Talk:History of Germany/Archive 2

message: shouldn't this be the "varus battle" instead of the "battle of teutoburg forest" since it seems to be proven, that the battle happened _not_ in the forest? musschrott
Strong support for this. Nowadays it is assumed that battle has been happened at Kalkriese, which is north of Teutoburg forest.
--Kune 21:09, 2005 May 28 (UTC)
The term "battle of teutoburg forest" originates  from Tacitus, who located the battle in the "saltus teutoburgensis". The forrest was named Teutoburg Forrest only after historians had erroneously identified it as the battlefield in the 19th century. The name of the battle of the battle is correct, the name of the forrest isn't. Nevfennas 18:15, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Battle at Teutoburg forest

message: Does anyone share Heimdal's preference (nay, insistence?) that the article have no lead paragraphs at all?  Alai 23:01, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just restored the lead section, of which this article is in dire need, unless of course anyone prefers to see it loose its current featured condition. If the lead is removed once again, I'll vote for its demotion. -- Shauri 15:32, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead paragraphs

message: ----
The Holy Roman Empire couldn't have encompassed "western Czechoslovakia". That state emerged in 1918 and was split in 1991/2. You could speak of the Czech Lands. --217.9.225.146 16:09, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Czechoslovakia? What Czechoslovakia? 

message: In the Germany since 1945 section, there is a link to the article Red Army Faction, but that is just a redirect to Red Army Fraction. Should this be changed to make people less confused? Or am I barking up the wrong tree here? -iten
:The English article says that the correct translation should be "fraction" but I'm not too sure about that translation, so see this English-German language forum for a discussion (just begun) Saintswithin 12:47, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red Army Faction... should be Fraction? 

message: The article for Friedrich Ebert is too short and is thoroughly unsatisfactory.  I added the little that I know to the article.  Can someone with more knowledge about him expand the article?  Thanks.  Peaceman 00:17, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The article was not short but some IP vandalised it. I've just reverted it.NightBeAsT 16:41, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Friedrich Ebert 

message: I notice no  link to either Reichstag Fire Decree or Enabling Act . This article skips  over the Enabling Act at present . I am up-loading a guide to the  Enabling Act's history  . I ask any german speaker to help by reading the full german version of the Reichstag Fire Decree to determine : whether arrest of Reichstag deputies was legal or not legal  after that decree ? Famekeeper 08:50, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing Facts/ Links /Questions

message: It skips from "Migration Period" directly to "Holy Roman Empire", and completely omits "Carolingian Renaissance" and "Ottonian Empire". --Wetman 13:27, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The box

