Schneidermann doesn’t offer a neat solution to the contradictions that he unearths, but he does give a few other examples of work that has aged well. The American columnist Dorothy Thompson, Schneidermann says, saw Hitler immediately for what he was, describing him, in 1932, as a man “without form, without expression, his face a caricature . . . his movements without dignity, anything but martial.” Thompson offered a lucid assessment of Nazism as a “repudiation of the history of western man, of Reason, Humanism, and the Christian ethic.” She was kicked out of Germany in 1934, but remained a tireless advocate against Nazi Germany. This strategy may not be available to every journalist, but Schneidermann also admires Georges Duhamel, a correspondent for Le Figaro, who faced certain pressures from his conservative bourgeois editors and readers in Paris not to moralize. On June 23, 1938, Le Figaro ran as a front-page headline a question that Duhamel, given the chance to interview Nazi leaders, would have asked: “What do you intend to do with the Jews?” In its simplicity, its directness, its willingness to seem naïve, Schneidermann finds it hauntingly unimpeachable.

Arthur Moeller van den Bruck was initially the dominant figure of the Conservative Revolutionaries influenced Nazism.[118] He rejected reactionary conservatism while proposing a new state that he coined the "Third Reich", which would unite all classes under authoritarian rule.[119] Van den Bruck advocated a combination of the nationalism of the right and the socialism of the left.[120]
Auschwitz is enshrined in history in part because, as a work camp, there were survivors. Anita Lasker-Wallfisch was a 14-year-old Jewish cello student living in the German city of Breslau (now Wroclaw in Poland) when the war broke out. Two years later, she and her sister Renate were sent to work in a nearby paper factory. In 1942, after the Germans deported her parents to a death camp, the sisters doctored their identity papers and tried to escape.

Despite this process of universalization, Anne and her diary have been attacked with increasing sharpness by Holocaust deniers, and the controversy they began had additional ramifications for the diary and Anne’s character and nationality. At the end of the 1950s, after the diary was translated into English and the play earned rave reviews, the extreme right wing in Germany attacked its authenticity because, in their opinion, it was causing ever greater harm to Germany’s image. The rising controversy also included the question of the education of youth: was one who denied the diary’s authenticity fit to be a teacher? In the mid-1970s, the controversy crossed Germany’s borders, starting a trend in which there was a clear connection between Holocaust denial in general and denying the diary’s authenticity in particular, as in the statements and writings of significant Holocaust deniers such as Richard Verall and David Irving of Britain and Arthur Butz of the United States. Toward the end of the 1970s four trials began in Germany, in some of which the French Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson, together with Siegfried Verbeke of Belgium, tried hard to undermine the authenticity of the diary and support the extreme right. Otto Frank took them to court once more, as he had done in the 1950s.
The women selected from this transport, including Anne, Edith, and Margot, were marked with numbers between A-25060 and A-25271. Records indicating their exact numbers have not been preserved. Approximately eight weeks later, in late October 1944, Anne and Margot were transferred from Auschwitz-Birkenau to Bergen-Belsen, where they both died sometime in March 1945. Though Anne’s death certificate documents her movement between camps, it, too, does not include her tattoo ID number.

