This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Madagascar Plan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Madagascar Plan has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on June 3, 2014, June 3, 2015, June 3, 2020, and June 3, 2022. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hm... I've read once that Jewish Poles sent commission to Madagascar, to estimate chances for settlement - this was supposedly before the war and supposedly was sponsored by Polish government. Commission returned with negative result. Anyone knows more about that? Szopen 17:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Yes. Heinrich Haertle mentions it on page 165 of Freispruch fuer Deutschland (Verlag K.W. Schuetz, Goettingen, 1965)
"Dieser Traum ist allerdings nicht nur von Theodor Herzl, sondern auch der polnischen Regierung getraeumt worden, die im Jahre 1937 eine Kommission damit beauftragte, zu pruefen, ob man nicht die 3 millionen polnischer Juden nach Madagaskar verfrachten koenne."
My translation:
This dream was certainly dreamed not only by Herzl, but also by the Polish Government, which in the year 1937 established a commission to examine whether it might not be possible to freight the 3 million Polish Jews off to Madagascar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadding ( talk • contribs) 13:45, 16 August 2008
This sounds like a tall story. Would the Polish government or Jewish Poles have dared to investigate such a plan without the prior approval of the French government, (which would have otherwise gone ballistic had it found out)? It would have been a non starter without French approval in which case there will records somewhere in France. Who the Hell was Haertle anyway?
This reference would be best edited out of the article as unsafe. At the very least it must have references added. It brings the whole article into disrepute at present. Kombo the mzungu ( talk) 17:10, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Should a mention be made to the Lehi (group) proposal for a Nazi-friendly Israel? Since there is no proof of German answer, it may be too unrelated. -- Error 00:52, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
As we know the Nazis' Final Solution did not only incorporate Jews, but also other social 'undesirables' like homosexuals, paedophiles and career criminals
Just wondering (been ages since I studied any of this) if the Madagascar Plan also included these 'undesirables' or if it was only centred on Jews — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannigaholic ( talk • contribs) 22:18, 8 October 2006
While most of us, myself included, can certainly agree that mass murder is indeed heinous, it would seem that not all of us can. Therefore, use of this term is not-so-subtle POV. In addition, linking that term to the Holocaust is a violation of the easter egg guideline found at Wikipedia:Piped link.
The new language aims to preserve all the meaning of the sentence but via neutral wording and historically-accurate phrases.
– ArmadniGeneral ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Given that Nazi concentration camps were already making widespread use of forced labor in 1938, it is very difficult for me to imagine Nazis giving any serious thought to the idea of wasting ships and fuel to transport Jews all the way to Madagascar to live free lives - nor can I picture Jews doing much useful slave labor for the Reich so far removed from the action. The article makes it sound like the Germans would really have gone through with this cockamamie idea if only the British had not been such trouble... I'm thinking that extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof, because it's just so much easier to dismiss everything about the Plan as propaganda. 70.15.116.59 03:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
"Note that the plan was to use the British navy for transportation only after the war was won...." Even without British cooperation or even an armistice with Britain, the transfer of Europe's Jewish population to Madagascar could have been accomplished over time using passenger ships of neutral states. After June 1940, France was such a neutral state. Britain did not dare to invade Madagascar until May 1942, months after the US had entered the war. Hadding ( talk) 13:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Hadding, what you say isn't quite true. The Germans could not have transported millions of Jews to Madagascar (think of the logistics even if they were transported in the same condition as the cattle cars to Auschwitz). The Royal Navy had imposed a blockade on Germany and the rest of Occupied Europe - which really included France since it was only the southern portion, and that away from the Atlantic coast, which was "unoccupied". I don't think the Nazis needed the RN to transport the Jews, but they did need the blockade lifted, I mean it wasn't as if they were able to get Vichy France to import oil and natural rubber for them in defiance of the British blockade! As for Britain "not daring to occupy Madagascar". You misunderstand. Britain occupied Iceland, which was theoretically neutral even if Denmark had been occupied. The point was that they feared the Germans would occupy the island, and it's position in the mid-North Atlantic made it extremely strategically important for the vital Battle of the Atlantic. Madagascar, in contrast, was not seen as a threat. It was on the other side of the World from Nazi Germany. There was no hope of the Germans sending significant military resources there, and with South Africa, India, and Australia ringing the Indian