message: Czeslaw Luczak "Od Bismarcka do Hitlera: Polsko-Niemieckie stosunki gospodarcze"Poznan 1988 ISBN 83-210-0767-8 There were ultra-nationalist, tolerated or even backed by government organisations, such as Allgemainer Deutscher Verband, later renamed to Alldeutsched Verband, which in 1914 had 18.000 members. In Posen there was founded in 1894 Verein zur Forderung des Deutschtums in den Ostmarken, later renamed into Deutscher Ostmarkverein, which in 1909 had 50.500, and in 1912 54.100 members, recruiting in vast majority from government clerks, teachers, officers etc - this organisation was called by Poles HaKaTa from names of the founders, Hansemann, Kennemann and Tiedemann. In 1911 it called eastern provinces of Germany "the battlefield" and was later called by H.U Wehler the precursor of the Nazi party (Wehler, Krisenherde des Kaiserreichs 1817-1918, Ottingen 1979, p-193-194) because of its pathological hatred of all things Polish (p 20-21) Governmetn founded in 1886 Konigliche Ausiedlungskommission which was funding the German settlement in eastern provinces, buying the land from Polish owners etc, there were also two other organisations, in 1904 in Posen Deutsche mittlestandkasse and 1906 in Danzig/Gdansk Bauernbank fur Westpreussen. This institutions were helped by different local organisation such as Landgesselschaften and local settlement commission Kleinsiedlungsgenossenschaften. In addition there was founded Deutscher Fursorgverein, Ruckwanderstelle and many, manyother organisation with one goal: buy as many land from Poles as possible and settle as many Germans as possible.
They were encouraging Germans from foreign lands, from Galicia, Vohlyn, Hungary, Romania etc etc. The Commision for Settlement in 1886-1918 settled in Posen and West Prussia 21.886 German families, counting in total 153.800 people, from which 21.683 took over their farms before the end of 1914. 25% of them came from abroad. Many families were also helped by other organisations, which helped them buy land etc etc. At first they were settled in countryside, hpoing that Germanisation of villages will cause the Germanisation of cities, later also German craftsmen were settled in cities, mainly by HKT which settled in Posen province about 30 doctors, craftsmen etc yearly. In addition to help fight "the Polish danger in eastern provinces" the workers in factories were also settled. In period 1903-1905 325 families came to Posen and West Prussia(1379) from abroad, including 209 fro Hungary, 89 from Galicia and 27 from Russia, and to 1912 in Posen area there were 961 workers settlements. (p20-25)
People working in eastern Prussian provinces received an addition to their salary, so called "Ostmarkenzulage". Some representants of local administration proposed counting the years of service by doubling, just like in the case of the war, for the clerks working in eastern provinces.
Interesting case: in 1850 many German catholic settlers from times of XVIII, while in 1914 they considered themselves Poles - there was from 50.000 to 75.000 such settlers. This was primary reason why vast majority of new settlers were protestants (21.014 families from settlers recruited by Commission of Settlement, that is 96,9%. Similarly 90% of German clerks and teachers were protestants (p26).
In total, the estimated number of Germans settled in 1871-1914 in Posen and West Prussia was higher than 250.000.
On other hand, the Polish teachers and clerks were assigned functions in western part of Germany. Such action was taken for few thousands of Poles, amongst whom was teacher 64 years old and clerks with 40 years of job. In addition German gvt paied for special agitation in press for encouraging emigration of Poles for abroad. The exceptional ways were removal of Poles by force, first "Poles who were suspected of anti-German activity" (3 February 1872 in Posen), and later of removal of all Poles without Prussian citizenship, with exception of few who received special allowance for stay. THe mass removals started with expelling 500 Jews from Berlin. Suprisingly, some "presidents" of provinces (of Silesia and West Prussia) say that this action has no sense, since many of those Poles have already found new families and they are living there for sometimes decades. On the other hand, "presidents" of Posen and Opole (region in middle Silesia) proposed the enlarged the scope of the action. In 1884 the law was passed for removal of all Poles, who had citizenship of other states, with exception of those, who were "by mistake" drafted to Prussian army or arrived before 1843 (in practice however those exceptions were not honoured). In total 43.943 Poles were destined for removal, but finally, because deficit of workforce the number was limited to about 32.000. Among the removed there were 9 to 10.000 Jews, who admitted (with few exceptions) the belonging to Polish nation.
That actions was protested by Polish envoys to German and PRussian parliaments, which were backed by many German (Espectially Alsatians) and Danish envoys. Many politicians, like Karol Liebknecht, Ludwig Windthorst, Rudolf Virchov etc described this actions as either inhuman or illegal. Finally PRussiann government stopped the action. Amongst the removed there was 2-years old orphan adopted by Polish family in Pleszow; 98-years old woman who arrived to her grandson to Gniezno. The families were partitioned by deporting those members who had no citizenship. The Poles "suspected for anti-German policy" were for example Pole from Wroclaw (Breslau) who celebrated victory of Sobieski at Vienna or few Polish students from university. OTOH Bismarck received also the letters with approval from Germans (Even from Bohemia!), and was backed by majority of German press.
Poles were almost always serving outside eastern provinces; it was believed, in words of Bismarck, that in such way they will "know the blessing of German civilisation" (p42). German ggovernment thought, that Polish recruits will be addicted to that civilisation and will stay in western parts of Germany and in consequence they will Germanise. But only 0,01% Polish men have not returned to theur families after the service.