Anne Frank Stichting. Anne Frank 1929–1945. Heidelberg: 1979; Idem. Exhibition catalogue in Dutch and English, Anne Frank in the World 1929–1945. Amsterdam: 1985; Idem. Exhibition catalogue in Japanese, Anne Frank in the World. Amsterdam: 1985; Idem. Exhibition catalogue in English, Anne Frank: A History for Today. Amsterdam: 1996; Idem. Anne Frank Magazine 1998. Amsterdam: 1998; Bernard, Catherine A. Tell Him that I …: Women Writing the Holocaust. Stanford: 1995; Barnouw, David, and Gerrold van der Stroom (editors). The Diary of Anne Frank: The Critical Edition. London: 1989; Bettelheim, Bruno. “The Ignored Lesson of Anne Frank.” Harper’s, November 1960, 45–50; Boonstra, Janrense, and Jose Rijnder. The Anne Frank House: A Museum with a Story. Amsterdam: 1992; Doneson, Judith E. “The Diary of Anne Frank in the Context of Post-War America and the 1950s.” In The Holocaust in American Film, 57–85. Philadelphia: 1987; Idem. “The American History of Anne Frank’s Diary.” Holocaust and Genocide Studies Vol. 2 No. 1 (1987): 149–160; “ Evans, Martin, and Kenneth Lunn (editors). War and Memory in the Twentieth Century. London: 1997; Fogelman, Eva. Conscience and Courage: Rescuers of Jews During the Holocaust. London: 1995; Frank, Anne. Tales from the Secret Annexe. London: 1982; Gies, Miep, and Alison Leslie Gold. Anne Frank Remembered. New York: 1987; Gill, Anton. The Journey Back from Hell: Conversations with Concentration Camp Survivors. London: 1988; Gold, Alison Leslie. Memories of Anne Frank: Reflections of a Childhood Friend. New York: 1997; Goodrich, Frances, and Albert Hackett. The Diary of Anne Frank. London: 1970; Graver, Lawrence. An Obsession with Anne Frank: Meyer Levin and the Diary. London: 1995; Hellwig, Joachim, and Gunther Deicke. Ein Tagebuch für Anne Frank. Berlin: 1959; Hillesum, Etty. Letters from Westerbork. London: 1986; Holliday, Laurel (editor). Children’s Wartime Diaries. London: 1995; de Jong, Louis, and Simon Schema. The Netherlands and Nazi Germany. Connecticut: 1990; Kedward, H. R. Resistance in Vichy France. Oxford: 1978; Kolb, Eberhard. Bergen-Belsen from 1943–1945. Gottingen: 1988; Lasker-Wallfisch, Anita. Inherit the Truth: 1939–1945. London: 1996; Lee, Carol Ann. Roses from the Earth. London: 1999; Levin, Meir. Obsession. New York: 1973; Levy, Isaac. Witness to Evil: Bergen-Belsen 1945. London: 1995; Lindwer, Willy. The Last Seven Months of Anne Frank. New York: 1991; van Maarsen, Jacqueline. My Friend Anne Frank. New York: 1996; Marks, Jane. Hidden Children: Secret Survivors of the Holocaust. London: 1995; Melnick, Ralph. The Stolen Legacy of Anne Frank. Connecticut: 1997; Moore, Bob. Victims and Survivors: The Nazi Persecution of the Jews in the Netherlands 1940–1945. New York: 1997; Mulder, Dirk. Kamp Westerbork. Westerbork: 1991; Müller, Melissa. Das Mädchen Anne Frank. München: 1998; Nijstad, Jaap. Westerbork Drawings: The Life and Work of Leo Kok 1923–1945. Amsterdam: 1990; Pick, Hella, and Simon Wiesenthal. A Life in Search of Justice. London: 1996; Presser, Jacob. Ashes in the Wind: The Destruction of Dutch Jewry. London: 1968; Reilly, Jo, David Cesarani, Tony Kushner and Colin Richmond (editors). Belsen in History and Memory. London: 1997; van der Rol, Ruud, and Rian Verhoeven. Anne Frank: Beyond the Diary. London: 1993; Roodnat, A. C., and M. de Klijn. A Tour of the Anne Frank House in Amsterdam. Amsterdam: 1971; Rosenfeld, Alvin H. “Popularization and Memory: The Case