Jump to content

Talk:Lothar von Trotha

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 131.239.63.3 (talk) at 22:54, 13 May 2014. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Was Trotha Jewish?

I'm guessing that he was seeing the names of his wives.

I didn't find anything in my research on this article to verify whether he was Jewish. --Roisterer 02:34, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
It wasn't uncommon for that time, that German men and Jewish women (and, vice-versa, Jewish men and German women) had relationships. As you know, the Jewish people were totally assimilated into the German society. OotHb 5:55 (GMT +1) 18 Dez 2005


He doesn't look German. Even with a tan and a sepia picture a German does NOT look like he does. Maybe he's Czech or Polish?
Wow, you can tell a German from a Czech or a Pole just by glancing at an obscure picture? Not really ...

Just for information: The family of Trotha is an old German noble familiy from - who would have guessed? - Trotha (a small village near Halle on the river Saale). Try www.throta.de. 08. Feb. 06


This guy looks about as German as Ariel Sharon, the fact that his origins are murky and he married a Jewish woman, along with the fact that he doesn't in any way look remotely German, should be taken as evidence that he is a Jew. How many Prussian aristocrats (aside from Jews) would marry a Jew? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.140.85.63 (talk) 02:40, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this an issue? Did Ernst Heinkel "look" German? Did Reichsminister Dr Goebbels "look" German? Did parteigenossen Hans Frank "look" German? What about Emil Maurice? As for the marriage question, many Germans married across religious lines prior to 1935. So what? There are certainly logical issues to raise regarding some aspects of this article and also some aspects of the related article on the Herero Uprising, but implying that von Troth chose to restore order in the way that he did either because he was Jewish or because his wife was Jewish adds nothing constructive to the process. One might better compare von Troth's tactics against the Hereros and those used by the armed forces of the United States against native-Americans in the 19th century, and those used by the English and Spanish against native-Americans prior to that. (71.22.47.232 (talk) 03:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC))[reply]


Herero sparing noncombatants?

I restored the claim that the Herero had spared noncombatants, because it's already clear it needs citation, and I see nothing contradictory on the Herero Genocide page. Also, with this page having attracted vandalism, an anonymous user who has edited nothing else should justify this change a little more :) Greenman 14:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a citation to substantiate this claim from the seminal study by Horst Drechsler.
The incident began with the murdering of 150 or so German civilians, so I can hardly see how the Herero "spared noncombantants". Totally bogus and not at all reflected by established facts, like msot of the lies mr Greenman seems to enjoy writing and protecting from being changed into something factual/truthful Ernham 17:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, although an author of unknown political agenda says that the Herero commanders spared noncombatants, the Wikipedia article on German Southwest Africa says that the Herero killed around 150 German civilians. It appears that we need to find a cite documenting Herero killings of German civilians and then edit accordingly the current claim that the Herero spared civilians.

One war crime or crime against humanity does not jusify another, but if we mention one we must mention the other. An objective student of history cannot indulge in selective outrage. (71.22.47.232 (talk) 09:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Outcry in Wilhelmine Germany?

The current article says, "As soon as news of von Trotha's actions reached Germany, there was a public outcry which led Imperial Chancellor Bernhard von Bülow to ask Kaiser Wilhelm II to remove von Trotha from his command." I don't think that is an adequate portrayal of the response. Trotha was given the honor "pour le mérite," after all, and got a full pension. Also, the social democrats are widely held to have lost electoral support in the 1907 elections because they criticized von Trotha's unpardonable annihilation tactics and German imperialism generally (see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1907). A "public outcry" would have looked a bit differently, methinks. Jboy 9 Dec 2006

Another lie-filled anti-German article. Oh fueher, how they envy us, the wonderful Germany blood and soil superboys

Sad, wikipedia, sad.

Thank you for you contributions. To deal with the points individually...
I see no mention in the cited article that Germany, nor any other nation in the world, recognizes these as acts of genocide, and it seems irrelevant given that the German minister was reported as saying that she felt the 'brutal crushing was genocide'. I agree that the word 'official' was not used correctly.
The fact that von Trotha arrived after 5 months, and also initially experienced relative failure, is worth reporting, as it gives context to his change of strategy. I agree that comments about the Herero's supposed 'lack of fear' and perception as being 'savages' don't belong here, at least without more context.
Historians have made the connection between Namibia and later events in Nazi Germany, so that comment should stay. Anyone reading the article can decide for themselves whether its a valid connection. I also left in the comment about good relations between the countries, and the aid packages, but removed the word 'generous', as that's POV and not all parties agree. Greenman 18:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If they have made the connections, CITE THEM, not your BOGUS communist political website either. The German imperial troops took a long time to be mobolized, which is why little was done initially. It is recorded that herero were unorganized and easily routed in battle, but that they would continue to return to areas they had already been pushed out of. Ernham 17:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More neutral editors needed - help stop the edit war!