German clergy was colportating amongst the kids the religious books in German, hpoing that they will Germanise whole families via their kids. Their actions were supported by German government, which few times gave special funds for many of them.
Some of the German actions were ridiculous: The German clerks demanded that Polish parents will gave their newborn kids German names, and they were sometimes even changing them without consciense of parents; so Jan was written as Johann etc. German goverment also was warning the staying Polish teachers that "cultivating Polish language" in PRIVATE homes could result in deportation. Ostmarkenverein was postulating, but fortunately without success, the planned Germanisation of Polish orphans and kids from broken families. (p45)
The German view on Poles were quite simple: Poles were on lower level of civilisation. E.g. A.Dix, German writer, in 1898 said that "Slavs are typical representants of proletariat, citizens of fifth class", and "Germans in east should be everywhere the masters". T.Schon, president of West PRussia, wrote, that main task of his administration is to "turn ex-slaves Slavs into people and Germans". Even Wilhelm II said on occasion that "Slavs are born to serve other nations". (p 45)
The policy of German government brought the desired results. In the years 1870-1910 the Prussian official statistics noted 70% of raise of Germans in West Prussia and 58% in Posen, 12,2% in East Prussia and 56,3% in Opole. For comaprison, in Posen number of Poles raised by 27,8%, in Opole in 32,4%, and was lowered in Eastern Prussia by 12% and in Western Prussia by 5,8%. All the censuses are generally in low esteem by Polish historians, because they forced Poles to declare themselves as bilingual or using only German, for example all Polish soldiers were counted as Germans. In Namyslow count in SIlesia in 1910 it was reported that only those Poles who admitted that they know no German were listed as Poles, and the rest as Germans. he separate case is so called "battle for land". It was started by Flotwell, who however was able to bought only 30 large Polish estates. The legal basis for later actions was 1886 June law of "strengthening the Germanness in provinces West Prussia and Posen", in short "Ansiedlungsgesetz", the Settlement law. Those act, plus later novelisations (including 1912 "the law of strengthening Germanness in some parts of the country" etc) included for example that Poles in countryside can build new buildings only after receving speciall allowance from German administration, which effectively caused that Poles could not build new buildings (famous Drzymala wagon case), made legal basis for confiscating Polish land and allotted large sums for buying out olish land, e.g 100.000 mk in 1886. The funds of Settlement Comission achieved 955 millions mk, plus another funds from economical activity, in total about 1423 millions mk. However, because Poles - as results of well-known "longest war of modern Europe" were boycotting the action en masse, the commission finally was mainly buying the land from.. Germans (the total of 71.2% in 1910 and 1913 71.3%). Frustrated Germans: the organisations, profesors such as Otto Hotzsch, local admi nistration etc postulated that the law should be passed which would allow to buy the land without the agreement from Polish owner. Such law was passed in 1908, march 20. Protests from around the world (the actions initiated by Polish writer Henryk Sienkiewicz, who convinced many intellectuals to sign letters of protests, the protests by some Germans etc) caused that first actions based on such law were in 1912, when 4 Polish estates were bought despite the protests of the owners. The First World War stopped such actions. (p52-5Cool
The new settlers received credits for new buildings and starting new life, etc etc. Sometimes the Commission was using low-moral Poles, who were buying the land from other Poles who otherwise were refusing to sell it to Germans; The official end of the Comission was 1 June 1924.
In addition there were other, non-government (though with government's blessing and backing) institutions which were giving credits on favourable terms, buing land and encouraging German settlement, and so called "land organisations" (Landgesellchaft) which were creating new large farms, with sepcific official goal of separating Poles and dissoluting Polish "element". (p28-66)
As mentioned earlier, Poles needed special allowance for making new building in countryside. In 1905-1913 in region of Bydgoszcz 78% of all petitions were refused (1904, 10 VIII, ansiedlungsnovelle). In some regions Poles had to provide the documents testifying, that they won't sell the building to other Pole, or that their investment is not violating the "settlement law modification" (mentioned ansiedlungsnovelle).
The name "battle for land" came becasue Poles started to defend, the organisations for helping were created by Poles, and both Germans and Poles tried to buy as much land as possible. The successes of Polish private organisation resulted in protulates by German newspapers for passing the law (Berliner Borsen-Zeitung 22 May 1907) which would made illegall the assistance to buying the land by private institutions. Suprisingly, the most sold land came from rich Poles, while the ones who were most active in propaganda and less eager to sell the land were sometimes the poorest ones...
As the result, in Posen majority of rural area (almost 60%) was in the hands of Germans (p74)
The German and public banks were refusing providing the credit for Poles, either directly or by making conditions which were highly discouraging, especially when compared to conditions offered to Germans. Sometimes they were gicing the credit, only suddenly demand everything back. Simultanously goverment was backing favourable credits for "strenghtening the German economy" in eastern provinces. The government was subsidising the self-help organisation, but since 1908 only on conditions, that such organisation will remove all Polish members. (p81)
