AHC: Both Ford and GM catch hell for helping the Nazis, implications?

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers-willing-business-partners/303146/

' . . . I have read four other negative reviews of this book, and they all share what to me is a surprising feature: they are more critical of Edwin Black (with The Times pointing out that he has written for Redbook magazine and another reviewer that he is not a college graduate) who wrote a book, than of Thomas Watson, who made the damnable choices recorded in that book. . . '

Weird. But also very human. Especially if your job requires you to read the book in the first place (and probably some professional jealousy thrown in as well).
 
Last edited:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers-willing-business-partners/303146/

' . . . according to Black, "Holleriths could not function without IBM's unique paper. Watson controlled the paper.... Holleriths could not function without cards. Watson controlled the cards.... Hollerith systems could not function without machines and spare parts. Watson controlled the machines and spare parts." That passage refers to the situation in 1940, when the Nazis had long since become dependent on their single-source supplier. . . '
This is from a book review of Edwin Black's IBM and the Holocaust (2001).

The specialty paper, the punched cards, the spare parts, yes, that's a hard indictment of IBM.

Although we of course need to ask, how much evidence is there for these factual claims? Other reviewers have said the author both makes valid points and at times overstates his case.
 
hollerith.jpg

an IBM Hollerith machine used in the Holocaust.
 
See also the first two pages of this PDF file on the website of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum:

https://www.ushmm.org/m/pdfs/20010723-artifact-photos.pdf

DEHOMAG was the IBM subsidiary in Germany from 1922 and through the Nazi years. This stands for Deutsche Hollerith Maschinen Gesellschaft.

And if this topic interests you, please jump in and help me with an Internet search or two.
 
Last edited:
1. medium damaging facts come out

2. Ford executives give their easy and facile explanations.

3. the more damaging facts come out

So, yes, a lot depends on the order. This would be a particularly bad order for Ford Motor Co.
 
A photo can certainly be rebutted! I agree with this a 100%. :)

Just a question of whether Ford Motor Co and Henry will successfully do so.
 
Edwin Black's, IBM and the holocaust (especially the 2012 revision) . . .
The following says Edwin makes some hell of some good points, but at times overstates (my paraphrase)
http://articles.latimes.com/2001/may/20/books/bk-145

Look, if there's a story about an injustice which touches our hearts, and then we later find out some of the facts weren't quite right, we feel ripped-off and cheating. And then we're likely to kick at the whole thing. This is absolutely a processing flaw on the part of human beings, on the side of emotional intelligence. But, be that as it may, it's there.

And it sets up the first rule of effective activism--to slightly understate our case. And the higher the stakes, almost the more important for us to do it right (here among friends, we can drop our guard, but out there in the world, this kind of applies)

I have read that in his updated version Edwin talks about how, after the Nazis invaded and occupied Poland, IBM basically saw it as a great business opportunity and rushed in.
 
Well, I;m not gonna debate on how plausible this could be since I'm not sure thats the point.

My guess is that the auto industry may take a big hit in the US at the very least and may give rails a decade at most to expand and such, though given the post economic US boom, that could be something. Of course, that would lead to a lack of jobs for the US so they might need something else, maybe they go out and settle more of the west.

Perhaps some groups could springboard this to investigate Nazi sympathic companies and it broaden to just corrupt buisness practices
 
. . . My guess is that the auto industry may take a big hit in the US at the very least and may give rails a decade at most to expand and such, . . .
This might turn out to be a blessing in disguise.

True, we may not reach the high water mark in the (?) 1960s as far as the number of citizens with middle-class jobs and above. But then we might not peg this as "normal" and have as much political anger over the decades, instead scapegoating. For example, illegal immigrants were by no means the main villain for the 2008 financial industries crash, but they sure have received a lot of anger in couple of election cycles since.

Instead, just maybe the economic development in the United States is more slow and steady?
 
This might turn out to be a blessing in disguise.

True, we may not reach the high water mark in the (?) 1960s as far as the number of citizens with middle-class jobs and above. But then we might not peg this as "normal" and have as much political anger over the decades, instead scapegoating. For example, illegal immigrants were by no means the main villain for the 2008 financial industries crash, but they sure have received a lot of anger in couple of election cycles since.

Instead, just maybe the economic development in the United States is more slow and steady?

Are you suggesting that if the standard of living in the US was lower there would be less political unrest?
 
. . . standard of living in the US . . .
I'm suggesting if the economic development in the U.S. had been more steady eddie, then there probably would have been less political unrest.

By this I mean the 'normal' ups and downs, but not such an impressing underlying growth period from 1945 to 1971 (approximately; the end more fuzzy than the beginning) where people grew up thinking it was always going to be like this.
 
Top