Sigh. This is a call for help to all interested editors to please help monitor the constant removal of cited references, in both this and the Herero and Namaqua Genocide articles, by a particular editor, and general attempts to force his own POV. The editor in question is abusive and not-responsive to constructive criticism, and has simply decided to opt out of discussions, and continually revert. Please see the relevant histories for the full discussions, and record of this users lack of constructive engagement. Greenman 17:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are the one POV pushing. I'm just interested in facts and truth as we know them, not your ridiculous communist websites and perverse interpretation of reality. How can one spare non combatants when one just organized the ehtnic cleaning of over 100 noncombants? You cherry pick sources that are completely BOGUS and have no undertsanding of what you are editing. I don't have time to deal with you, but i won't let you continue to present a wiki that is 90% bogus as not being "disputed" and I won't let you claim something as a "genocide" when it is not recognized as such by any other country. You have chosen this route of edit warring instead of defending your postion. For instance, you could supply at least one country that officially recognizes it as a genocide. You have don nothing of the sort. Ernham 17:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ernham wins the edit war

This just in. In a fantastic display of scholarly integrity, the esteemed Ernham has earned the right to write history. By constantly editing out those niggardly references he didn't like, wittily smashing any editors who dared to disagree, Ernham has been declared the winner. Thanks to his stamina, it's now quite obvious that the Herero genocide has no links with Holocaust,

Actually, though it is obvious you are being sarcastic, there are NO links to the Herero genocide (1904-07) and the Holocaust! I do not recall any Nazis in early 20th century Namibia. If you truly believe the two actions to be related, then you are an idiot.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.234.16.2 (talk) 21:30, 20 March 2007(UTC).

...in spite of some foolish attempts to add references. References? Who needs them? Ernham has shown once and for all that all you need is stamina! In a masterly display, Ernham even removed a reference from a [fictional piece]! Yes, the author had dared to make one of his characters make a comparison between the Herero geno, oops, I mean little skirmish caused by the nasty Herero. In the flick of the mouse, not only history, but fiction has been rewritten! Masterly Ernham, masterly!

It's heart-warming to read how Ernham decided that the German public caused an outcry when they heard about von Trotha's (not really genocide of course) tactics. Thanks to his god work, Ernham has shown that it's quite obvious that the vicious Herero targeted innocent Germans. The cited reference is wrong, Ernham is right. Ernham too demonstrated that the German development aid minister didn't actually say what she's reported to say, and by reverting the insinuation he proved once and for all she didn't say what she said. And if you disagree it's all an Anglo-Saxon plot. By wearing down the annoying detractors with his stamina, Ernham has proved once and for all that He's right! Congratulations Ernham on a fantastic display.

I award you the 'Choose your own adventure' prize for blindly sticking to truth no matter the facts.

In short, this article is pile of sh*te. But no-one else seems to care, so Ernham can write his own version of history, free of references, surrounded by posters of Steffi Graf and Michael Schumacher, free of nasty lying Anglo-Saxon brutes who're behind a plot to rewrite history, (shame wikipedia, shame), nasty 'so-called' Herero daring to claim compensation, and so on. Goodbye. Greenman 19:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations Greenman! You should be awarded for your maturity. Your use of thinly veiled sarcasm and disregard for opposing opinions especially earn you this distinction. Way to go, call Ernham with a Nazi, because that is a truly effective debate tactic! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.234.16.2 (talk) 21:30, 20 March 2007(UTC).

With Ernham banned for his behaviour, hopefully we can avoid sinking to that level again and make some constructive progress on this article (although the anonymous contributer has decided to call me an idiot, so I don't have high hopes :).

