Talk:Night of the Long Knives/discussion to 07/07/07

discussion of the article

There should be mention of those non-SA figures that were killed - ex-Chancellor von Schleicher and his wife, ex-Bavarian Premier von Kahr even the music teacher Willi Schmidt mistaken for the local SA leader Wilhelm Schmidt.

Removed questions and discussions from article. - Patrick 09:35 May 1, 2003 (UTC).

Previous version of the text parts:

The purge was the result of the political struggle between the Nazi leaders subordinate to Hitler - Hermann Göring, Joseph Goebbels, Heinrich Himmler, Reinhard Heydrich and Ernst Röhm, the leader of the SA. Hitler encouraged political infighting amongst his subordinates, and the power of Röhm and his violent organization scared his rivals. Himmler had evidence manufactured to defame Röhm and presented it to Hitler. //source?//

While Hitler had been personally rather fond of Röhm he was under pressure to reduce his influence. German military leaders were unhappy with the proposal of Röhm that the German army be absorbed into the larger SA, and the industrialists that supported Hitler were concerned over Röhm's socialist leanings. Members of the Nazi party also viewed Röhm and some other SA leaders with distaste because they were homosexuals. //sources for all this???//

With all these groups arrayed against Röhm, Hitler decided to act. //According to...//, he ordered all the SA leaders to attend a meeting at the Hanselbauer Hotel in Wiesse, near Munich. On June 29 Hitler arrived with a strong SS force; he was present as Röhm was arrested, and in the following hours other SA leaders were also arrested, and many of these, //including/for instance LIST NAMES // were shot out of hand. Apparently Hitler intended to pardon Röhm, but eventually decided to have him die. It is believed that Röhm was offered a chance of suicide but was eventually shot.

Hitler announced the purge on 13 July, claiming 61 had been executed and 13 shot while resisting arrest. "I become the supreme judge of the German people. I gave the order to shoot the ringleaders". //source???//

\\"I become the supreme judge of the German people--this does not sound like an accurate translation. "I have become" -- perhaps. "I became" --perhaps. But not "I become". The truth is, that since we are not restricted by size/pages/paper, there's not reason every direct quote should not be in the original AND translation, with a cite to the source of the original. This supposed quote is an example.//

..it should be mentioned that not only SA members have been killed but also some SA-unrelated opponents of AH

• The article already mentions it, but perhaps it isn't clear enough: "The Night of the Long Knives (in German: Nacht der langen Messer, 29–30 June, 1934) was the Nazi purge of the Sturmabteilung (S.A.) leadership, and Hitler's political opponents; between 77 (official) and 400 people are believed to have been murdered." Have a go at making it clearer if you like. Motor 12:21, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

name?

What is the history of the name, does it reference any work of literature? When was the purge first called Night of the Long Knives? --130.161.31.140 30 June 2005 13:06 (UTC)

I have to say that in Germany nobody knows anything about "Nacht der langen Messer" or "Reichsmordwoche" its called only "(Ernst) Röhm Putsch". (Okay) After a quick search I found "Nacht der langen Messer" but "Reichsmordwoche" exist definitly not in the german language. So, please call it also Röhm Putsch and no longer "Reichsmordwoche"

That would be appropriate in the German Wikipedia, but here it should be under the name that most English speakers know it by. I think the name is fine, although we should note the other names in the intro and have proper redirects. --Dhartung | Talk 9 July 2005 00:12 (UTC)

Hitler himself used the term Nacht der langen Messer in his speech to the Reichstag on July 13, 1934, wherein he justified the purge to the German nation. See the transcript of that day's Reichstag session (in German). The reference is in the right column, right above the marginal note (D). JonRoma 05:27, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Hitler was not elected

As detailed quite nicely at [[1]] and contrary to popular belief, Hitler was not elected.

Here's my thumbnail summary of the info on the above-referenced page:

Sept. 1930: Reichstag elections, Nazis win 18.3% of seats, becoming second largest party in Germany.