There were also non-returnable subsidies paid by government (Niederlassungsbeihilfe), organisations such as HKT etc - all of which should result in limiting Polish economy and domination of Germans in economy of eastern provinces.
German soldiers were OFFICIALLY forbidden from goinf to Polish friseurs, German public institutions from delegating works and repairments to Polish companies etc. German organisations were printing works such as "Guide for German shops in Posen".
OTOH, Polish organisation had their meetings monitored and sometimes disbanded because of using of Polish lanugage; they could were refused from hiring the rooms etc etc. The economical boycott was from both sides. Both for the Poles and Germans it was patriotic duty to buy only from their nationalities. It was started by Poles, true, and later the German slogans were usually simply translations of earlier Polish ones, but the Poles, contrary to Germans, had not the backing of government. (p90)
Also :
History 1871-1939 Warszawa 2000 dr.Anna Radziwił prof.dr.hab Wojciech Roszkowski
Anna Radziwil-vicemnister of education in Poland, senator,history teacher, director of several Gymnasiums in Warsaw Wojciech Roszkowski-director of Institute of Political Studies PAN, lecturer in Main Trade School,Collegium Civitas, gives lectures in United States Universities, author of several works from history of Poland and the world.
Page 80. The fight against Polishness had a widespread range-it touched political sphere, national-cultural sphere, as well as economic one, and was led thru legal methods, by "law". You could process with Prussian authorities-something unthinkable in Russian part of partitoned Poland, where such an attempt would end in arrest or deportation. Intesification of the fight against Polishness happened after unification of Germany.(1871), when nationalistic(pangerman) feelings rose, whos representant was von Bismarck.This fight was led mostly in Grand Duchy of Poznan which was renamed Posen Province.Polish population had majority there(60 %) and had its own strong intelectual elites.On other lands of Prussian partition of Poland for example Pomerania Poles were minority and hadn't got strong intelectual elites.In Upper Silesia the few polish intelectuals for example Karol Miarka-who discovered his polish roots as an adult men-tried to preserve or even resurrect Polishness of the common people. In Poznan the fight with Polishness and about Polish culture took many forms.It was a fight over land, language and Church.In this fight the whole Polish society took part, both its upper classes, as well as peasents, which led to creation of GrandPolish ethos(etos wielkopoznanski)-which was made of interclass solidarity, strong connection to catholicism-the mark of being a Pole, and patriotic justified ability to selforganise and development. Centralne Towarzystwo Gospodarcze-existing from 1861, peasent circles, many forms of communes,peoples banks, and also Towarzystwo Czytelni Ludowych(Society of Reading for the Folk), singing societies-created an social infrastucture, which opposed the germanisation offensive.Gen. Dezydery Chlapowski,Maksymilian Jackowski, Roman Szymanski, priest Piotr Wawrzyniak were great patrons of these forms of national activity of Grand Polish society(...) Quite unexpectly a hero of the fight against german policy was to become archbishop of Gniezno Mieczyslwaw Ledóchowski, who at first period of his activity cut himself off from Polish activities.In 1872 however Bismarck started to pursue Kulturkampf policy.According to this priests were turned away from education for example.In schools german language was made compulsory apart from religion.Government wanted to have say in who will become who in church hierarchy.Civil marriages have become compulsory, and made of course only by german. officials.Ledóchowski who opposed this was arrested in 1874.This merging of fight against Catholicism with figh against Poles created in Polish society a feeling of identity between being a Pole and being a Catholic.It was then when the stereotype of "Polish Catholic" was created.Bismarck retreated from the most severe laws of Kulturkampf in late 70s.However antipolish legislation remained in place, and in 80s German government conducted another offensive.New steps of German government intended to increase number of Germans in polish partition and increase of the land controled by Germans and wanted a more efficient Germanisation policy.This fight was planned at beginning by Bismarck.In 1885 a measure called Rugi Pruskie was made-compulsory deportation of all polish workers who didn't get Prussian citizenship.They were repeated in following years.The first ones afflicted 26 000 people.In 1886 Colonisation Commision was made which had funds from Government and was to buyout land from Poles, and conduct settlement action of German settlers. After Bismarck left in 1890 policy of new chancellor seemed to indicate lessening of antipolish measures, but his followers intensified antipolish actions.
--Molobo 13:55, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: NB yes, you already spoke that your book lacks much information.However they are many more history books then the one you presented.Fortunetly you have much more sources(see above) to use that detail the events more clearly.
--Molobo 17:27, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I spoke what? No, Molobo, you're twisting my words again. If a history book doesn't write that Mr Hans Müller ate a sandwich in 1876, it doesn't mean it lacks this piece of information, it just doesn't found it noteworthy. Oh, there sure are many history books but when I open my newest that my old history teacher spoke highly of it, and I see that what you're doing mirrors the proportion of it less and less, you can even post whatever you cherrypicked and I'm still not convinced. See, you're just like a descendant of Mr Hans Müller: you might be able prove that Mr Hans Müller ate his sandwich but that it would not be an overstatement to cast it into the article is of course something you cannot prove. NightBeAsT 19:01, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

