Was Hitler Jewish?

Question

What evidence is there to show conclusively that Hitler was or was not Jewish or had Jewish ancestry even if he was not a practicing Jew?

Straight dope on this issue: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/797/was-hitler-part-jewish — Andrew Grimm, Apr 23 '11 at 13:24
I've heard that the anti-semitic Vladmir Zhirinovsky is of partially Jewish descent. — Andrew Grimm, Apr 23 '11 at 14:09
To fund the ironic claim, that the racist mass murderer of Jews might have been partly a Jew himself, you first have to buy the racist definition of 'Jews', made by the Nazis, which wasn't scientific. Only if you ignore the facts, and propagate the ideology further, you can claim that he `was Jewish`. And how would somebody prove his ancestries 3000 to 4000 years back? And even if you could find a grandfather - what would it show? The question is only relevant for racists. To be a Jew is a religion, and there is no Jewish gen, nor a Jewish nation. — user unknown, Apr 23 '11 at 20:20
@uu: I never said that it was ironic. I merely wondered whether that was responsible for his anti-jewish philosophy. — apoorv020, Apr 23 '11 at 20:24
To make notifications work, you have to cite at least 3 characters, afaik, so @uu doesn't reach me, try @use instead. How do you define ancestry? If you calculate one generation with 30 years, and count your or somebodies ancestry back 2000 years, you get 66 generations. 2^62 is already 4 611 686 018 427 387 904, but of course not all of them were distinct. Now imagine to go back to the time of the first jews, which is about 4000 years back. How big are the chances to not have Jewish ancestries? — user unknown, Apr 24 '11 at 19:51
How to define "Jewish", according to the definition used by Jews, the one used by Nazis, other? — Abe, Jul 18 '13 at 04:14

Lennart Regebro · Accepted Answer · 2013-07-14T20:46:00.093

27

It's not known with full certainty who Hitler's father's father was (although George Hiedler is the generally accepted one). For a list of theories on the matter, see the Wikipedia article about Alois Hitler.

Since Hitler's father's mother got pregnant while allegedly working for a Jewish family it has been claimed that the father is actually the 19-year old son of this Jewish family. That would make Adolf Hitler one quarter Jewish according to the race laws in Nazi Germany.

However, there is not a smidgen of evidence for this theory. It has become popular because of the immense potential for irony, should it be true. But it probably isn't.

Source: Frank McDonough, Hitler and the rise of the Nazi Party, Pearson Education, 2003, p. 20.

edited Jul 14 '13 at 20:46

answered Apr 23 '11 at 07:23

Lennart Regebro

8,919
1
47
43

5

*It has become popular because of the immense potential for irony, should it be true.* -- I think it has become popular because it pins the holocaust on the Jews. – Jerry Asher Apr 23 '11 at 18:48
14

But even if it was true, that would not pin the Holocaust on the Jews. Hitler would likely have been unaware of his Jewish heritage, and not even seen as a Jew in the matrilinear traditional view. And one person is not "the Jews". So that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in three different ways. – Lennart Regebro Apr 23 '11 at 20:04
Under their school of thought, though, wouldn't his lack of awareness be an artifact of his inferiority from simply being Jewish? (Disclaimer: I don't actually feel that way, just using their line of reasoning.) – corsiKa Apr 23 '11 at 22:32
4

@Lennart, I am not sure you understand how anti-semitism, or bigotry or racism for that matters works. Making logical sense is the least of it. The question remains, if it is clear that Hitler was not Jewish, why is this meme so popular? None of the answers here address that. My suggestion is that the question allows antisemites to absolve Germany of the Holocaust and pin it on the Jews, much like the Jews and Judas were blamed for killing Christ, a Jew. It's another example of Jewish evil. Even Hitler was Jewish. Here is a book at Amazon - read just the description: http://amzn.to/kTyk8S – Jerry Asher Apr 28 '11 at 19:33
4