1931: Chancellor Heinrich Bruning attempts to negotiate with Hitler in hopes of convincing Hitler to agree to an extension of President Hindenburg's term, and avoid an election in 1932. Hitler declines.

1932: Presidential election, Hitler comes in second in both rounds, receiving 35% in the second round.

Hindenburg dismisses Bruning as Chancellor and appoints Franz von Papen, who immediately calls for new Reichstag elections.

July 1932: Reichstag elections, Nazis win 230 seats, becoming the largest party in the Reichstag.

Reichstag votes no-confidence (by 84%) in the government, Reichstag dissolved, new elections called.

November 1932: Nazis lose seats but remain largest party in the Reichstag; Hindenburg dismisses Papen in favor of Kurt von Schleicher to try his hand at forming a stable coalition in the Reichstag. Schleicher fails, and Papen (along with a coalition of German businessmen, see [[2]]) convinces Hindenburg to appoint Hitler as Chancellor.

So, Hitler himself was never elected to office, but was appointed Chancellor.

63.206.91.183 08:59, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Um, you didn't really need to argue in such detail, I don't think anybody would go to bat for what was essentially a very brief summary wording. It suffices, simply, that Chancellor was not an elective office; it was a role like Prime Minister. I took the opportunity to put more political context in the intro, and just a note that I removed the words mass murder because they just don't seem to fit -- this wasn't Jonestown or Columbine, it was a series of assassinations. --Dhartung | Talk 07:18, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

appy polly loggies, I'm a freshly-minted newbie here. I find it an important distinction, as the so-called "lessons of history" commonly derived from the commonly-believed, but inaccurate, version of events, when viewed in light of the actual sequence of events as outlined, are turned exactly on their head. But I'm sure I'm violating a dozen policies by mentioning this, so I'll shut up now. 63.202.176.181 21:10, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

I think you are splitting hairs just a tad too much. Prime Ministers are technically appointed, indeed the current incumbent Chancellor of Germany is appointed - to extrapolate from that the fact that most of the current world leaders (working within parliamentary democracies) are not elected is just a bit daft. I agree that the know-it-all "pop fact" that comes out all too frequently of "Hitler was elected into power by democracy", and those who say it are often ignorant of the wider context of post WWI Germany, its fractured, unstable political system, its dejected people and the extremist movements which meandered through all of European politics at the time. Nor do the know-it-alls say that in the days after coming to high office Hitler effectively installed himself as dictator by dismissing all opposition (in more ways than one) and eradicating the main democratic engine (by literally setting fire to the place). Obviously if the democratic process had been allowed to continue then things would have occurred differently - however the raw fact remains that Hitler got to that position of power through democratic means.

I would agree with you however in regard to the "mass murder" and I would suggest that the article be reworded. I only have Churchill's "The Gathering Storm" as my reference (which I am currently reading and the reason I browsed to this page) but he suggests estimates of those killed "between five and seven thousand" (P. 90) and his description of how the murders were carried out throughout the day certainly fits the mass murder horrors of Columbine

"All the afternoon the executions proceeded in Munich at brief intervals. The firing parties of eight had to be relieved from time to time on account of the mental stress of the soldiers. But for several hours the recurrent volleys were heard every ten minutes or so" (p. 90)

Churchill doesn't give the impression that these were just "a series of assassinations".