Ocean, it seemed sown up for the Allied cause. It only became an issue when the Japanese took Singapore and the Dutch East Indies, and occupied Burma. Then the worry was that the JAPANESE might take it over and use it as a base to control the Indian Ocean. Once that happened, a force was sent out. So it was the entry of the Japanese into the war, by attacking the Americans, that brought it about. Why would Britain want to isolate 10's of thousands of troops in occupying Madagascar in the midst of a war where they were fighting for survival when it was no threat, and they would gain little from doing so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.39.162.130 ( talk) 09:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I think Jews to Madagascar should be merged into this article. It has some information not in this one currently, but is more or less the same article. Thoughts?-- TM 13:24, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
One important thing to note here is that there were two, possibly related, phenomenon that generally fall under this heading in Poland. One was the ONR slogan - which is what the article currently describes - and which would (presumably) involve forcible deportations in a manner similar to the Nazi plan. The other was a "Madagascar Plan" proposed by the French government ( Blum's government if I'm not mistaken) to create a Jewish Homeland on Madagascar. This one would have been voluntary and would probably be more similar to the British Uganda Program or the proposal for Jewish Homeland in Alaska. I think it's pretty important to distinguish between the two. radek ( talk) 20:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Some related sources: [1], [2]. The idea seemed to originate with the French who were seeking a way of dealing with the refugee "problem" of Jews from Germany after Nazis came to power. The ONR slogan came later. radek ( talk) 21:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
The timing of the Hitler's approval of the plan was designed to concide with the Evian conference and show that the Nazis were doing more to help the Jews then the British and their allies were. The territorialists generally encouraged Jews to migrate to Argentina. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.68.144.99 ( talk • contribs) 14:04, 22 February 2011
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ealdgyth ( talk · contribs) 15:26, 15 June 2013 (UTC) I'll be reviewing this shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:26, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
When I think about compelling presentation, I think about taking the reader on a journey through time. Madagascar Plan was not a country (!) but a failed concept inspired by extreme prejudice. I placed the portrait of the 19th century creator of this concept at the top of our 2013 good article in order to differentiate the layout from the standard country layout where the maps do matter more than individuals. Every reference I added spoke of a different aspect of Paul de Lagarde role in the plan. The new citations were not repetitious. They came from relevant books. Strehle (reverted by Diannaa) claimed that de Lagarde had good relations with Jews in spite of his views. Rees (again, reverted by Diannaa) said that de Lagarde wanted the Jews eliminated. Also, please be assured that I put a lot of thought into what I do. I have a hard time understanding the need for a complete overhaul of my direct and straightforward improvements. My words were rewritten with bits and pieces removed for no particular reason. WP:STACKING was introduced in the process, so now, his picture shows side by side with Nazi Germany (not with the Origins of the concept) ... Here's a quote from one of our Wikipedia relevant policies: It is quite reasonable to take an interest in an article on a topic you care about − perhaps you are an expert, or perhaps it is just your hobby; however, if this watchfulness starts to become possessiveness, then you are overdoing it. Poeticbent talk 23:53, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Would it not be worth mentioning the " Jewish Autonomous Oblast" (f. 1934) in the east of the Soviet Union in the "Origins" section, since the Uganda Plan already gets a mention? I certainly am not suggesting that the one was a precursor of the other, but it is certainly of at least tangential relevance. It might also work as a "see also". Excellent article by the way! 129.67.64.157 ( talk) 17:59, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
That box on the right that says "Madagascar Plan" only shows information about Madagascar. Either the title needs to be changed, information about the plan needs to be add or the box needs to be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deuteranopia ( talk • contribs) 02:24, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
I made a map of Israel compared to Madagascar and it was removed HERE with the comment that it was Original Research, I'm not sure why, it's an illustration for the article. Raquel Baranow ( talk) 00:34, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
The article states: The idea of Jewish resettlement was taken up in the 1920s by British antisemites
however, throughout the entire article there's not a single word about the creation of
Mandatory Palestine by the British in 1920, which made it all possible. The omission of such an essential fact creates the illusion that Mandate Palestine had nothing to do with the idea of resettlement talked about for years prior to the Holocaust. A
Wikipedia:Good article you say? This is mind boggling.
