Talk:Alfred Rosenberg/Archive 2

Jewish ancestry, German Wikipedia
Here is what the German Wikipedia says about this:

Bis heute ist nicht sicher, ob der glühende Antisemit Rosenberg möglicherweise selbst jüdische Vorfahren hatte. Das Interesse an dieser Frage ist erstmals im Monat der Veröffentlichung seiner antisemitischen Schrift Der Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts und seiner Wahl in den Reichstag im Oktober 1930 entstanden. In der Öffentlichkeit war damals die Rede davon, dass „kein Tropfen deutschen Blutes“ in seinen Adern fließen würde und sich unter seinen Vorfahren nur „Letten, Juden, Mongolen und Franzosen“ befunden hätten.[2] Verkündet haben soll diese Aussage etwa der Journalist Franz Szell[3] und am 15. September 1937 ebenso die Vatikan-Zeitung L’Osservatore Romano.[4] Nachgewiesen werden konnten jüdische Familienwurzeln allerdings bislang nicht. Allem Anschein nach wurden diesbezügliche Dokumente, die diese Frage mutmaßlich hätten klären können, während der deutschen Besatzungszeit in den Jahren 1941 bis 1945 vernichtet, nach Ansicht mancher Forscher gezielt.[5]

Translation: It is still not clear whether the convinced anti-semite Rosenberg possibly had Jewish ancestors himself. The interest in this question first came up in the months the publishing of his anti-semite writing "Der Mythus des 20. Jahrhunderts" and his election into the national parliament in Oktober 1930. There were public claims that he did "not have a single drop of German blood" in his veins and that his ancestors would only consist of "Latvians, Jews, Mongols, and French".[2] These claims came, among others, from journalist Franz Szell[3] and can also be found the Vatican's paper L'Osservatore Romano from September 15th 1937.[4] However, there is no known proof of Jewish roots. It seems that the relevant documents, that could have answered this question, got destroyed during the occupation between 1941 and 1945, according to some scientiest on purpose.[5]

As this is a question that was already considered relevant in Rosenberg's lifetime, I think it would be a good idea to include this information in the article. However, I'll leave that to the experts.


 * Just include this. This is all we really know on this subject. Moucis (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Jewish Ancestry III
From the comments at Haaretz "Peter Viereck mentioned the Jewish ancestry of Rosenberg and Goebbels in his 1939 book "Metapolitics" http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/1.528773

(I will try to look at that book or maybe someone who knows the original source language of that book could look at it & come back & tell us). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.98.106 (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

What were his crimes specifically?
Does anyone else find it odd that he was executed? After all he was the intellect of the NSDAP but was not seemingly involved directly in any military planning or the Holocaust, it sounds like he was killed for his ideas. Historian932 (talk) 05:51, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * No, not odd at all, his ideas inspired hate and mass murder, Alfred_Rosenberg describes the reasons. --Nug (talk) 08:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The legitimacy of his execution was debated at the time, as was that of Streicher who was not directly involved in genocidal acts at all. But of course Rosenberg was, unlike Streicher, part of the government. Nominally at least, he was the man in charge in Eastern Europe as Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories. Paul B (talk) 12:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * He was killed for his opinion. 184.98.209.171 (talk) 13:42, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

He was a jew
Rosemberg is a jewish surname and the face/antropometry of Alfred Rosemberg not is aryan(he was mixed of jewish and alpine race of Baltic Sea)!!! Anti-semitic jews not are rares in the all times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.71.79.94 (talk) 10:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Rosenberg was most certainly not a Jew. This has been dealt with extensively. See the above IPs other posts if you're curious about whether he's here to build an encyclopedia. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 13:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

-I am curious to know about the alleged "alpine race of Baltic Sea" --thanks to please provide details and sources?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hop1along (talk • contribs) 11:09, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The "alpine race" is a sub-category of the "Caucasian race" as codified by anthropologists in the early 20th-century. The editor presumably believes that AR belonged to this racial group in the Baltic area. Paul B (talk) 18:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't know if Alfred Rosenberg has Jewish ancesters or not. But the argument that he must be jewish/of jewish ancentry because of his last name is odd. Rosenberg is German for Rose Mountain/Rose Hill. Just because there are 'many' Jews named Rosenberg does not mean that everybody named Rosenberg is a Jew/of Jewish heritage. It is a common name with Sinti as well - that of course does not mean everybody named Rosenberg is Sinti/of Sinti heritage. And there are Germans without any Jewish or Sinti heritage that have that name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.56.180.48 (talk) 11:14, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Bayreuth Circle
Look, I edited this by deleting a sentence that went:

"Shortly after arriving in Germany, Rosenberg became a member of the Bayreuth Circle, a racist think tank founded by Richard Wagner."