Perhaps there are contemporary sources which disprove Churchill's estimates, and I concede that this was written in the immediate aftermath of WWII when the mists of current events may have clouded the facts somewhat. But I though it was worth brining up since this is an obvious discrepancy between what I am currently reading and what wiki says! SFC9394 00:10, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Opening

I'm not sure that Reichsmordwoche should be translated as "Imperial Week of Murder." Reich can also mean realm, or more colloquially the German state itself. It appears that the translation was added by an anonymous user [3], and it really feels like the work of Google and whatnot. It was originally added by WHEELER back in 2004 [4]; I'd ask him for a source but I think that he has left the project. I'm loath to translate it at all–German compound nouns really lose something auf Englisch. I'm removing the translation for the moment. Ideas? Mackensen (talk) 22:19, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree with removing it for now. I think we should find an authoritative source such as William L. Shirer who wrote about it at the time and can give a contemporary translation. Guessing is just wrong. --Dhartung | Talk 06:17, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

This:

The Night of the Long Knives, also known as Reichsmordwoche or "the Blood Purge" (German, Nacht der langen Messer)

- is a bit of a mess, mostly because it separates "The Night of the Long Knives" from "(German, Nacht der langen Messer)", which since it's a translation should be right by it so that it's clear to the reader what means what. Having it two more terms apart is confusing. I am about to put that right, so it will say:

The Night of the Long Knives (German, Nacht der langen Messer), also known as Reichsmordwoche or "the Blood Purge"

- that's a bit better, but it's still messy because it still looks to the casual reader as if "Reichsmordwoche" and "the Blood Purge" could be equivalents/translations, and, unless my German has deserted me, they are not. Perhaps someone else would like a go at this? 138.37.188.109 10:20, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC) I have some problems with this sentence in the opening paragraph:

The purge primarily targeted SA leaders and members who were associated more with socialism than with nationalism, and hence were viewed as a threat to the continued support for Hitler within the army and conservative business community that had supported Hitler's rise to power. During this event, however, the Gestapo also targeted conservative rivals and elements within and outside the regime.

First, while many SA by 1934 were angry that the Nazi regime did not do more to put socialism into practice, it is wrong to say that some SA "were associated more with socialism than nationalism," as the above writer states. They were all ferocious German nationalists. To say that some "were associated more with socialism than nationalism" draws a false dichotomy between the two. Second, while many in the army supported Hitler's rise to power, it is wrong to say that "the army...supported Hitler's rise to power." It's just too simplistic to put it that way. The army and its leaders despised and feared communism. They were sympathetic to conservative parties in general. But many in the old Prussian elite looked at Nazism with distaste, and only supported it in end, as Hindenburg did, as a way of combating the communist menace. Third, I don't agree with "During this event, however, the Gestapo also targeted conservative rivals and elements within and outside the regime." The Gestapo was the instrument of Hitler, Goring, Himmler, and the rest. The above sentence may give the impression that the Gestapo worked independently of orders from Hitler or other high-ranking Nazis working at the direction of Hitler. Hitler ordered the purge, Hitler targeted specific individuals during the purge. Even if not every murder can be directly traced back to Hitler, the purge only targeted those who were seen as having opposed, or actively opposing Hitler.--Mcattell 15:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

This sentence: "In contrast to other purges, the Night of the Long Knives did not focus on suppressing the Communists or Social Democrats, the Nazis' primary foes from the left" is redundant and shouldn't be used in the opening, since the opening paragraph states it in more general terms.

Chancellor Adolf Hitler.

"Chancellor Adolf Hitler" This titel is uncommon.

Hitler was still merely a Chancellor until Hindenburg's death on 2 August 1934, when subsequently Hitler merged the offices of Chancellor and President; simply referring to the combined office as the "Führer" (or Fuehrer). Rchan89 01:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Therefore, as the article should make clear, Hitler was still "chancellor" at the time of The Night of the Long Knives.--Mcattell 17:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Popular Culture

I have removed this section, as it is adequatey covered in the disambiguation page. The two artist albums have little in common with the actual events discussed in the article. If anybody object, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Kareeser|^Talk! 06:08, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

i think that histiry is very useful —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.110.99.130 (talk • contribs) .