Poeticbent
talk 16:50, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Many Jews were expected to perish in the implementation of this plan. [1] = is this Longerich's interpretation or the documented intent/expectation of the Nazis? In other words, 'who expected'? Nishidani ( talk) 20:28, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
References
Was anything ever mentioned in relation to any of this, as to how the native population of Madagascar would fit into this? It was not an uninhabited island... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.238.38.47 ( talk) 22:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
The claim that "Hitler resolved that the Jews of Europe were to be exterminated immediately rather than after the war, which now had no end in sight" is controversial. There is no evidence to support such a claim. In any event the allegation is irrelevant to the topic. Royalcourtier ( talk) 03:21, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help) Longerich also covers this point in his book Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of the Jews (2010). The material is included as general information at the bottom of the article, as a way to indicate to the reader how the Nazis proceeded after the failure of the Madagascar Plan. For this reason, I disagree that it's off-topic. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 13:36, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
These are the words of Hilberg (2003): "Even as it faded, the [Madagascar Plan] was to be mentioned one more time, during early February 1941, in Hitler's headquarters" (p. 415). This article, however, says that "Hitler continued to mention the plan until February 1942". There is a world of difference between these two dates. Uglemat ( talk) 21:04, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
For clarity, this the paragraph in Longerich 2010 which is cited:
Inspired by the intention to annihilate the Jews under German rule, Hitler was to keep coming back to the Madagascar Project time and again until 1942, by which time the idea of ‘anywhere’ had been replaced by that of ‘nowhere’.102 [Peter Longerich, The Unwritten Order: Hitler’s Role in the Final Solution (Brunscombe Port, 2003), 185.] In the Foreign Ministry the plan was officially shelved in February 1942.103 [See Brechtken, ‘Madagaskar’, 270 ff., which has full details and references; Henry Picker Hitlers Tischgespräche im Führerhauptquartier (Stuttgart, 1976), 29 May 1942, p. 340 and 24 July 1942, p. 456; PAA, Inland IIg 177, Rademacher to Bielfeld, 10 Feb. 1942 (on the end of the Project).]
This should be straightforward to verify. Either Longerich can show specific instances later than February 1941, or he should not be used. The prolongation of the Madagascar Plan would seem to reinforce Longerich's far-fetched thesis that the decision came only in early 1942, so he must absolutely prove his statement. Uglemat ( talk) 11:01, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Here is a quote from Cristopher Browning 2004:
As late as December 1940 [Eichmann] told Bernhard Lösener of the Interior Ministry that the Madagascar Plan was still sitting on Heydrich’s desk, awaiting his signature.... Like a spectacular meteor, the Madagascar Plan blazed across the sky of Nazi Jewish policy, only to burn out abruptly. [p. 88]
A subtitle in a chapter is called "The last spasms of expulsion policy, fall 1940 – spring 1941" (p. 89). Another quote:
Active consideration of Madagascar had ceased the previous fall [i.e., fall 1940], although occasional references to that island as a future destination continued to surface for months. [p. 102]
When Browning discusses a press announcement by Heydrich in October 1941 where Heydrich contemplated the resettlement of the Jews outside of europe, Browning writes: "As Madagascar was by that time but a distant memory, Heydrich must have been referring to the east." (p. 302, emphasis added). Browning confirms that the plan was "officially" shelved in the Foreign Office on 10 February 1942 (p. 415). But that does not mean the plan was actually still alive. Clearly this supports Hilberg. The plan emerged in 1940, and by early 1941 it was dead. Uglemat ( talk) 11:51, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
I have added a map based on two essays on the topic (sources in the image). If anyone has any feedback, or have noticed I've made a mistake, please feel more than welcome to add it. Lazdona ( talk) 20:40, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
A new paper of Eric Kurlander has some interesting details and dissents from many previous views. Zero talk 10:30, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Madagascar Plan article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Madagascar Plan has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on June 3, 2014, June 3, 2015, June 3, 2020, and June 3, 2022. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hm... I've read once that Jewish Poles sent commission to Madagascar, to estimate chances for settlement - this was supposedly before the war and supposedly was sponsored by Polish government. Commission returned with negative result. Anyone knows more about that? Szopen 17:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Yes. Heinrich Haertle mentions it on page 165 of Freispruch fuer Deutschland (Verlag K.W. Schuetz, Goettingen, 1965)
"Dieser Traum ist allerdings nicht nur von Theodor Herzl, sondern auch der polnischen Regierung getraeumt worden, die im Jahre 1937 eine Kommission damit beauftragte, zu pruefen, ob man nicht die 3 millionen polnischer Juden nach Madagaskar verfrachten koenne."