of Anne Frank.” In Lessons and Legacies, edited by Peter Hayes, 243–279. Evanston, Illinois: 1991; Sanchez, Leopold Diego. Jean-Michel Frank. Paris: 1980; Schloss, Eva, with Evelyn Julia Kent. Eva’s Story: A Survivor’s Tale by the Step-sister of Anne Frank. London: 1988; Schnabel, Ernst. The Footsteps of Anne Frank. London: 1976; Shapiro, Eda. “The Reminiscences of Victor Kugler, the ‘Mr Kraler’ of Anne Frank’s Diary.” Yad Vashem Studies 13 (1979); Shawn, Karen. The End of Innocence: Anne Frank and the Holocaust. New York: 1989; Steenmeijer, Anna G., and Otto H. Frank (editors). A Tribute to Anne Frank. New York: 1971; Stoutenbeek, Jan, and Paul Vigeveno. A Guide to Jewish Amsterdam. Amsterdam: 1985; Wiesenthal, Simon. Justice Not Vengeance: The Test Case. London: 1989; Wilson, Cara. Love, Otto. Kansas: 1995; von Wolzogen, Wolf. Anne aus Frankfurt. Frankfurt: 1994.
Several SS personnel oversaw the killings at each gas chamber, while the bulk of the work was done by the mostly Jewish prisoners known as Sonderkommandos (special squads).[91][92] Hungarian doctor Miklós Nyiszli reported that the Sonderkommando numbered around 860 prisoners when the Hungarian Jews were being killed in May–July 1944.[93] Their responsibilities included removing goods and corpses from the incoming trains, guiding victims to the dressing rooms and gas chambers, and working in the "Canada" barracks, where the victims' possessions were stored.[94] Housed separately from other prisoners, in somewhat better conditions, their quality of life was further improved by access to the goods taken from murdered prisoners, which they were sometimes able to steal and trade on Auschwitz's black market.[95] Many Sonderkommandos committed suicide in response to the horrors of their work; others were generally shot by the SS in a matter of weeks. New Sonderkommando units were formed from incoming transports. Almost none of the 2,000 prisoners placed in these units survived to the camp's liberation.[96]
Those prisoners capable, began forcibly marching at the moment when Soviet soldiers were liberating Cracow, some 60 kilometers from the camp. In marching columns escorted by heavily armed SS guards, these 58,000 men and women prisoners were led out of Auschwitz from January 17-21. Many prisoners lost their lives during this tragic evacuation, known as the Death March.
As the Soviet Army advanced from the east, the Nazis transported prisoners away from the front and deep into Germany. Some prisoners were taken from the camps by train, but most were force-marched hundreds of miles, often in freezing weather and without proper clothing or shoes. Over the course of these death marches, which sometimes lasted weeks, tens of thousands of people died from cold or hunger, or were shot because they could not keep up.
The main camp population grew from 18,000 in December 1942 to 30,000 in March 1943. In July or August 1941, Himmler briefed Höss about the 'Final Solution'. On September 3th, 1941, Soviet POWs at the Auschwitz main camp were used in trials of the poison gas Zyklon-B. This poison gas was produced by the German company "Degesch" (Deutsche Gesellschaft zur Schädlingsbekämpfung). The were gassed in underground cells in Block 11. After this trial, a gas chamber was rigged-up just outside the main camp and in February 1942, two temporary gas chambers opened at Birkenau. The crematories were built by the German company "Topf & son" located at Erfurt.

