Apparently the London Times thought there was one in 1935…..
Meanwhile, back in the real world, do you remember when The Times (the London one of course) felt that Hitler was a moderate making concessions to ingratiate himself with the “radical” wing of his own Nazi party. Yes, you heard that right, upon implementing another plank in his plans to eradicate Jews (as meticulously documented years before in Mein Kampf), The Times wrote:
The new laws, while in line with anti-Semitism which has been a large part of the Fuhrer’s inspiration from the beginning are no doubt to be taken as an encouragement to the Radical wing of the party.
Let that sink in: if the Nazi party had a “Radical wing” (their capitalisation) are they seriously suggesting there was a moderate form of Nazi-ism? They concluded their article by trying to find the silver lining for the Jews of Germany:
The best to be said of the new laws is that they may offer German Jewry the process of law in place of arbitrary bullying and local tyranny.
And we all know where the trains to carry out that “process of law” ended for six million people.
Here is the full text of the article:
The Times of London, Leading Article, The Nuremberg Laws, September 17 1935
Reprinted September 17 2004
Herr Hitler’s speech to the special meeting of the Reichstag at Nuremberg may not have fulfilled all the expectations of the Deputies who were so suddenly summoned together. But our Berlin Correspondent considers that for domestic purposes it was a master-stroke of party stage-craft; and the one-hour session provided speeches by the Fuhrer and General Goring and three new laws. Henceforward the Swastika flag, till now the emblem of the National-Socialist movement, is to the official flag of the German Reich. The other two laws impose severe conditions for full German citizenship so as to exclude Jews and forbid marriage between Aryans and Jews, on the engagement of German girls as domestic servants in Jewish houses.
For Germany the new “ghetto legislation” will rank in importance equally with Herr Hitler’s references to foreign policy. In the long run it may mean more to Germany than any manifestation of activity in foreign affairs. Nothing like the complete disinheritance and segregation of Jewish citizens now announced has been heard since medieval times. The new laws, while in line with anti-Semitism which has been a large part of the Fuhrer’s inspiration from the beginning are no doubt to be taken as an encouragement to the Radical wing of the party.
To increase a provocation which is doing grave injury to German interests abroad is a contradiction more than strange, while it is a further defiance to conceptions of social justice that are still second nature to the greater part of mankind. The best to be said of the new laws is that they may offer German Jewry the process of law in place of arbitrary bullying and local tyranny.