I deleted this claim because it's fantasy. First, Wagner did not found a racist think tank of any sort. Second, there was never an organisation called "the Bayreuth Circle".

Third, if what is meant is the term (lower case) "Bayreuth circle" to mean people who knew each other because they liked Wagner's music, like Schemann, Chamberlain, Wolzogen, and so on, then we're still in La-La Land, because Rosenberg never had anything to do with that loose-knit group.

If you read Rosenberg's main book, the _Myth of the XXth Century_, you'll realise why that's the last group he'd associate with. Rosenberg was forced to pay some lipservice to Wagner because Hitler liked Wagner's music and Hitler was the boss, but in fact Rosenberg's own book, _Myth_, contains a long, detailed attack on Wagner's works, especially but not only the _Ring_ and _Parsifal_.

In his _Memoirs_, written in 1946, Rosenberg showed that he considered the fact that one politician, Schemm, liked Wagner was one of the indications that he was politically unreliable (too Christian). He also wrote that Hitler should have seen Wagner's _Ring_ cycle as a warning against the path he chose: in pursuing power without right, or justice. But that was in 1946, when he was in jail. When he was powerful, he despised Wagner's _Ring_, saying it was neither heroic nor German [see Frederick Spott's history of Bayreuth], and calling it a failure that would eventually fade away and stop being performed [see Rosenberg's _Myth_].

So it was an interesting sentence, densely packed with untruth. Hence the deletion.

Laon

The intentions of Hitler
"For Hitler, religion and philosophy were only tools for acquiring the absolute power of dictatorship" "Hitler wanted to appear non-threatening to major Christian faiths and consolidate his power."

How can such statements ever be verified? Who knows what Hitler intended? Has he stated this himself? Perhaps in Mein Kampf? Speeches? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAD6DEE2E8DAD95A (talk • contribs) 12:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Hitler's views on religion are well documented. "Hitler's Table Talk," a collection of notes that Bormann had a couple of assistants scribble down during Hitler's nightly sessions with his entourage, is particularly illuminating.  Hitler did entertain vague "spiritual" notions and probably believed in some higher power, but he held mainstream Christianity and the Church in contempt; and after the successful conclusion of the war, planned to forcefully suppress the Church and raise a new generation of Germans without strong ties to Christianity.  Hitler actually said, only half-jokingly, that it would have been better if the Turks had taken Vienna since it would have led to the Islamicization of Europe--  the Turks, being racially inferior, would have succumbed in time to the Germanic peoples thaye had conquered; but the Muslim religion, with its virulent anti-Semitism and tradition of proselytizing by the sword, would have been a powerful tool for German expansion and domination.


 * But he recognized that any contemporary attempt to suppress the Church could endanger the Nazi regime, and so he was content to wait. Hitler also made fun of Himmler and the latter's mystical SS notions and attempts to turn the SS into a semi-religious order based on old German paganism.


 * His philosophical or ideological views, at least before 1942, were also remarkably flexible-- if it served his purposes (acquiring power, strengthening his and Germany's position, and weakening his enemies), he was prepared to compromise on almost anything except his core anti-Semitism.  He acquiesced to the destruction of Romania's Nazi-like "Iron Guard" since a strong, conservative Romanian dictatorship was of more use to him; failed to support Hungary's "Arrow Cross" until the war's last days (for the same reasons); and, of course, made alliance with the Japanese, officially an "inferior" racial group.  He also watered down the "socialist program" of the Nazis after they took power and was quite bourgeois in much of his domestic policy.  It was only as the war effort soured and the end approached that he lost this flexibility and wholly embraced his radical ideological preferences, being more bent on destruction than anything else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.252.4.21 (talk) 10:04, 26 March 2007‎ (UTC)