text: ...
 I could just as well read what experts in German history offer. NightBeAsT 19:53, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Not being Polish or German, I do agree that Bismarck's policies toward Poland and the German territories generally in the Kulturkampf are a significant part of German history (especially when we consider what Germany's policies and attitudes toward Poland eventually triggered...), but it needs to be introduced in a way that flows with the text and is not sensational. Nightbeast, I agree the tone of Molobo's addition is POV, but where exactly would "German historians" disagree with the general argument? Why don't we just have a basic mention here and do most of the expansion in the Kulturkampf article? Tfine80 21:26, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Tfine80, I do not think Bismarck's policies towards Poles are part of the Kulturkampf, as that is only defined as the fight against Catholicism. If in the Schulaufsichtsgesetz the state also used the power taken from the Catholic Church for an attempt at imposing the German language and culture, rather than the Polish, I do not count it as part of the fight against the Church but all who did count it as part of the Kulturkampf were already probably accumulated here or on talk:Kulturkampf by Molobo. Still, if I open a history book, Kulturkampf is defined as fight against Catholicism and the treatment of national minorities is a different chapter of little text, which tells me that it is most irrelevant and that impression hasn't changed. I didn't misunderstand what you mean by 'general argument', did I? NightBeAsT 18:41, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text:  While it may not be central to the definition of Kulturkampf, it is not "irrelevant." It is not some section of obscure, "little text" -- it is a major part of Polish history. Search for something like poland and kulturkampf on print.google.com, you will see that this is a major subject of academic discussion. Also, here's an entire book entitled "The Kulturkampf in Prussian Poland" published by Columbia University Press.  Catholicism is central to Polish culture, so it's not so surprising that this effort would have national and cultural dimensions. But I agree that it should not have a large mention in the article of History of Germany. Tfine80 22:57, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Nice try. But you forget a small detail. Bismarck wrote this within a private letter to his sister. Call him an uncaring person, but this was not his policy. You can only destroy a culture if you kill the people. But Bismarck tried to alter ("überformen") the polish culture. He misbelief that he can "change" the polish people to be more like germans, to  stabilize his power and stop the polish efforts to independence. He needs the polish people and he didn't wants to destroy them.--Revvar 13:04, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, that's your interpretation.  is a different. NightBeAsT 18:41, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Ouch. Like anyone cared about the monument... NightBeAsT 20:15, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Molobo, if you want it translated, all you need to do is ask for it, not pretend to misunderstand it. Bismarck is seen in Poland as "Pole-eater". When Poles are talking about the German Empire-uniter, a quotation of one of Bismarck's writing to his sister Alwine is liked to be cited: "Haut doch die Polen, daß sie am Leben verzagen. Wir können, wenn wir bestehen wollen, nichts anderes tun, als sie ausrotten." Bismarck has never practicised such politics, of course. His fight against Catholicism, however, is seen in Poland as war against Polonism up until today. Imprisonments of Catholic clergymen up to the Polish Primate, however, were an essential building block for the unity of the Polish nation. A unity that hasn't existed in Poland for centuries. NightBeAsT 20:15, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Persecution of Poles during Bismarck