My translation:
This dream was certainly dreamed not only by Herzl, but also by the Polish Government, which in the year 1937 established a commission to examine whether it might not be possible to freight the 3 million Polish Jews off to Madagascar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadding ( talk • contribs) 13:45, 16 August 2008
This sounds like a tall story. Would the Polish government or Jewish Poles have dared to investigate such a plan without the prior approval of the French government, (which would have otherwise gone ballistic had it found out)? It would have been a non starter without French approval in which case there will records somewhere in France. Who the Hell was Haertle anyway?
This reference would be best edited out of the article as unsafe. At the very least it must have references added. It brings the whole article into disrepute at present. Kombo the mzungu ( talk) 17:10, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Should a mention be made to the Lehi (group) proposal for a Nazi-friendly Israel? Since there is no proof of German answer, it may be too unrelated. -- Error 00:52, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
As we know the Nazis' Final Solution did not only incorporate Jews, but also other social 'undesirables' like homosexuals, paedophiles and career criminals
Just wondering (been ages since I studied any of this) if the Madagascar Plan also included these 'undesirables' or if it was only centred on Jews — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannigaholic ( talk • contribs) 22:18, 8 October 2006
While most of us, myself included, can certainly agree that mass murder is indeed heinous, it would seem that not all of us can. Therefore, use of this term is not-so-subtle POV. In addition, linking that term to the Holocaust is a violation of the easter egg guideline found at Wikipedia:Piped link.
The new language aims to preserve all the meaning of the sentence but via neutral wording and historically-accurate phrases.
– ArmadniGeneral ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Given that Nazi concentration camps were already making widespread use of forced labor in 1938, it is very difficult for me to imagine Nazis giving any serious thought to the idea of wasting ships and fuel to transport Jews all the way to Madagascar to live free lives - nor can I picture Jews doing much useful slave labor for the Reich so far removed from the action. The article makes it sound like the Germans would really have gone through with this cockamamie idea if only the British had not been such trouble... I'm thinking that extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof, because it's just so much easier to dismiss everything about the Plan as propaganda. 70.15.116.59 03:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
"Note that the plan was to use the British navy for transportation only after the war was won...." Even without British cooperation or even an armistice with Britain, the transfer of Europe's Jewish population to Madagascar could have been accomplished over time using passenger ships of neutral states. After June 1940, France was such a neutral state. Britain did not dare to invade Madagascar until May 1942, months after the US had entered the war. Hadding ( talk) 13:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Hadding, what you say isn't quite true. The Germans could not have transported millions of Jews to Madagascar (think of the logistics even if they were transported in the same condition as the cattle cars to Auschwitz). The Royal Navy had imposed a blockade on Germany and the rest of Occupied Europe - which really included France since it was only the southern portion, and that away from the Atlantic coast, which was "unoccupied". I don't think the Nazis needed the RN to transport the Jews, but they did need the blockade lifted, I mean it wasn't as if they were able to get Vichy France to import oil and natural rubber for them in defiance of the British blockade! As for Britain "not daring to occupy Madagascar". You misunderstand. Britain occupied Iceland, which was theoretically neutral even if Denmark had been occupied. The point was that they feared the Germans would occupy the island, and it's position in the mid-North Atlantic made it extremely strategically important for the vital Battle of the Atlantic. Madagascar, in contrast, was not seen as a threat. It was on the other side of the World from Nazi Germany. There was no hope of the Germans sending significant military resources there, and with South Africa, India, and Australia ringing the Indian Ocean, it seemed sown up for the Allied cause. It only became an issue when the Japanese took Singapore and the Dutch East Indies, and occupied Burma. Then the worry was that the JAPANESE might take it over and use it as a base to control the Indian Ocean. Once that happened, a force was sent out. So it was the entry of the Japanese into the war, by attacking the Americans, that brought it about. Why would Britain want to isolate 10's of thousands of troops in occupying Madagascar in the midst of a war where they were fighting for survival when it was no threat, and they would gain little from doing so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.39.162.130 ( talk) 09:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I think Jews to Madagascar should be merged into this article. It has some information not in this one currently, but is more or less the same article. Thoughts?-- TM 13:24, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
