Ian Kershaw Puns

Ian Kershaw is perhaps the best working English historian on the subject of the Third Reich and Holocaust. His work, particularly since 1991, has caused a revolution in academic approaches to German society between 1933-45. His detailed studies of the Holocaust do not focus exclusively on the spectacle of horror, but rather how that horror arose from state and society.

However, outside of professional history, a pre-1991 view predominates. This approach to Holocaust studies is an artifact of the Cold War, where there was a political need to create false equivalency between the Third Reich and Soviet Union. Arendt’s theory of Totalitarianism, the basis of Horseshoe Theory, starts with the premise that the USSR resembles the Third Reich, Stalin Hitler and so on, and falsifies or omits evidence to support that conclusion.

Kershaw, in the essay quoted below, does not exonerate the USSR of human suffering, or Stalin of paranoia, but simply demonstrates that rapid industrialization and heavy-handed response to cyclical famines are fundamentally rational state projects supported by violence, as opposed to the Third Reich which was guided by the principle of charismatic leadership and so pursued violence for its own sake, with no definitive goal.

> The renewed emphasis, already visible in the mid-1980s, on the intertwined fates of the Soviet Union and Germany, especially in the Stalin and Hitler eras, has become greatly intensified in the wake of the upheavals in Eastern Europe. The sharpened focus on the atrocities of Stalinism has prompted attempts to relativise Nazi barbarism—seen as wicked, but on the whole less wicked, than that of Stalinism (and by implication of communism in general). The brutal Stalinist modernising experiment is used to remove any normative links with humanising, civilising, emancipatory or democratising develop- ment from modernisation concepts and thereby to claim that Hitler’s regime, too, was—and intentionally so—a ‘modernising dictatorship’. Implicit in all this is a reversion, despite the many refinements and criticisms of the concept since the 1960s, to essentially traditional views on ‘totalitarianism’ and to views of Stalin and Hitler as ‘totalitarian dictator

> But the fundamental problem with the term ‘totalitarianism’—leaving aside its non-scholarly usage—is that it is a descriptive concept, not a theory, and has little or no explanatory power. It presumes that Stalinism and Hitlerism were more like each

I have been eyeing the works of Ian Kershaw for a while and have been keen to invest some time into understanding the life of Hitler against the political climate he was surrounded by.

I am quite conflicted on whether to opt for the 2 volume version of Kershaw's work, or to risk the abridged version that allegedly combines the 2 volumes well.

I am mainly wondering what is gained/lost in this abridged volume? It is newer so I am wondering also if Kershaw has added any additional insights that the historical community has gathered since his original publications? Is there anything lost in regards to details? How does he go about abridging the two works?

Saw him credited on the episode dated 28th December.

"Mighty though 'Bagration' was, the attack on four fronts was less decisive than the attack Germany feared most: a concentrated surge through southern Poland to Warsaw and from there to the Baltic coast, east of Danzig, cutting off two entire Army Groups(Center and North) and opening the route to Berlin."

Would such a manoeuvre have even been possible for the Red Army, and if this was something seriously considered, why did the Red Army opt for the Bagration strategy instead?

https://preview.redd.it/md6cg0rw9xv41.jpg?width=1529&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a6909efb23733f87089f9bf81dd801b8c469c148

All’inferno e ritorno di Kershaw è senza dubbio la miglior introduzione alla storia d’Europa nella prima metà del ‘900. Dico introduzione non per svilire il libro a semplice manuale. Il libro è quanto mai ricco e documentato, ma essendo pensato per il lettore comune Kershaw dipana la trama in quasi 600 pagine di testo di piacevolissima lettura.

In All’inferno e ritorno non espone una tesi “forte” che funga da perno alla trattazione come nel caso del “Secolo breve” di Hobsbawm o del “Continente buio” di Mazawor. La scansione temporale riprende in sostanza l'”età della catastrofe” di Hobsbawm denominandola seconda guerra dei trent’anni.

