Talk:Aktion T4/Archive 1

message: :I fully agree. Three and a half paragraphs are devoted more to (admirable) Ernst Klee than to T-4 Euthanasia program itself. Even the synopsis of Klee's standard work is poor indeed. He would never have written: "Most of the participants of the T-4 Euthanasia Program became part of the Holocaust as well, ... even helping to build death camps as Belzec, Treblinka or Sobibor in Operation Reinhard, as Klee notes", because Klee knows better than most that it was the T-4 personnell that was transfered to the "Reinhardt" camps and that they not only helped to build these camps but  r a n  them indeed. They were not any "helpers", they were the real k i l l e r s! I hope it has not been the intention of the author(s) to make killers appear as harmless looking helpers.  P. Witte 17:54, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ernst Klee]] 

message: I reverted the following edit, as it is a gross oversimplification:
:T-4 Euthanasia Program was the official name of Nazi Germany's Eugenic euthanasia program which killed some 200,000 people as the first stage of what would come to be called the Holocaust (which killed some 11 million people).
What follows the "which" is incautious. If the Holocaust had "stages", one needs to be careful in asserting that anything that happened before the invasion of the Soviet Union necessarily led to what happened thereafter. Elements of T-4 may have been essential to the Holocaust, particularly Operation Reinhardt, but there is no evidence indicating that there was a larger plan, of which T-4 was a first step. If one follows the accounts synthesised by Browning, it was only the difficulties created by the extreme violence used by the Einsatzgruppen on somewhat independent initiative and the consonance of its purpose with the senior leadership of the RSHA that caused the SS to cast about for more efficient means of mass murder and thus to redeploy technology used by T-4. It seems far more important to introduce these distinctions as closely as possible with any statements linking this to the Holocaust than to cite statistics. Buffyg 00:42, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The statement is not false, only oversimplified and I think it should be reworded then restored into the article because it brings the introduction/definition of T-4 into context with common knowledge of history.--AI 02:09, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure if it's a good thing to stuff everything under the holocaust. What sets the holocaust apart is it's racial motives, Stalin made more victims. The racial laws and the propaganda would have been the first stage anyways. It's probably better leaving a clear intro, and deal with this elsewhere in the article. --Scandum 10:24, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see my additions reg. T-4 program in occupied Poland elaborated in World_War_II_atrocities_in_Poland#Extermination_of_the_psychiatric_patients. --Ttyre 16:38, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It might be better if you add a link to the extermination of patients in Poland instead. Only German citizens fell under the euthanesia laws and hence the T-4 program. Using the word atrocities isn't entirely right nor NPOV btw. --Scandum 17:50, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  T-4 and the Shoah 

message: I feel very uncomfortable about the use of the word euthanasia to describe the T-4 programme. Even if this is a fair translation of the original German phrase used by the nazis, its repeated use during the article seems to justify the murders rather than pointing out that murder in the name of eugenics and euthanasia are not mutually interchangeable descriptions.
Not only does this clumsy use of language diminish the sadism of the crime described, but it also degenerates the concept of euthanasia - the practice of helping someone bring a dignified end to their life at their own request.
Whether or not the reader is pro-euthanasia, I think most people will agree that there is a strong difference between the two concepts on a linguistic and academic level. Mention should be made of the fact that euthanasia was used as a euphemism by the nazis, but I do not think its usage should recur later in the article.
:Would it be sufficient to keep the word "euthanasia" in quotes? I don't think these would be scare-quotes so much as an indication that one is acknowledging a usage without having to accept it. Unless there is some recognised alternative language to be found in scholarship, I think quotation is what one would have to settle for. Buffyg 12:53, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think its the modern usage of euthanasia which is in fact the problem.  Today, it is synonymous with suicide when applied to humans.  Most of the people executed under the T-4 program were biologically inferior, and the criteria applied to them was the same applied to the execution of a lame horse.  The only issue here is does eugenics require the religious respect for all human life?  The answer is clearly "no".  While we can have a eugenics program that simply sterilizes the inferior, the result is the same: defective genes are prevented from reproducing.  
I don't see anyone using this same fervor over Spartan infanticide.  The fact is while today, we may hold to the belief that all human life must be preserved, that is a modern value system and one that is grossly dependent upon our technological sophistication.  Surely, it is not the value system of nature.  So, why apply it to Wikipedia?
*I support using the term in quotes the first few times, or at least adding a line about how the Nazis considers it "euthanasia" but calling it such could be very problematic (the Nazis also called killing "disinfection", of course). --Fastfission 00:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The word 'extermination' probably fits better, and associating euthanasia with an extermination program given the way euthanasia is practiced nowadays is possibly POV. Scare quotes isn't a good way to write a neutral article either imo. Possibly best is clearly describing what the nazis meant with euthanasia? --Scandum 18:08, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, for once, we might agree. --Fastfission 02:38, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage of the word euthanasia 

message: I am pretty sure that the main Nazi compulsory sterilization program was carried out under different official auspices than the euthanasia program. Is the intro to this article implying otherwise, or is it saying that they also did sterilizations under T-4 as well? I know less about T-4 than I do the sterilization programs so I don't have an answer off-hand myself. --Fastfission 18:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sterilizations and euthanasia?