One important thing to note here is that there were two, possibly related, phenomenon that generally fall under this heading in Poland. One was the ONR slogan - which is what the article currently describes - and which would (presumably) involve forcible deportations in a manner similar to the Nazi plan. The other was a "Madagascar Plan" proposed by the French government ( Blum's government if I'm not mistaken) to create a Jewish Homeland on Madagascar. This one would have been voluntary and would probably be more similar to the British Uganda Program or the proposal for Jewish Homeland in Alaska. I think it's pretty important to distinguish between the two. radek ( talk) 20:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Some related sources: [1], [2]. The idea seemed to originate with the French who were seeking a way of dealing with the refugee "problem" of Jews from Germany after Nazis came to power. The ONR slogan came later. radek ( talk) 21:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
The timing of the Hitler's approval of the plan was designed to concide with the Evian conference and show that the Nazis were doing more to help the Jews then the British and their allies were. The territorialists generally encouraged Jews to migrate to Argentina. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.68.144.99 ( talk • contribs) 14:04, 22 February 2011
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ealdgyth ( talk · contribs) 15:26, 15 June 2013 (UTC) I'll be reviewing this shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:26, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
When I think about compelling presentation, I think about taking the reader on a journey through time. Madagascar Plan was not a country (!) but a failed concept inspired by extreme prejudice. I placed the portrait of the 19th century creator of this concept at the top of our 2013 good article in order to differentiate the layout from the standard country layout where the maps do matter more than individuals. Every reference I added spoke of a different aspect of Paul de Lagarde role in the plan. The new citations were not repetitious. They came from relevant books. Strehle (reverted by Diannaa) claimed that de Lagarde had good relations with Jews in spite of his views. Rees (again, reverted by Diannaa) said that de Lagarde wanted the Jews eliminated. Also, please be assured that I put a lot of thought into what I do. I have a hard time understanding the need for a complete overhaul of my direct and straightforward improvements. My words were rewritten with bits and pieces removed for no particular reason. WP:STACKING was introduced in the process, so now, his picture shows side by side with Nazi Germany (not with the Origins of the concept) ... Here's a quote from one of our Wikipedia relevant policies: It is quite reasonable to take an interest in an article on a topic you care about − perhaps you are an expert, or perhaps it is just your hobby; however, if this watchfulness starts to become possessiveness, then you are overdoing it. Poeticbent talk 23:53, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Would it not be worth mentioning the " Jewish Autonomous Oblast" (f. 1934) in the east of the Soviet Union in the "Origins" section, since the Uganda Plan already gets a mention? I certainly am not suggesting that the one was a precursor of the other, but it is certainly of at least tangential relevance. It might also work as a "see also". Excellent article by the way! 129.67.64.157 ( talk) 17:59, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
That box on the right that says "Madagascar Plan" only shows information about Madagascar. Either the title needs to be changed, information about the plan needs to be add or the box needs to be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deuteranopia ( talk • contribs) 02:24, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
I made a map of Israel compared to Madagascar and it was removed HERE with the comment that it was Original Research, I'm not sure why, it's an illustration for the article. Raquel Baranow ( talk) 00:34, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
The article states: The idea of Jewish resettlement was taken up in the 1920s by British antisemites
however, throughout the entire article there's not a single word about the creation of
Mandatory Palestine by the British in 1920, which made it all possible. The omission of such an essential fact creates the illusion that Mandate Palestine had nothing to do with the idea of resettlement talked about for years prior to the Holocaust. A
Wikipedia:Good article you say? This is mind boggling.