 * You just elaborated the original claims but didn't provide any concrete sources. Besides, Antisemitism, as well as its counter-part Zionism, is philosophy. A wrong and/or stupid one if you want, but nevertheless philosophy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.226.8.199 (talk) 09:58, 5 August 2009‎ (UTC)

"Nazi Policy and Rosenberg's Views"
Remove this part of the article and replace it with a more objective one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.2.124.251 (talk) 11:44, 16 November 2006‎ (UTC)

Image size
believes that the image should be smaller than all others on Wikipedia, I disagree. It should be the same for every page, unless he can provide a policy that states otherwise. For the same discussions see Talk:Hjalmar Schacht, Talk:Albert Speer and Talk:Eduard Dietl. Skjoldbro (talk) 08:27, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Per WP:STATUSQUO and WP:BRD, I've restored the page to the status quo ante while discussion is ongoing. GMG, please do not revert again, you've made your opinion known, not please allow a WP:CONSENSUS to form about this specific photograph, as opposed to any other photograph that's been discussed.
 * Per WP:STATUSQUO and WP:BRD, I've restored the page to the status quo ante while discussion is ongoing. GMG, please do not revert again, you've made your opinion known, not please allow a WP:CONSENSUS to form about this specific photograph, as opposed to any other photograph that's been discussed.


 * The problem as I see it, is that this particular image of Rosembergm is an extreme close up, cropped very close to the face, and when presented in the infobox at the "standard" size-- which is to say without a size parameter -- it actively dominates the page. It's simply too large, and just as we would not allow the logo of a company to overwhelm the top of the page, we should not allow images of people to do so.


 * Here is the difference:


 * I think it's quite clear that the "standard" image is too big and dominates the page, and the reduced version is quite large enough to easily identify Rosenberg, but I'd like to hear other opinions about it from other editors; neutral ones, if possible, not those dedicated to keeping pictures of Nazis as large as possible, and not those pissed off at me for other, unrelated reasons. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Counter proposal: Change profile pic with File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-1985-0723-500, Alfred Rosenberg.jpg, and move current down to the body. This other photo shows face and torso, negating the need for arbitrary sizing of the photo. Skjoldbro (talk) 09:15, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Even better, do the same but with the head-cropped version of that image, File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-1985-0723-500, Alfred Rosenberg headcrop.jpg. I would have no objection to that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:35, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Alfred Rosenberg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141015151512/http://www.wkbw.com/news/Federal-Officials-Reveal-Diary-of-High-Level-Nazi-Leader-Found-in-WNY-211415701.html to http://www.wkbw.com/news/Federal-Officials-Reveal-Diary-of-High-Level-Nazi-Leader-Found-in-WNY-211415701.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Corrected the part about Szell
It's a rather minor correction; Franz Szell was a actually Hungarian (with Jewish roots), living in exile in Lithuania. He supposedly spent a year researching Rosenberg's roots before he wrote his letter, accusing Rosenberg being Jewish. He was soon deported by the authorities. Szlevi (talk) 05:35, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The citation you gave for this is not acceptable: it is merely the catalog entry of a piece of material, not the material itself. It cannot, therefore, be WP:verified. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * And, in any case, what does Szell's "Jewish roots" have to do with anything? Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Are you high? The only thing I have added was that Szell was Hungarian, *NOT* Lithuanian, it is a _fact_. Even the old linked JTA archive link makes it clear. He was also Jewish which could be interesting as he was researching Rosenberg's Jewish roots. Szlevi (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * PS: here is an authentic copy on auction, signed by Szell, the "Hungarian Jewish journalist": http://auctions.alexautographs.com/asp/fullcatalogue.asp?salelot=47+++++++203+&refno=+++72011&image=2&mypage=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szlevi (talk • contribs) 07:36, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, that's a picture of a piece of paper, with text not written in English. I don't think that's a valid reliable source. If Szell is Hungarian, and not Lithuanian, certainly there must be a book or an article or something online which says this?  Why do we need catalog entries with no content and unreadable photographs of documents? Do a little research, please.  It makes no difference to me if the man was Hungarian or Lithuanian, so if you can come up with a source saying he's Hungarian, more power to you -- but it's got to be a valid reliable source. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:41, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This, for instance, says that Szell is Latvian. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:54, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I've restored the original information you posted, re-written and copyedited, with additional information from the citation. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:27, 8 September 2017 (UTC)