forgotten within the structures and hierarchies of command, until you're not sure who ought to know what. As far as I know, Nazi bureaucracy was generally bad and didn't worked very well since statesmen wasn't statesmen first but instead nazis, who gotten said positions not due to brilliance but due to party sympathy, meaning something already prone to getting bloated and corrupt just made shit happen.

>>566530
Functionalism = Holocaust was result of many factors and complex system of power, not the initial goal

Intentionalism = Holocaust had been pre-planned, was always a goal, centralized power

>>566543
So instead of writing all that why didn't you just say, 'cronyism'?

>>566559
If you need everything summed up in one word.

Who fucking cares? Sounds just like the type of bullshit a pseudo-historian would come up with for their new book. Either side of the argument has very limited evidence and it's too ambiguous to tell anyways, why should I care about the origin of the decision in one culture to destroy another?

>>566543
It was way worse than that. SOME of the bureaucracy was appointed on party loyalty.

When you say 'Nazi Beuracracy' you probably mean the Bureaucracy of the German state. But some purges aside, that remained intact and it's appointments normal.

BUT there were usually at least two or three party institutions, OR personal fiefdoms of Nazi officials that were part of neither the formal German State or the Nazi Party that had the exact same responsibilities.

For example, any particular economic matter could fall under the Ministry of Economics, or the Ministry of labor, OR it could be a matter for the German Workers Front, the party labor conglomerate, OR it could be decided upon by the office of the Plenipotentiary for the four year plans, and that's just in the broad strokes.

>>566570
>Who fucking cares? Sounds just like the type of bullshit a pseudo-historian would come up with for their new book.
Please go until you have done some basic historical reading.

>>566548
Then he was probably functionalist in the carrying out of mass exterminations, but a general idea of ending the "Jewish problem" was always a goal from the start.

Though I'd caution against describing Hitler as pragmatic. When the war was going to shit and his generals needed weapons and supplies to be top priority on the railroads, he still insisted the transfer of Jews to work/death camps have precedence over all. Against his generals objections Hitler still felt solving the "Jewish problem" was necessary, even as the war effort suffered greatly from it.

>>566570
>Either side of the argument has very limited evidence
Chris. Browning.

>why should I care about the origin of the decision in one culture to destroy another?
So you can do it again / prevent it being done again.

>>566570
>why should I care about the context and details of a significant historical event
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzYGWF6qrts

>>566570
I fucking hate positivists.

>>566651
He's not a positivist, you're just a retard. Holding a belief due to rational, evidence, or understanding is not positivism, it's called not being an idiot. I encourage you to look up the definition of words before you use them.

>>566705
>due to rational
>the definition of words

>>566589
there's different degrees of each

Functionalism.

Intentionalism is literally infantile and the kind of stuff you teach to small children.

and then there's Goldhagen

>>566661
This literally makes no sense.

>>568085
>Goldhagen
how did we let this happen?

>>569523
What's so bad about Goldhagen?

Definitely functionalist, but I would not say German anti-semitism was some special breed of anti-semitism that made the german people predisposed to holocaust.

Goldhagen is a jew propagandist.

>>566570
>>>/r/eddit

You seem a good fit

>>570000
implied Germans were super-antisemites by their very nature and had been since medieval times and that was the reason the Holocaust happened

>>566477
so, how do Functionalists explain Wannsee?

>>570659
>so, how do Functionalists explain Wannsee?
Bureaucratic responses to the failures of local policies and the bureaucratic attempt to regularise and systematise policy is normal.

Post-Wannsee "Jew" and "Partisan" hunts increased. The genocide of the south slavs through aktions was post-wannsee and wannsee is entirely incapable of explaining the anti-slav genocide.

thanks.

>>570853
>anti-slav genocide

what does that even mean? Are you talking about foibe?

>>566548
Sounds like a shitty dichotomy that subscribes to the "genocide is evil." meme

>>570887
Go read the Yugoslav evidence

>>570933
i guess so...