@Jerry: No, that question does not remain, it has been answered. It's so popular because if it was true, it would be the biggest "ooh isn't that ironic" of humankind. Your answer is assuming that anyone going "Hitler was part Jewish" is stupid and anti-semitic. But those who want an excuse for the holocaust goes a much easier way: Denying it ever happened. That means there is nothing to pin on anyone. But pinning it on Jews via a Jewish Hitler means you must admit it happened. And then the Jewish evil is turned...against Jews? That doesn't fit with the conspiracy. So no. Doens't work. – Lennart Regebro Apr 28 '11 at 20:22
You state as fact that Hitler's father's mother worked for a Jewish family. According to my ~~extensive research~~ few minutes of Googling, this is itself unlikely, since the Jews had been expelled from that part of Austria in the 15th century. The whole thing may well have been invented by Hans Frank. – Keith Thompson Jul 13 '13 at 23:39
1

@KeithThompson Yeah, because nobody moved anywhere after the 15th century. ;-) It's not really relevant, though, since the idea that Maria Shicklgruber got pregnant by the son in the household has no evidence, so the existence or not of the Frankenbergers aren't really relevant. – Lennart Regebro Jul 14 '13 at 00:44
The fact that the existence of the Frankenbergers is uncertain adds weight to the conclusion. I'm not arguing the conclusion, merely that you've stated as a fact something that appears to be far from certain. I suggest that your answer would be improved by changing "while working for a Jewish family" to something like "while allegedly working for a Jewish family". – Keith Thompson Jul 14 '13 at 01:50
@KeithThompson Fair enough, it doesn't hurt. – Lennart Regebro Jul 14 '13 at 20:46
1

Jewish lineage is determined along matriarchal lines, so the father isn't as important as the mother. This was certainly the case in German race laws. The rumour is that his grandmother was part Jewish, which'd make him Jewish according to his own laws. – jwenting Jul 15 '13 at 05:42
5

@jwenting No, that was certainly not the case with the German Race laws. Racism in general, and Nazism in particular is based on the idea that mixing races "defiles" the blood. If it's a mother or a father makes no difference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling_Test – Lennart Regebro Jul 15 '13 at 06:04
@KeithThompson very strange argument: "since the Jews had been expelled from that part of Austria in the 15th century." And from what I have found using google is that from 1867 on, Jews would become full citizens of the Austrian-Hungarian empire allowing them to "settle freely" as any other citizen. There's a lot of time between being chased away in the 15th century and moving back more than 400 years later. But maybe your post was ironic, and I did not get it?? :| – KlausN May 12 '20 at 08:26
@KlausN My post was based on a quick Google search that I did almost 7 years ago. My comment wasn't meant to be ironic. It was merely incomplete (as I acknowledged). – Keith Thompson May 12 '20 at 09:08

score 6 · Answer 2 · edited Feb 26 '19 at 09:44

6

Who is a Jew?

The definition of who is a Jew varies according to whether it is being considered by Jews based on normative religious statutes, self-identification, or by non-Jews for other reasons. Because Jewish identity can include characteristics of an ethnicity, a religion, and citizenship, the definition of who is a Jew has varied, depending on whether a religious, sociological, or ethnic aspect was being considered.
—source

Genome-wise: He surely shared genome with the Jewish population. We all come from a common ancestor. Furthermore, there is no such thing as a Jewish race, so the question does not make much sense when seen from this point of view. Everybody is related to Jews.
Religion-wise: He had a Christian family and education:

_{(source: wikimedia.org)}
Nationality-wise: He was Austrian first, and then German. There is no evidence or historical doubt that his nationality was other then Austrian/German.
Self-identification-wise: He didn't really like Jews, so I doubt he self-defined as one:

"If I am ever really in power, the destruction of the Jews will be my first and most important job. As soon as I have power, I shall have gallows after gallows erected, for example, in Munich on the Marienplatz-as many of them as traffic allows. Then the Jews will be hanged one after another, and they will stay hanging until they stink. They will stay hanging as long as hygienically possible. As soon as they are untied, then the next group will follow and that will continue until the last Jew in Munich is exterminated. Exactly the same procedure will be followed in other cities until Germany is cleansed of the last Jew!"
—Adolf Hitler
According to Nazi laws: unlikely (but the laws seem recursive to me, so it's really hard to say). I doubt that any German tribunal would have declared him a Jew in those times. For more information see Wikipedia.

edited Feb 26 '19 at 09:44

Glorfindel

1,452
1
17
28

answered Apr 23 '11 at 09:40

Sklivvz

78,578
29
321
428

16

The baptism certificate can be seen [here](http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hitler_Baptism_Certificate0002.jpg). But it must be fake - everyone knows Hitler was born in Kenya! :) – Andrew Grimm Apr 23 '11 at 12:24
6

I'm not trying to stalk the diamond mods, but I don't think this is a good answer. For "genome-wise", you state we all share a common ancestor, but you don't provide any evidence that the last common ancestor was Jewish. For "Nationality-wise", you don't expand upon the brief mention of nationality and Jewishness in the introductory paragraph, and how being Austrian or German is relevant. – Andrew Grimm Apr 23 '11 at 12:42
1

For "self-identification-wise": the page you link to cites holocaust denier David Irving for a separate quote without any warnings about the reliability of his work. The quote that you supply was apparently from a book by John Toland - I was initally a bit concerned, because Toland seems to be a Pearl Harbor truther, but his book receives good ratings at amazon.com. (One of the Amazon.com reviews suggests that Toland suggests Hitler may have Jewish blood in him, BTW) – Andrew Grimm Apr 23 '11 at 13:05
@Andrew: I've updated the answer to address your concerns, I hope it's clearer now. Regarding the citation, I used it because it was to-the-point. The other source I was looking at was the Mein Kampf, but I would have needed to cite much longer pieces of it as the tone is less direct. – Sklivvz Apr 23 '11 at 13:08
1

For "According to Nazi laws", you don't provide any plain text citations, just a picture of a primary source. I'm not meaning to be rhetorical, but is that enough to back up your claims, especially if a person reading your answer is blind or visually impaired? – Andrew Grimm Apr 23 '11 at 13:21
1

"Furthermore, there is no such thing as a Jew race" ... much as I'd like to disagree with Hitler, if ashkenazi Jews have a higher incidence of Tay-Sachs than non-ashkenazi-Jewish-Europeans, then I can't rule out a "Jew race" as a total fiction. – Andrew Grimm Apr 23 '11 at 13:30
Edited - again. Anything else? :-) – Sklivvz Apr 23 '11 at 13:30
@Andrew: you can have an African Jew, an Asian Jew etc etc... it's not a race. – Sklivvz Apr 23 '11 at 13:31
@Sklivvz: Are you prepared to back up your assertion there's no such thing as a Jewish race with a citation? – Andrew Grimm Apr 23 '11 at 13:47
@Andrew: done.. – Sklivvz Apr 23 '11 at 13:58
@Sklivvz: How reliable is that citation? (PS: I wasn't the person who downvoted you) – Andrew Grimm Apr 23 '11 at 14:13
4

Chimpanzees and human beings "all come from a common ancestor." So do whales and hippopotamuses. Does this mean it is impossible to distinguish between a chimpanzee and a human being, or a whale and a hippo, to say they have no genetic differences? I don't know if Ashkenazi Jews can be properly called a "race", since obscurantists have twisted that word to require a strenuous level of difference, but A. Jews are certainly inbred to a point that no geneticist would confuse them with a European -- they have a long-lived Semitic DNA signature, they are certainly a population unto themselves. – Uticensis Apr 23 '11 at 14:16
2