message: The purpose of the program was to both lower expenses by systematically killing the institutionalized as well as preserving the genetic quality of the German population by sterilizing people with physical deformities etc.
I enjoyed this article, though this section stuck out to me - wouldn't it be more dissasociative with the subject matter to say furthering the Nazi [cause or ideal] of preserving the genetic quality etc.? Cheers. (Sergelapelle 22:38, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Establishment and purpose - Phrasing 

message: This article needs something about the successful opposition to the program. Adam 14:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Opposition

message: I just wanted to add that the line stating "...Hartheim to suffocate mostly adult victims with carbon monoxide even..." is incorrect.  When you kill people with carbon monoxide you aren't suffocating them.  You are in fact poisoning them and they will continue to breath in oxygen until the stop inhaling.  I didn't feel confident enought to change it myself.  I will come back to this article to see the change and perhaps just change the next one myself next time I see a small error.
Minshullj 06:23, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small Detail in History of the program 

message: The German word "Volksgenosse" means "racial comrade." The word "volk" can be used in several ways. In the well-known phase on the Reichstag, "Dem Deutschen Volk," it means all the German people. In the DDR, the Volkspolizei were the "people's police", meaning the working people in a class sense. But the Nazis used it to refer to the German race, as opposed to non-German races such as Jews. The expression "Volksgenosse" meant a "racial comrade" not a "people's comrade" in the sense socialists would have used it. See the German Wikipedia on this. Adam 11:16, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Nazis didn't talk about a "German Race", that would have been the Aryan race. But the poster doesn't adress all "Aryans", it's  focus are the German people (or here: taxpayers) (compare with "Volkswagen", the car for the "(German) people"). That the Nazis had their own, racistic  definition of "German" or "German people" is true,  but still "race comrade" is the translation of "Rassengenosse" (a term also used by Hitler) and not the correct translation of "Volksgenosse".  - 195.49.2.166 11:57, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Volksgenosse

message: Adam, do it again without discussion while I am in the middle of an edit and we shall see what we shall see.
Remember,
:I can trace my ancestry back to a protoplasmic primordial atomic globule. Consequently, my family pride is something inconceivable. I can't help it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Caltrop (talk • contribs) .
*I have explained my reversion above. Kindly respond.
*I will continue to revert sloppy edits. Adam 13:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  pushing 3RR 

message: I've changed two words in the introductory paragraph relating to the use of the word 'kill' (killings and killed).  Common usage of these words has depersonalized an extreme criminal program (eligible for prosecution as a "Crime Against Humanity"), albeit one that was institutionalized by the highest levels of the then-current German regime.
When a tree falls in a park and crushes a child playing underneath it, it would be fair (in most people's views) to describe the child's death with the verb 'killed'.
When a government institutionalizes mass murder for its ulterior motives, please call a spade a spade and avoid being polite by use of the word 'kill'.  What they did, whether or not they issued an edict, was 'murder'.  If this is less digestable to the casual reader, so be it.  Mass murder should be demonized by all societies at every opportunity if we want to avoid repeating it continuously, forever.
64.231.37.251 16:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Depersonalization" is not something that Wikipedia is concerned with, and the point is not to be "digestable to the casual reader", either.  Personalization or POV is disallowed by Wikipedia.  See WP:NPOV.  While the programs were horrendous, the term "Murder" is not NPOV and Wikipedia has no place "demonizing" any topic. -- Renesis13 21:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Murder' vs. 'Killing'

message: Adam, I was completely wrong, and in the wrong, to abusively 3RR-block you -- you are a major contributor and all-around good guy and WP resource. Forgive me, I was in the midst of my usual DAFT minor edit fog. 
Please accept my sincere apologies. Caltrop 22:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Killing of people with disabilities in Nazi Germany is a little unwieldy, IMHO. Ifnord 16:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apology to Adam 

message: There is now two articles on this topic. T-4 Euthanasia Program and Killing of people with disabilities in Nazi Germany. The latter is a rewrite by User talk:Adam Carr who insists that the title (which I find unwieldy and think no one would ever type in as a search) is the only title that fits. I have no strong feelings on the topic, nor the two versions of the page. I would like comment from the community though, especially on the title. Ifnord 17:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If one leaves everything alone, nothing would get done. That is the collaborative spirit of Wikipedia. I have a problem with the new title. I understand Adam does not like the word euthanasia being used in this context, but that's his opinion. What if someone rewrites Abortion into Killing unborn babies then deletes the redirects the original article into the rewrite? How about Capitalism into Ruling class supresses the masses by monetary policy? Let us agree on a NPOV title that accurately reflects what the article is about. Ifnord 15:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A poor analogy: no-one disputes that abortion is abortion. I dispute that T4 was a euthanasia program. See further comments below. Adam 02:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: DE has an article on and their T4 page a mention of this program. I've got a source calling this a "joint T4-SS operation", i think on the basis that T4 killing centers and doctors were used and paperwork went back to Tiergartenstraße. Any thoughts on how to include this information?EricR 14:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aktion 14f13