Mr/Ms anonymous, in order for there to be a connection between the two events, there don't have to have been Nazis present in Namibia. Such literal short-sightedness is hardly helpful. It is possible for there to be other links. Eugen Fischer, father of eugenics, and whose book was a standard Nazi textbook during the Nazi era, toured the concentration camps in Nambia, and performed experiments there. It's in Namibia he formed many of his ideas. Hitler cites his work in Mein Kampf. Historians have pointed out the connection. Since Wikipedia is supposed to be NPOV, all that's needed is to point this out, not agree with it. If you think its idiotic and there should have been Nazis in Namibia, fine, but Wikipedia is not a place for original research :) I will add this reference to the article as perhaps it will dissuade other well-meaning but ill-informed contributers, though I'm sure the revisionists would have an apoplexy and will remove it anyway. Greenman 18:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only revisionist in here seems to be you. Ernham 20:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First: The Konzentrationcamps where not like the one of the second ww. Second: the whole issue is vage. As the Germans attaced the African a lot of them escaped thrue the dessert. Trotha himselfe declared that he all killed them, but not because he did, because he did not want to give in that a big part of his enemy escaped to british Terretories. As never ever one has surged this in South Afrika and Botswana, we will never know how many aktually died. The same is with the so called Konzentrationcamps where a hand ful soldiers watched for a lot of people. Here too a lot of them escaped . As the Africans today are not silly the numbers of victims are rising and the words holocaust and Konzentrationcamp is braught in and the money starts roling. And thid : This nations where nomadic cattle holder the reason for the war it is unlikly that there where 80.000 of them before the war. This arguments all where written in a German book witch ofcause is supressed as Revisionist. But it is scientificly made but not in the eyes of people for whom history is a political play ground.

Johann

Friendly vandal is back

Ernham has obviously been unbanned again, and is back doing what he does best, punting his own obstinate POV with no attempt to reach consensus. His first act back after a month or so of peace and progress on the article is to revert it back to his previous garbage version, removing sourced references, etc. I'm going to try not to lower myself to his standard and involved myself in an edit war again, (though I can't help trying to get involved when I see utter crap on Wikipedia) but PLEASE, can everyone else viewing this article help stop his vandalism!!!! Greenman 11:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you are the POV-pusher around here who knows little to nothing about the history which you continue to manipulate and lie about. Ernham 20:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Beware of the tigers and Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. -- Jeandré, 2007-04-08t11:00z

There's no point engaging with Ernham :) I'm stepping out of the edit war, but please note it's a pile of POV crap again as Ernham simply reverts without discussion, so perhaps someone else wants to fix it, or get Ernham banned for the xth time :) Greenman 11:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"German family's Namibia apology" - BBC

Story is here. I don't know enough about this to judge how to write about it, but it seemed relevant. Loganberry (Talk) 01:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What to do?

Von Trotha had a choice. Either try to win the hearts and minds of the Hereroes (positive reinforcement) or kill most of them (negative reinforcement). As a military man, he chose the second option. War is heck. He didn't have to be concerned about the media and its embedded journalists.Lestrade (talk) 01:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

Do you have any idea what negative reinforcement is? Negative reinforcement does not mean giving somebody something negative/bad, it means removing something unpleasant. If your boss rewards your hard work by yelling at you less, that is negative reinforcement (assuming you do not like being yelled at). The removal/negation of unwanted stimulus. As a result of your behavior a negative condition is avoided or stopped. Everytime you enter a room you wind up burning your feet on the hot floor, if you stop entering the room you stop burning your feet, hence you avoid something you don't like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.140.85.63 (talk) 03:05, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Von Trotha died from poisoned food he ate, or from drink

It caused Trotha's typhoid fever! Trotha died in pain!

Hi Anon, I have reverted this addition for now; such claims need a reference. --Pgallert (talk) 08:22, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The reference is in itself!
THE BEST VER http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lothar_von_Trotha&diff=607821362&oldid=607746157 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.239.63.3 (talk) 20:22, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
this is a circular reference that is not suitable for reference. Regards, Pgallert (talk) 22:37, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've already left a note on the IP's talk page, but you can't say it was food poisoning unless you have a specific source that states this. Food isn't the only way typhoid fever is transmitted. I would also note that "poisoned" is absolutely the wrong word, as that implies someone did it on purpose. That is very different from "contaminated". Regardless, without a reliable source, neither word should be used. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:04, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
LOTHAT VON TROTHA WAS POISONED, THAT'S WHAT CONTAMINATION IS! YOU GET TYPHOID FEVER ONLY THROUGH POISONED FOOD OR DRINK! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.239.63.3 (talk) 22:50, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lothar_von_Trotha&oldid=608463008"