I removed the asinine section again. I realize fan-cruft accumulates on Wikipedia, but it is completely inappropriate for this article. –Joke 20:00, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Repetition

Several of the paragraphs are paraphrases of each other. for example:

Hitler dominated Germany's government by 1934 but still feared losing power in a coup d'état. To maintain complete control, he allowed political infighting to continue among his subordinates. As a result, a political struggle grew, with Hermann Göring, Joseph Goebbels, Heinrich Himmler, and Reinhard Heydrich on one side and Ernst Röhm, the leader of the SA, on the other. The German Army and the SA were the only contenders to threaten Hitler's power.

By 1934 Adolf Hitler appeared to have complete control over Germany, but like most dictators, he constantly feared that he might be ousted by others who wanted his power. To protect himself from a possible coup, Hitler used the tactic of divide and rule and encouraged other leaders such as Hermann Goering, Joseph Goebbels, Heinrich Himmler and Ernst Roehm to compete with each other for senior positions.

David Cheater 00:57, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

gay vs. homosexual

Under Background, fourth paragraph, sentence two:

However, Röhm was a gay man which did not help his political situation; he was one of the first members of the Nazi Party and had participated in the Beer Hall Putsch.

Could this be replaced with:

However, Röhm was a homosexual man--which did not help his political situation--and was one of the first members of the Nazi Party who had participated in the Beer Hall Putsch.

Ajl772 17:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, there seems to be switching between "gay", "homosexual", and "lesbian".

Fifth paragraph, last sentences:

Men, in particularly, who were identified as gay were forced to wear a pink triagle. Lesbians more often detected attention but when found out they too faced some of the same treatment as gay men. Despite the fall of Nazi Germany; paragraph 175 remained part of German Law until the 1960s when this law was deleted and it again became legal to be a gay person as well as under the European Common Market rules marry with full benefits. It has been estimated that as many as 700,000 gay men and women were sent to Concentration Camps--most of which were murdered there.

Ajl772 17:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

As to the blockquote directly above, I do not see what the problem is. Gay is a term that includes both gay men and lesbians, as it is being used there: "a gay person". It should, of course, be made clear when it's not obvious whether a passage refers to "gay people" in general or "gay men" specifically. As to the first question, to use "gay" or "homosexual", I think we should err toward "gay". "Homosexual" is primarily a clinical term not widely used today. — coelacan talk — 12:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree; "gay" is generelly preferred in US English short of the most clinical and formal contexts. I don't think the meaning would be clarified or the article is improved by using that type of language in these particular sentences. It's factual, it uses clear wording that most people will understand, and I don't see a problem. --Dhartung | Talk 19:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree: The term "gay" in its present sense did not exist at the time, and Rohm would have hardly described himself as a gay man. I think we should follow the lead of professional historians on this one--I cannot find any serious work on Nazism or German history that describes Rohm as "gay." I think that if you describe Rohm as a "gay man" you risk projecting the current debate about sexuality into this article, where it doesn't belong. Either way, it shoud be one or the other. Mcattell 16:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)Also the text says that Rohm was "rumored" to be a homosexual, when Rohm's homosexuality is well documented.

Reichsmordwoche

It is not the job of the English-speaking Wikipedia to coin German words for an event in Germany.

German-language titles of rank in the article

In introducing a number of senior Nazis, a learned Wikipedian wrote:

...a political struggle grew, with Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring, Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler, and RSHA Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich on one side and SA head Ernst Röhm on the other.

Clearly the author of this sentence is very familiar with German-language titles of rank in Nazi Germany. Nonetheless, this article (in English Wikipedia) is designed for a readership of English-speaking laypersons. To include titles such as "RSHA Obergruppenführer" makes it hard to understand the sentence and exactly who these people were. Telling the reader that Heydrich was Himmler's deputy in the SS is more concise and easier to understand than saying he is a "RSHA Obergruppenführer." Also, including the formal titles makes the sentence unwieldy and hard to understand.

Again, I appreciate the writer's efforts, but for the above reasons I suggest the historical persons above be described in more clearly in English.--Mcattell 00:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, Hermann Göring not a reichsmarschall at the time of this event; instead he was Minister-President of Prussia.--Mcattell 16:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)