Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hitler & Co needed plentiful scapegoats to feed their hate agenda. Jews, the disabled, and ethnic minorities weren't sufficient to fill their needs for antipathy. Since many of the areas they wanted to control were populated by Slavs, they were a convenient target.
In accounts of WW2, the Nazis regularly referred to them as "untermannen" or subhumans.
All you stated isn't true. I could give you the real facts but I'm not going to waste my time.
The Slavs have a long history of being used by others, starting with the Romans who conquered them and used them as as slaves. Slav comes from the Latin word for slave. Hitler just continued the concept seeing them as vastly inferior.
I had to look up the Latin word for "slave" since English version didn't make much sense to me, and the word "shiavo" could have made sense, except for one thing; when you are talking about "Romans" - are you talking about "Romans Romans" as in "Roman Empire"?
But isn't it the history of the Ancient world ending somewhere in 476 C.E?
But "Slavs" don't even show up in the picture until 6th century. ( I've mentioned somewhere earlier that it was 8th or 9th, only because it was very difficult to pinpoint who/what they really were according to archeologists -
"The meaning of the term "Slav" depends upon the context in which it is used. This term can be used to refer to a culture (or cultures) living north of the River Danube, east of the River Elbe, and west of the River Vistula during the 530s CE.[7] In addition, Slav is an identifier for the common ethnic group.[8] Furthermore, Slav denotes any language with linguistic ties to the modern Slavic language family (which has no connection to a common culture or shared ethnicity).[9] Despite the various notions of Slav, it is unclear whether any of these descriptions add to an accurate representation of that group's history, since historians, such as George Vernadsky, Florin Curta, and Michael Karpovich have called into question how, why, and to what degree the Slavs were cohesive as a society between the 6th and 9th centuries.[10][11] When discussing the evidence that specialists use to construct a plausible history of the Slavs, the information tends to fall into three avenues of research: the archeological, the historiographic, and the linguistic.
Archaeologically, early Slavic physical evidence ranges from hill forts, to ceramic pots and fragments, to abodes. Archaeologists however face difficulties in distinguishing which finds are truly Slavic and which are not.[12] In addition, many of these findings are either inaccurately carbon-dated or so isolated that they do not reflect organized Slavic settlement."
So up until the mentioning of Kievan Rus ( and history that predates it, with the Slavic tribes settled on these territories in the 8th-9th century,) little is known about them.
And when you take in consideration that slaves in the Roman Empire were of different origin -
"Roman slavery was not based on race.[121][122] Slaves were drawn from all over Europe and the Mediterranean, including Gaul, Hispania, Germany, Britannia, the Balkans, Greece... Generally slaves in Italy were indigenous Italians,[123] with a minority of foreigners (including both slaves and freedmen) born outside of Italy estimated at 5% of the total in the capital at its peak, where their number was largest. Those from outside of Europe were predominantly of Greek descent, while the Jewish ones never fully assimilated into Roman society, remaining an identifiable minority. These slaves (especially the foreigners) had higher mortality rates and lower birth rates than natives, and were sometimes even subjected to mass expulsions. [124]"
this leaves me with even more doubt that the word "slaves" has been attributed to some particular group of people, that lived somewhere "north of the River Danube, east of the River Elbe, and west of the River Vistula during the 530s CE."
The Slavs have a long history of being used by others, starting with the Romans who conquered them and used them as as slaves. Slav comes from the Latin word for slave. Hitler just continued the concept seeing them as vastly inferior.
The word Slav does not originate from word slave, if anything it's the other way around. Slav comes from the word slava, which means glory or worship. So Slavs translates to "the glorious ones" or "those of one worship/faith/religion" or it comes from the word slovo which means word and so it would mean "those who speak one tounge" or it could mean all three. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs
The word Slav does not originate from word slave, if anything it's the other way around. Slav comes from the word slava, which means glory or worship. So Slavs translates to "the glorious ones" or "those of one worship/faith/religion" or it comes from the word slovo which means word and so it would mean "those who speak one tounge" or it could mean all three. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs
It most likely comes from slovo, as in some 700 BC I don't think the "glorious ones" wasn't really something people thought about. Also the word nemci would speak for this. Slovo = our people, nemci = not our people.
Nemci is the basis for the modern term for Germans in most Slavic languages, for those who don't know.
This is from the Webster dictionary
"Origin of SLAVE
Middle English sclave, from Anglo-French or Medieval Latin; Anglo-French esclave, from Medieval Latin sclavus, from Sclavus Slavic; from the frequent enslavement of Slavs in central Europe during the early Middle Ages
First Known Use: 14th century"
It's no coincidence that the Latin word for slave "shiavo" looks and sounds similar to slav which eventually turned to modern English slave. No, the ancient Romans didn't discriminate as far as who they used for slaves, but as they conquered tribes and territory to the east in Europe they had an abundant supply of slaves from people of that regions. Romanian language in eastern Europe is still derived from mostly Latin.
late 13c., "person who is the chattel or property of another," from Old French esclave (13c.), from Medieval Latin Sclavus "slave" (source also of Italian schiavo, French esclave, Spanish esclavo), originally "Slav" (see Slav); so used in this secondary sense because of the many Slavs sold into slavery by conquering peoples.
Well I suppose you can "believe" whatever you like, but the facts are clear that Hitler and the Nazis hatred for Slavic people unless of course you can find some hidden expression of love in a statement like:
“All Poles will disappear from the world.... It is essential that the great German people should consider it as its major task to destroy all Poles.” Heinrich Himmler
Hitler killed more Slavic people than any other ethnic group by huge numbers. Although they are white and European, they have a different ethnic origin than Germans do. Many Jews were just as "white" as Germans but that didn't make any difference. Hitler picked what groups he deemed to be inferior for his own benefit and sadly, the peoples of eastern Europe were slaughtered by the millions because they served no purpose to him other than to take over their lands.
Contrast this to how he felt about Italians because of their Roman ancestry and his friendship with Mussolini. He even adopted a variation of the old Roman arm held out salute for himself and his army. He admired Italians for their culture and love of art and bringing Europe out of the dark ages during the Renaissance. Hitler was an artist early in his life and his love of art never faded.
I'm just wondering why you believe Hitler didn't hate Slavic people when everything in history shows he did.
This is from the Webster dictionary
"Origin of SLAVE
Middle English sclave, from Anglo-French or Medieval Latin; Anglo-French esclave, from Medieval Latin sclavus, from Sclavus Slavic; from the frequent enslavement of Slavs in central Europe during the early Middle Ages
First Known Use: 14th century"
It's no coincidence that the Latin word for slave "shiavo" looks and sounds similar to slav which eventually turned to modern English slave. No, the ancient Romans didn't discriminate as far as who they used for slaves, but as they conquered tribes and territory to the east in Europe they had an abundant supply of slaves from people of that regions. Romanian language in eastern Europe is still derived from mostly Latin.
Yes, I've read it all, but given the consideration that the identification of what "Slavs" are, is not even easy to pinpoint, the "origin" of this word might be not more than a myth.
"Modern nations and ethnic groups called by the ethnonymSlavs are considerably diverse both genetically and culturally, and relations between them – even within the individual ethnic groups themselves – are varied, ranging from a sense of connection to mutual feelings of hostility."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