So -1 for empty cliches. – Uticensis Apr 23 '11 at 14:16
@Andrew: well it's good enough for the Jews themselves which surely are authoritative when speaking about the definition of their own community, so it's good enough for me. – Sklivvz Apr 23 '11 at 14:38
1

@Billare: Ashkenazi Jews are not the same thing as the whole community of Jews. Furthermore your point really makes no sense. Surely there are differences between any two individuals that are not twins. That doesn't make them two separate races. Finally, please moderate your tone. Not providing an answer and calling other people's work an "empty cliche" for a single point on which you disagree *could* be considered trolling by a less nice moderator... – Sklivvz Apr 23 '11 at 14:52
3

@Sklivvz Ashkenazi Jews, "European" Jews, are obviously the only sub-population of Jews relevant to this question. Are you arguing otherwise? And my point makes perfect sense. Consider a population characterized by DNA made of 6-digit binary string, with each bit having equal probability of being 0 or 1; 001000 and 101010 would be members. In a large, randomly mating population, the progeny of one mating of individuals differs from *every* another mating of individuals in an average 3 places, the same as the average genetic distance between their parents -- that is the definition of random. – Uticensis Apr 23 '11 at 15:37
2

@Sklivvz (cont'd) Now suppose members of this population with 0s in the first bit started mating exclusively with another, and those with 1s in their first bit did the same. Then **Os race** would differ genetically from each other at 3 - 0.5 = 2.5 bits of DNA, and would differ from the **1s race** at 3 + 0.5 = 4.5 bits of DNA. WLOG, vice versa, the same would hold for the **1s race**. – Uticensis Apr 23 '11 at 15:37
1

@Sklivvz (cont'd) Then we can say that the **0s race** is 2.5 - 3 / 3 = 16% more alike each other than they are to an average member of the population. **That is the core of the definition of what race, ethnic group, family, phylum, genus are**: members share more of their DNA with "each other" than they do with other groups on average; the only difference between the above is that there are different interesting thresholds to draw. – Uticensis Apr 23 '11 at 15:37
1

@Sklivvz (cont'd) In fact, if you'd studied this, you'd know that this "shared DNA" concept is just as fundamental to biological typology as the Planck units are to particle physics. Ashkenazi Jews are a "race", an "ethnic group", a "family", whatever term suits your fashion, because they share more DNA on with each other than they do with the average member of whatever other group they are being compared to. – Uticensis Apr 23 '11 at 15:38
@Billare, write your own answer instead of posting comments. This is not a forum. – Sklivvz Apr 23 '11 at 15:42
According to the Nazi race laws you were to be regarded as a Jew for the purpose of the law if you have one or more parents that was of the Jewish faith. Hitler would therefore have been jewish in the view of these laws, had his fathers father really been this Jewish young man. Which it wasn't. – Lennart Regebro Apr 23 '11 at 20:09
what about not using wikipedia as a primary source :) Pretty comprehensive analysis of what a Jew is otherwise, but no evidence of Hitler's status – jwenting Apr 26 '11 at 08:59
@jwenting: If you read carefully, wikipedia is not used as primary source, but as a further reading source and for definitions. There are 6 non-wikipedia sources cited. – Sklivvz Apr 26 '11 at 09:10
you use wikipedia as the sole source of information on Nazi race laws (which are the ones that would be used to class Hitler as a Jew at the time). All other categories are secondary to that one, which is the sole test that would be applied at the time. – jwenting Apr 26 '11 at 10:10
@jwenting: the picture included is a primary source. The fact that it appears on wikipedia is not relevant. Furthermore your assertion about the importance is purely subjective. I disagree that the OP asks about Hitler being a Jew according to his laws. The question is more general. – Sklivvz Apr 26 '11 at 11:05
2

-1 Please address Billare's criticism in your answer. "There is no such thing" is simply too much of a blanket statement. – Ruben Jun 23 '12 at 11:54

Was Hitler Jewish?

2 Answers2