message: An interesting analysis of this German word.It was repeated by Himmler in relation to Jews :
http://www.holocaust-history.org/himmler-poznan/ausrotten.shtml
Holocaust-deniers claim that there never was a Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews of Europe. They find it very difficult to explain away this speech, given in Poznan (also spelled "Posen") -- in which Heinrich Himmler talks about the "extermination of the Jewish people" and says quite frankly "we're eliminating the Jews, exterminating them."
In order to discount this speech, Holocaust-deniers will object to its translation. So the reader should pause to read Himmler's exact words:
	German 		English 	
 
	Ich meine die "Judenevakuierung": die Ausrottung des jüdischen Volkes. 		I am talking about the "Jewish evacuation": the extermination of the Jewish people
Following are two examples of Holocaust denial, then comes the third which somehwat Revvar used in his sentence: 
" You can only destroy a culture if you kill the people. But Bismarck tried to alter ("überformen") the polish culture."
Here is what the sight says on the word :
Third, they argue, the word "Ausrottung" does not actually mean "extermination," but instead "forced emigration" or "deportation." For example, David Irving has said this:
    Irving claims that it really means "stamping out" or "rooting out."
"Mistranslation" is the main argument and it is easy to dismantle. There are other claims besides these (and they all tend to contradict each other, just as these main three do). But these are the primary three.
So let's take a close look at our translation, particularly of this word "Ausrottung."
The verb "ausrotten" or its noun "Ausrottung," in the context of living things, refers to killing -- and not just killing, but an especially thorough destruction, a way of eradicating something so that it can never come back.
It is usually translated "extermination," and while that perhaps misses the character of the utter and irrevocable annihilation of "Ausrottung," it is probably the best English translation.
The Holocaust-denier argument will be that "Ausrottung" refers merely to deportation of the Jews, not killing them.
ourth, every good German dictionary confirms that "ausrotten," applied to living things, means killing, extermination, destruction. Here's Sprach-Brockhaus, 1972, defining the noun form "Ausrottung":
	Der Sprach-Brockhaus deutsches Bildwörterbuch, 1972, F.A. Brockhaus, Wiesbaden, p. 49 	
	die Ausrottung, völlige Vernichtung 		die Ausrottung: völlige Vernichtung. 	
"Völlige Vernichtung" means "complete annihilation."
Holocaust-deniers usually go on to say that "ausrotten" has changed meaning since the war. (David Irving, for example, has tried this tactic, writing "The word ausrotten means one thing now in 1994, but it meant something very different in the time Adolf Hitler uses it.")
So let's check the same dictionary from 1935:
	Der Sprach-Brockhaus deutsches Bildwörterbuch, 1935, F.A. Brockhaus, Leipzig, p. 38 	
	die Ausrottung, völlige Vernichtung 		die Ausrottung: völlige Vernichtung. 	
The only change is the typeface.
But the Sprach-Brockhaus is a small dictionary, providing not much context. Let's look at a more complete dictionary, the Muret-Sanders. This one is also German-to-English, so it will be most useful to English speakers (who will be the only ones confused by this word).
Here are its translations from 1906 and 1974:
	Muret-Sanders enzyklopädisches Wörterbuch der englischen und deutschen Sprache, Teil II: Deutsch-english, 1906, Langenscheidtsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Berlin-Schöneberg, p. 213 	
	ausrotten, exterminate 		ausrotten: I. 1. Unkraut [weeds]: to root out or up, to outroot, to uproot ... Volksstämme [races], Wölfe [wolves]: to exterminate.
2. fig. Mißbräuche [abuses]: to extirpate, eradicate, deracinate, auch: to weed out; (zerstören, vernichten) to destroy, annihilate.
II. das Ausrotten, die Ausrottung: rooting out, &c; fig. extirpation, extermination, deracination, destruction.
Ausrotter: extirpator, exterminator, &c; weeder-out; destroyer.
Ausrottungskrieg: war of extermination 	
	Der neue Muret-Sanders Langenscheidts enzyklopädisches Wörterbuch der englischen und deutschen Sprache, Teil II: Deutsch-englisch, 1974, Druckhaus Langenscheidt, Berlin-Schöneberg, 1974 	
	ausrotten, exterminate 		ausrotten: I. 1. (Unkraut [weeds] etc.) uproot, tear (od. pull) (s.th.) up by the roots, root (s.th.) up.
2. (Volk [a people], Rasse [race], etc.) exterminate, wipe out, extirpate: diese Krankheit rottete die ganze Bevölkerung aus this disease wiped out the entire population; die Urbevölkerung des Landes wurde ausgerottet the native population of the country was exterminated (od. killed off); etwas mit Stumpf und Stiel ausrotten auch fig. to destroy s.th. root and branch.
3. (Tiere [animals]) extirpate.
4. (Übel [evils] etc) eradicate, stamp out, root out, extirpate, exterminate: ein Vorurteil ausrotten to eradicate a prejudice; eine Krankheit ausrotten to stamp (od. wipe) out a disease; dieses Übel muß man mit der Wurzel ausrotten this evil must be uprooted; diese Unsitte ist nich auszurotten this bad habit is ineradicable.
[...]
Ausrottung: 1. cf. Ausrotten.
2. (eines Volkes [of a people], einer Rasse [of a race] etc) extermination, extirpation: systematische Ausrottung von Völkern [systematic Ausrottung of a people] (od. eines Volkes [of a people]) genocide.
3. (von Tieren [animals]) extirpation.
4. fig. eradication, extermination, extirpation.
5. med. (eines Tumors [of a tumor] etc) extirpation, eradication. 	
All this detail confirms one simple truth. The word means killing when discussing living things, such as Unkraut (weeds), Volksstämme, Volk, Rasse (a race), Wolfe (wolves), Tiere (animals), or Tumors (tumors).
Don't be confused by the second half of the 1906 dictionary definition, which quickly roughs in the noun form "Ausrottung." The smart reader will deduce the meaning from the verb form, which is given in detail for each context, and will only need the noun form to confirm the range of possible meanings. Which of those meanings to pick -- extirpation, extermination, deracination, destruction -- can be determined by the contexts given with the verb. Just because they are all listed together does not mean that a reader should cherry-pick one meaning out of context.
And don't be confused by the translation "extirpate." While it is not a common English word, it has a simple meaning: "to destroy completely; to pull up by the root; to cut out by surgery; synonym: see exterminate" (Merriam-Webster).
So when does "ausrotten" not mean literally killing? Only when applied to things which cannot be literally killed.
When applied to Mißbräuchen (abuses) or Übel (evils), obviously there can be no actual ending of life, because ideas are not alive, except metaphorically. In these contexts, ausrotten still means complete destruction, but it is best translated with terms like "stamp out," "deracinate," or "eradicate," which are more appropriate for describing the annihilation of an idea.
Holocaust-deniers will sometimes cherry-pick the most harmless-sounding translation from a figurative context, and pretend that is how Himmler was literally describing the fate of the Jews. Don't be fooled.
Or they will choose a definition that is specifically for the context of Unkraut (weeds), and say that the Jews were simply being "uprooted," which has a milder meaning for people. (But think: how does one kill a weed completely, so it can never return?)
Or they will pretend to be German etymologists and analyze each syllable of the word. While "aus" and "rotten" are cognate with English "out" and "root," the compound word has had its present meaning, and no other, since the 15th century.
Saying "aus-rotten" combines to mean "up-root" makes as much sense as an American denier claiming that the Latin roots "ex" (out of) and "terminus" (borders) combine into "ex-terminate"... meaning "deportation." Huh? If you as an English reader just did a double-take, that is how a German reader would react to misreading "ausrotten" as "uprooting" human beings. It's just wrong. 
--Molobo 20:01, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: What Ausrotten means in regards to people