Il libro è dominato, giustamente, dalla prima guerra mondiale e dalle sue conseguenze. Kershaw risolve l’annosa discussione sulle responsabilità del conflitto indicando le responsabilità di ogni singolo paese, anche se ritiene maggiori quelle della Germania. Da quel vulcano eruttante violenza e barbarie morali, nazionalismo, destabilizzazione geo-politica, economica e sociale l’Europa ne uscì inevitabilmente trasformata. L’A. sottolinea gli effetti distruttivi dello sviluppo tecnologico che poi, col perfezionarsi già nel corso del conflitto e soprattutto nei decenni successivi, avrebbe aperto le porte a futuri, immani massacri. E si sofferma con osservazioni perspicaci sugli effetti diretti e a lungo termine di una guerra che diventando sempre più spersonalizzata da un lato abituò chi vi prese parte alla morte, all’insensabilità e alla violenza (pp. 72 e ssgg.); dall’altro addomesticò lo popolazioni a lasciarsi privare più o meno completamente delle libertà civili e giuridiche con sorprendente facilità: la brutale disciplina imposta nelle trincee, lo sfruttamento draconiano della manodopera nelle fabbriche, l’imbavagliamento più o meno completo della stampa, furono elementi che abituarono le popolazioni a future restrizioni. Osservazioni puntuali riguardano l’uso strumentale del razzismo (che poteva assumere coloriture religiose, culturali o razziali o tutte assieme) da parte dei governi e della stampa, impegnati a presentare il proprio paese come depositario di un patrimonio di civiltà messo a repentaglio da avversari rozzi e culturalmente meno sviluppati.

La Grande Guerra fu anche, come è noto, la responsabile del crollo di quattro imperi e l’incubatrice della rivoluzione russa. Il vuoto

I've just read Hitler the biography by Ian Kershaw and if anyone knows another book by the same autor or the same type of book, suggest it if you can. I used to read biographys since I was 7, now I'm 10. But dont judge me bye my age, I like reading history books and non-fiction content. And if anyone has another good topic like The Cold War or anything, and if there's a book on it, it would be great if you suggest it.

I am reading Kershaw's 'Hitler Myth' for a school project and I want to find the primary source for a piece of information. The footnote in its entirety reads 'StAW, SD/22, AS Schweinfurt, 20 Sept. 1943'. He uses these 'StAW' sources a lot and I think they must be the name of opinion reports from the Third Reich, but I don't know what StAW stands for. Is that the way he references Sopade reports or is this something different?

I realise this is a very specific question, but I'd just like to know what this stands for so I can write out the reference myself in a way that makes sense.

My history professor told me that he read in a source somewhere that he was, but I could not find anything regarding his political views. Does anybody have an idea?

Image: ["Ev'rythin' free and easy / Do as you darn well please"]

http://thisnortheasternlife.blogspot.com/2016/08/quote-of-day-for-2016-08-04.html

I've just finished an A2 course on Germany from 1900 to 1945. One of the sections of the course was debating a 'controversy' about the nature of power in the Nazi regime. For that part, we basically were told that the strong dictator/weak dictator argument has been ended by Kershaw's 'Working Towards the Fuhrer' thesis. Is that true or is that oversimplified for dumb 18 year olds? Additionally, how respected is Kershaw as a historian?

My staff is currently:

David Price Ian Kennedy Mat Latos Chad Billingsley Wandy Rodríguez Kyle Lohse Colby Lewis

Craig Kimbrel Javy Guerra Santiago Casilla Jonny Venters David Robertson

Pitchers available on wire: Ted Lily, Tim Hudson, Doug Fister, John Danks, R.A. Dickey, Ryan Vogelsong, Barry Zito and Westbrook

Is it worth trading two good players for one great player?

Obviously the two volumes contain more detail(s) than the combined edition, but I'm wondering what chopping it down to a single volume does to the big-picture stuff. Thanks.

Where I think the still active Free Agents in MLB should go, and I mean all of them. (Age, Fangraphs WAR).