Levin also claimed that his play was rejected because he himself was Jewish, Zionist and socialist, and because his family originally came from Eastern Europe, while Otto Frank and his lawyer were from Germany, meaning that they were assimilated Jews, void of Jewish national feeling, who saw Nazism as an accident that had befallen their Germany. Thus, indirectly, he claimed that Frank was not loyal to Anne’s spiritual legacy, which was rooted in Jewish and anti-German sentiment. In the Hollywood version, not a single German soldier or SS man appears, not even at the end, when they are supposed to raid the hideout. Sections from the diary that express deep Jewish feeling, such as the one from April 11, 1944, were also omitted: “Who has set us apart from all the rest? … It’s God who has made us the way we are, but it’s also God who will lift us up again. In the eyes of the world, we’re doomed, but if, after all this suffering, there are still Jews left, the Jewish people will be held as an example to the world. Who knows, maybe our religion will teach the world and all the people in it about goodness, and that’s the reason, the only reason, we have to suffer. We can never be just Dutch or just English or whatever, we will always be Jews as well. And we’ll have to keep on being Jews, but then, we’ll want to be.”

After the liquidation of the Polish state and its institutions, the fundamental goal of German policy in occupied Poland was the exploitation of material and labor resources, and the removal of the local Polish population and ethnic minorities. This was done through expulsion and systematic extermination. The Polish lands were to be completely germanized, through German settlement in the depopulated area.
A few weeks ago, a six-thousand-word article in Esquire on the unexceptional life of a white teen-ager in peri-urban Wisconsin generated a furious online backlash. It appeared on the cover of the March issue, which was released in February—Black History Month—under the billing “An American Boy.” Many commentators on Twitter decried the magazine’s decision to kick off its series on growing up in America today through the lens of a straight white male. Others felt that the story failed to apply critical pressure to its youthful subject’s internal ruminations on such topics as Internet feminism and the #MeToo movement. With the discomfort and confusion that it provoked, the Esquire story joined a series of public controversies surrounding the media’s efforts to capture a new American political reality—far more extreme cases include “the Nazi sympathizer next door,” published by the New York Times after Charlottesville, and an L.A. Times story on the sartorial normalcy of the white-nationalist movement—without always knowing exactly what they are seeing or how to handle it.
All of their clothes and any remaining personal belongings were taken from them and their hair was shorn completely off. They were given striped prison outfits and a pair of shoes, all of which were usually the wrong size. They were then registered, had their arms tattooed with a number, and transferred to one of Auschwitz's camps for forced labor.
When unemployment began to drop in Germany in late 1932, the Nazi Party’s vote also dropped, to about 12,000,000 (33 percent of the vote) in the November 1932 elections. Nevertheless, Hitler’s shrewd maneuvering behind the scenes prompted the president of the German republic, Paul von Hindenburg, to name him chancellor on January 30, 1933. Hitler used the powers of his office to solidify the Nazis’ position in the government during the following months. The elections of March 5, 1933—precipitated by the burning of the Reichstag building only days earlier—gave the Nazi Party 44 percent of the votes, and further unscrupulous tactics on Hitler’s part turned the voting balance in the Reichstag in the Nazis’ favour. On March 23, 1933, the Reichstag passed the Enabling Act, which “enabled” Hitler’s government to issue decrees independently of the Reichstag and the presidency; Hitler in effect assumed dictatorial powers.
After the failure of the Beer Hall Putsch in 1923, and his subsequent trial and imprisonment, Hitler decided that the way for the Nazi Party to achieve power was not through insurrection, but through legal and quasi-legal means. This did not sit well with the brown-shirted stormtroopers of the SA, especially those in Berlin, who chafed under the restrictions that Hitler placed on them, and their subordination to the party. This resulted in the Stennes Revolt of 1930-31, after which Hitler made himself the Supreme Commander of the SA, and brought Ernst Röhm back to be their Chief of Staff and keep them in line. The quashing of the SA's revolutionary fervor convinced many businessmen and military leaders that the Nazis had put aside their insurrectionist past, and that Hitler could be a reliable partner [279][280]

Otto and Edith Frank planned to go into hiding with the children on 16 July 1942, but when Margot received a call-up notice from the Zentralstelle für jüdische Auswanderung (Central Office for Jewish Emigration) on 5 July, ordering her to report for relocation to a work camp, they were forced to move the plan ten days forward.[20] Shortly before going into hiding, Anne gave her friend and neighbour Toosje Kupers a book, a tea set, a tin of marbles, and the family cat for safekeeping. As the Associated Press reports: "'I'm worried about my marbles, because I'm scared they might fall into the wrong hands,' Kupers said Anne told her. 'Could you keep them for me for a little while?'"[21]
The conservators are walking a less-trodden path in restoration. “We have more experience preserving a cathedral than the remains of an extermination camp,” said Piotr Cywinski, who turns 43 on Thursday and is the director of the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum, which runs the site. Auschwitz, he said, “is the last place where you can still effectively take the measure of the spatial organization of the progression of the Shoah.”

In February 1938, Hitler emphasised to Austrian Chancellor Kurt Schuschnigg the need for Germany to secure its frontiers. Schuschnigg scheduled a plebiscite regarding Austrian independence for 13 March, but Hitler sent an ultimatum to Schuschnigg on 11 March demanding that he hand over all power to the Austrian NSDAP or face an invasion. German troops entered Austria the next day, to be greeted with enthusiasm by the populace.[65]

Some of the most notorious slave labour camps included a network of subcamps. Gross-Rosen had 100 subcamps,[37] Auschwitz had 44 subcamps,[38][38][39] Stutthof had 40 sub-camps set up contingently.[40] Prisoners in these subcamps were dying from starvation, untreated disease and summary executions by the tens of thousands already since the beginning of war.[41]