message: I post here to ask for someone to mediate in the dispute with Molobo. Having seen Shauri extend offers of friendship to Molobo and to be met by utter hate and the guilt by association fallacy, and myself having tried in vain to communicate with him, I have come to the conclusion that I have no other way to handle Molobo, as of now, but to revert him.--Wiglaf 00:48, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversions

message: As far as I'm concerned, the reasons for reversion rely on relevance, neutrality and no original reasearch issues. The fact that such a large and detailed paragraph on the disputed matter is inserted here is unappropriate, as it deals with a very specifical issue that (in the extremely large time scope covered by the article) serves no relevant purpose. These claims belong in the Kulturkampf article, not in the History of Germany one. Such article is the proper context for the contents that are being intended to push here. As for neutrality, I think that statements like the one I reverted today by Tirid Tirid, "...Especially the Poles, hated by Bismarck who compered (compared?) them to wolfs, that one shoots..." are beyond the slightest consideration, and are borderline to vandalism. Last but not least, we're witnessing a debate on terminological issues and original interpretations that are not allowed as contents of a WP article. 
I have no intention to debate on Kulturkampf matters, but as Tfine80 has aptly put it, "just hav(ing) a basic mention here and most of the expansion in the Kulturkampf article" is exactly what is suggested by the WP guidelines and rules regarding relevance. Said mention already exists without the unnecessary detail (on this context) on the alleged anti-Polonist policies of Bismark, and I quote the article: "Non-German sections of population in the German Empire, like the Danish, Polish and French minorities, were withhold (withheld?) by Bismarck from societal integretation. (integration?)" I thus invite everyone involved with the contents dispute at this Page not to abort the debate, but to move it to the proper article. Regards, Shauri  smile! 15:33, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reasons