Catchers:

Luke Maile (31, 0.3)- BAL, TOR
Stephen Vogt (37, 0.1) - OAK, SEA, PHI
Grayson Greiner (29, 0.0)- DET, NYY
Jeff Mathis (39, 0.0)- RETIRE
Rob Brantly (32, -0.1)- TB, NPB
Yohel Pozo (25, -0.1)- BAL, CHC, LAA
Wilson Ramos (34, -0.2)- DET, CWS
Jose Lobaton (37, -0.3)-TB, BOS
Robinson Chirinos (37, -0.4)-RETIRE
Kurt Suzuki (38, -0.4)- NPB
Andrew Knapp (30, -0.6)-OAK, KC
Chance Sisco (27, -0.6)KC, NYY
Austin Romine (33, -0.9)NYY, NPB
David Garcia (22, N/A), TEX, ARI, PHI, ATL

First Baseman:

Freddie Freeman (32, 7.8)- ATL
Anthony Rizzo (32, 2.7)-BOS, WSH
Brad Miller (32, 1.8)-STL, PHI
Ryan Zimmerman (37, 0.4)-WSH
Colin Moran (29, 0.3)-MIL, HOU
Daniel Vogelbach (29, 0.1)-NPB
Ronald Guzmán (27, 0.0)-NPB, CIN
Danny Santana (31, -0.3)-NYM, CWS
Todd Frazier (36, -0.4)- CIN, SEA
Albert Pujols (42, -0.4)-STL,
José Marmolejos (29, -0.6)-KC, HOU
Mike Ford (29, -0.8)-TEX, SEA, MIA

Second Baseman:
Donovan Solano (34, 2.0)-BAL,NYM
Josh Harrison (34, 1.8)-DET,TB
Jed Lowrie (38, 0.9)-BOS,OAK
Chris Owings (30, 0.6)-LAA, MIA
Jason Kipnis (35, 0.6)-ATL,CLE
Matt Carpenter (36, 0.0)-STL, CLE
Jordy Mercer (35, 0.0)-PIT, MIL
Greg Garcia (32, -0.2)-BOS, WSH
Dee Strange-Gordon (34, -0.3)-CIN,MIA,LAD
Franklin Barreto (26, -0.4)-MIL
Rio Ruiz (28, -0.4)TEX, OAK, LAD
Marwin Gonzalez (33, -0.5)-MIN, HOU
Eric Sogard (36, -0.7)-RETIRE
Pat Valaika (29, -0.8)-NPB,BAL

Third Baseman:

Kyle Seager (34, 4.0)-RETIRE
Kris Bryant (30, 4.0)-LAD,PHI,SF
Jonathan Villar (31, 1.8)-CWS
Matt Duffy (31, 1.5)CHC,ARI
Hanser Alberto (29, 1.2)-MIN
Maikel Franco (29, 0.9)-TOR,COL
Charlie Culberson (33, 0.5)-SEA
Ronald Torreyes (29, 0.5)-PHI,BAL
Starlin Castro (32, 0.4)-NYY,CHC
José Rondón (28, 0.3)-PIT,OAK,CLE
Ehire Adrianza (32, 0.2)-MIN,TOR
Asdrúbal Cabrera (36, 0.0)-RETIRE
Jake Lamb (31, 0.0)-OAK,ATL
Travis Shaw (32, -0.1)-TEX,SF
Brandon Drury (29, -0.2)-ARI,KC
Eddy Alvarez (32, -0.2)-PHI,COL
Brock Holt (34, -0.3)-PIT
Joe Panik (31, -1.0)-NPB
Ildemaro Vargas (30, -1.1) -MIN,MIL

Shortstops:

Carlos Correa (27, 6.6 WAR)-PHI,HOU,MIA
Trevor Story (29, 6.0)-NYY
José Iglesias (32, 2.6)-NYM,DET,MIL,SD
Freddy Galvis (32, 2.0)-NPB
Andrelton Simmons (32, 0.0)-LAA
Pete Kozma (34, 0.0)-STL,SEA,SD
Deven Marrero (31, 0.0)-SF, ARI
Andrew Romine (36, -0.3)-COACHING ROLE

Left Fi

(posted to ask historians but as yet unanswered...) Obviously the two volumes contain more detail(s) than the combined edition, but I'm wondering what chopping it down to a single volume does to the big-picture stuff. Thanks.