Poeticbent
talk 16:50, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Many Jews were expected to perish in the implementation of this plan. [1] = is this Longerich's interpretation or the documented intent/expectation of the Nazis? In other words, 'who expected'? Nishidani ( talk) 20:28, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
References
Was anything ever mentioned in relation to any of this, as to how the native population of Madagascar would fit into this? It was not an uninhabited island... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.238.38.47 ( talk) 22:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
The claim that "Hitler resolved that the Jews of Europe were to be exterminated immediately rather than after the war, which now had no end in sight" is controversial. There is no evidence to support such a claim. In any event the allegation is irrelevant to the topic. Royalcourtier ( talk) 03:21, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help) Longerich also covers this point in his book Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of the Jews (2010). The material is included as general information at the bottom of the article, as a way to indicate to the reader how the Nazis proceeded after the failure of the Madagascar Plan. For this reason, I disagree that it's off-topic. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 13:36, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
These are the words of Hilberg (2003): "Even as it faded, the [Madagascar Plan] was to be mentioned one more time, during early February 1941, in Hitler's headquarters" (p. 415). This article, however, says that "Hitler continued to mention the plan until February 1942". There is a world of difference between these two dates. Uglemat ( talk) 21:04, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
For clarity, this the paragraph in Longerich 2010 which is cited:
Inspired by the intention to annihilate the Jews under German rule, Hitler was to keep coming back to the Madagascar Project time and again until 1942, by which time the idea of ‘anywhere’ had been replaced by that of ‘nowhere’.102 [Peter Longerich, The Unwritten Order: Hitler’s Role in the Final Solution (Brunscombe Port, 2003), 185.] In the Foreign Ministry the plan was officially shelved in February 1942.103 [See Brechtken, ‘Madagaskar’, 270 ff., which has full details and references; Henry Picker Hitlers Tischgespräche im Führerhauptquartier (Stuttgart, 1976), 29 May 1942, p. 340 and 24 July 1942, p. 456; PAA, Inland IIg 177, Rademacher to Bielfeld, 10 Feb. 1942 (on the end of the Project).]
This should be straightforward to verify. Either Longerich can show specific instances later than February 1941, or he should not be used. The prolongation of the Madagascar Plan would seem to reinforce Longerich's far-fetched thesis that the decision came only in early 1942, so he must absolutely prove his statement. Uglemat ( talk) 11:01, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Here is a quote from Cristopher Browning 2004:
As late as December 1940 [Eichmann] told Bernhard Lösener of the Interior Ministry that the Madagascar Plan was still sitting on Heydrich’s desk, awaiting his signature.... Like a spectacular meteor, the Madagascar Plan blazed across the sky of Nazi Jewish policy, only to burn out abruptly. [p. 88]
A subtitle in a chapter is called "The last spasms of expulsion policy, fall 1940 – spring 1941" (p. 89). Another quote:
Active consideration of Madagascar had ceased the previous fall [i.e., fall 1940], although occasional references to that island as a future destination continued to surface for months. [p. 102]
When Browning discusses a press announcement by Heydrich in October 1941 where Heydrich contemplated the resettlement of the Jews outside of europe, Browning writes: "As Madagascar was by that time but a distant memory, Heydrich must have been referring to the east." (p. 302, emphasis added). Browning confirms that the plan was "officially" shelved in the Foreign Office on 10 February 1942 (p. 415). But that does not mean the plan was actually still alive. Clearly this supports Hilberg. The plan emerged in 1940, and by early 1941 it was dead. Uglemat ( talk) 11:51, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
I have added a map based on two essays on the topic (sources in the image). If anyone has any feedback, or have noticed I've made a mistake, please feel more than welcome to add it. Lazdona ( talk) 20:40, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
A new paper of Eric Kurlander has some interesting details and dissents from many previous views. Zero talk 10:30, 30 November 2023 (UTC)