message: Since it is much needed, I created the Wikipedia:German_Wikipedians%27_notice_board. I am not a German, and (so) it needs people of the German wikipedian community to bring it up to scratch. - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 02:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  News: [[Wikipedia:German_Wikipedians%27_notice_board|German Wiki Notice Board]] 

message: The German Historical Institute is currently curating an online project entitled German History in Documents and Images (GHDI). GHDI is a comprehensive collection of primary source materials documenting Germany's political, social, and cultural history from 1500 to the present. It comprises original German texts, all of which are accompanied by new English translations, and a wide range of visual imagery. All of the materials can be accessed free of charge for teaching, research, and related purposes; the site is strictly intended for individual, non-commercial use. Some of the volumes are already completed and might be a good addition to this website. Would it be possible to include a link to our project? www.germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org   Thanks, 207.152.160.186 21:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to <i>German History in Documents and Images</i> (<i>GHDI</i>) 

message: I am a student, and I noticed that a non-logged-in user edited the Opposition to Iraq section.  The last sentance is now nothing more than personal opinion.  It also has horrid grammer and spelling.  Will someone KNOWLEDGABLE please fix it to a section more appropriate to wikipedia? Thank You from a student who regularly uses Wikipedia and depends on it for reliable information. // —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.159.180.41 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 13 April 2007
;Above Archived:FrankB 18:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Complaint