You do have to keep per capita in mind though. Jews were targeted. Whites (arguably/officially) weren't. You can get into conspiracy theories where the whole thing was a purge of white people, some people do push that, but point is, just talking the official story, while many more white people were killed...they were also the ones doing the fighting. Although some whites were also holocausted. It all gets pretty muddy, honestly. Jews also weren't the only group being targeted, which is pretty crazy given how WW2 is talked about today.
Here's another interesting 'per capita vs raw numbers' stat, unrelated to WW2: There are more poor white people in America than there are blacks in their entirety. Yes, blacks are disproportionately poorer, but if the powers that be actually cared about poverty, there'd be more talk about the tens of millions of poor whites.
Again, you always do have to keep per capita in mind, because it does very much matter but, yes, there were many more whites killed than Jews holocausted, and there are many more poor white Americans than black Americans too. Things no one ever talks about.
Still, if they weren't targeted they would been killed in the front lines, obliterated in firebombing, or raped to death by Soviets. Surely it means that God worked a miracle through Hitler. His final solution saved the Jews and made them rulers of the Earth for 100 years.
I disagree with that assessment, personally. Rounding people up specifically for being of a certain group and then, no matter how you slice it, a fair bunch of them dying, will almost always have more of an impact than mixing a very small percentage of the population into the fighting force, and having some of them die on the frontlines or whatever.
Were some individual Jews saved by the concentration camps, that would have otherwise died in the fighting? Sure, 100%. Were Jews overall benefitting from being put in the camps? I find that unlikely.
Just swap things, and see how you'd feel, for example. Imagine they were rounding up specifically white people and putting them in camps where, at the very least, some of them were dying under horrible conditions. Would you feel that was better than white people simply being treated as anyone else, and many of those white men going to fight and die in the conflict, alongside everyone else? Alright, when I put it that way it doesn't sound so absurd after all, since you often didn't have a choice either way but, still, I'd personally prefer not to be singled out. I think I would rather take my chances in war than be at the mercy of people hostile toward me because of my group identity.
One more point; it wasn't just the young male Jews in the camps, either. So even if they on average benefited (which I still don't think they did), everyone else didn't. Children and grandpas and grandmas weren't going to go die on the frontlines, but they did die in the camps.
I'm not arguing no Jews ended up benefiting, but I don't think Jews as a whole benefited from the camps...aside from the excellent PR and propaganda after the fact, but that's a separate issue from treatment during the war. Anyway, it's certainly an interesting thought experiment if nothing else, though.
But here's the thing: Whites are rounded up in camps to be exterminated. Who's fighting a world war and dying by the millions to save them? Millions of black brothers come to our aid? Millions of Chinese fighting against other Chinese to save their favorite race the Whites? Millions of Jew sacrificing themselves to ensure that the Whites make it out alive?
The real miracle of WW2 is that the wester world went against human nature spanning millennia to fight for outgroup preference. This wasn't something like "flip the switch to change to tracks and if you don't 6,000,000 Jews die. This was real sacrifice and I never put it together.
Whoa. I never put this together but were more white people killed in WW2 (on both sides) than number of Jews that were "genocided"?
Call me dumb for not putting together before but even if you grant the Jews their magic number, the losses aren't anywhere close!
26 million slavs alone were killed if I remember correctly.
https://www.jta.org/2017/01/31/united-states/remember-the-11-million-why-an-inflated-victims-tally-irks-holocaust-historians
You do have to keep per capita in mind though. Jews were targeted. Whites (arguably/officially) weren't. You can get into conspiracy theories where the whole thing was a purge of white people, some people do push that, but point is, just talking the official story, while many more white people were killed...they were also the ones doing the fighting. Although some whites were also holocausted. It all gets pretty muddy, honestly. Jews also weren't the only group being targeted, which is pretty crazy given how WW2 is talked about today.
Here's another interesting 'per capita vs raw numbers' stat, unrelated to WW2: There are more poor white people in America than there are blacks in their entirety. Yes, blacks are disproportionately poorer, but if the powers that be actually cared about poverty, there'd be more talk about the tens of millions of poor whites.
Again, you always do have to keep per capita in mind, because it does very much matter but, yes, there were many more whites killed than Jews holocausted, and there are many more poor white Americans than black Americans too. Things no one ever talks about.
Still, if they weren't targeted they would been killed in the front lines, obliterated in firebombing, or raped to death by Soviets. Surely it means that God worked a miracle through Hitler. His final solution saved the Jews and made them rulers of the Earth for 100 years.
I disagree with that assessment, personally. Rounding people up specifically for being of a certain group and then, no matter how you slice it, a fair bunch of them dying, will almost always have more of an impact than mixing a very small percentage of the population into the fighting force, and having some of them die on the frontlines or whatever.
Were some individual Jews saved by the concentration camps, that would have otherwise died in the fighting? Sure, 100%. Were Jews overall benefitting from being put in the camps? I find that unlikely.
Just swap things, and see how you'd feel, for example. Imagine they were rounding up specifically white people and putting them in camps where, at the very least, some of them were dying under horrible conditions. Would you feel that was better than white people simply being treated as anyone else, and many of those white men going to fight and die in the conflict, alongside everyone else? Alright, when I put it that way it doesn't sound so absurd after all, since you often didn't have a choice either way but, still, I'd personally prefer not to be singled out. I think I would rather take my chances in war than be at the mercy of people hostile toward me because of my group identity.
One more point; it wasn't just the young male Jews in the camps, either. So even if they on average benefited (which I still don't think they did), everyone else didn't. Children and grandpas and grandmas weren't going to go die on the frontlines, but they did die in the camps.
I'm not arguing no Jews ended up benefiting, but I don't think Jews as a whole benefited from the camps...aside from the excellent PR and propaganda after the fact, but that's a separate issue from treatment during the war. Anyway, it's certainly an interesting thought experiment if nothing else, though.
But here's the thing: Whites are rounded up in camps to be exterminated. Who's fighting a world war and dying by the millions to save them? Millions of black brothers come to our aid? Millions of Chinese fighting against other Chinese to save their favorite race the Whites? Millions of Jew sacrificing themselves to ensure that the Whites make it out alive?
The real miracle of WW2 is that the wester world went against human nature spanning millennia to fight for outgroup preference. This wasn't something like "flip the switch to change to tracks and if you don't 6,000,000 Jews die. This was real sacrifice and I never put it together.