Talk:Anti-Jewish violence in Poland, 1944–1946/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anti-Jewish violence in Poland, 1944–46. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rossia.org/dossier/balkans/pol-jews.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203033626/http://www.yivo.org/pdf/poland.pdf to http://www.yivo.org/pdf/poland.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:19, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Jakub Berman, head of State Security Services

Berman controlled the UB, but formally the head was Stanisław Radkiewicz.Xx236 (talk) 10:00, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Fresh source

Much here to be folded in: https://networks.h-net.org/node/9669/reviews/127940/frydel-cichopek-gajraj-beyond-violence-jewish-survivors-poland-and

The source undermines the notion that the Kielce pogrom was inspired by a communist operation. It also puts the anti-Jewish violence in the context of general postwar violence, also seriously effecting Ukrainians, Germans, the factions in the 'Polish civil war' and the general Polish population. High time for a dedicated article on this broader subject. Ideas? -Chumchum7 (talk) 21:56, 1 January 2018 (UTC) -Chumchum7 (talk) 21:48, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: Thread reposted at Talk:Kielce pogrom#Fresh source (replied) Poeticbent talk 17:01, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Anti-communist resistance in Poland (1944–46) is a start to an article on the 'Polish civil war' or 'Postwar domestic violence in Poland'. The scholarship makes a clear connection between anti-communist resistance, violent anarchy and ethnic violence effecting Jews, Germans, Ukrainians and Poles.-Chumchum7 (talk) 06:30, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Your POV is a Soviet/Russian one.

The first was Soviet occupation of Poland and mass crimes:

1. rapes of not only German but also Polish and even Soviet women, including former prisoners of Nazi camps;
2. mass deportations of people to the SU;
3. mass executions, eg. the Augustów roundup;
4. almost total control including censorship, political police;
5. mass terror against fomer anti-Nazi fighters
6. network of concentration camps, some of htem controlled by the Soviets, others by Communist Poles
7. destruction or Sovietization of political parties.

Persecuted anti-Nazi fighters defended themselves. Parallerly teenagers created hundreds of illegal organizations.

The Polish police was destroyed by the Soviets who murdered about 6000 policemen in 1940 (part of the Katyn crime) and the Germans who misused the policemen against Jews and ethnic Poles. The Communists and Socialists created Milicja Obywatelska, a state police joined mostly by uneducated people, many of them criminals. Xx236 (talk) 10:46, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Misuse of PRIMARY sources

The American Jewish year book for 1947 is a PRIMARY source. It probably also isn't a RS for what was happening in Poland at the time - and drawing inferences with it is OR. I replaced the rather wrongheaded OR segment diff (which contradicts just about any scholarly writing on this subject) with a passage sourced to two publications by esteemed scholars in an academic setting.Icewhiz (talk) 10:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

COPYRIGHT VIOLATION BEING IGNORED BY RESTORATION OF TEXT WITH EGREGIOUS COPYRIGHT VIOLATION

The following text by Icewhiz, which was restored after deletion for copyright violation, contains verbatim cut & paste from published a source, Weinbaum, The Plunder of Jewish Property: “Jews in DP (displaced persons) camps in Germany feared returning to Poland, and those who attempted to do so were usually blocked by the Polish authorities.” Possibly more. IMPUGNED TEXT: Unclaimed Jewish property devolved to the Polish state on 31 December 1948, but many Jews who had fled to the Soviet Union were only repatriated after this date and Jews in displaced persons camps in Germany feared returning to Poland, and those who attempted to do so were usually blocked by the Polish authorities. Polish legislation in 1947 severely restricted interstate succession, limiting inheritance by distant family members. No provision was made for transfer of unclaimed Jewish property to appropriate Jewish organizations or to other survivors.[26][27] Tatzref (talk) 03:58, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

This text was not copy pasted, was properly referenced to the source, and the content was summarized and paraphrased. Conversely, text from self published Mark Paul was copy pasted by Tatzref into the article without attribution (citing some of Paul's sources from Paul's footnotes - which were also copy pasted) - due to which I requested a copyvio revdel..Icewhiz (talk) 04:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

The long phrase "Jews in displaced persons camps in Germany feared returning to Poland, and those who attempted to do so were usually blocked by the Polish authorities," is not a summary or paraphrase but direct lifting word for word from Weinbaum's book. This is readily verifiable by looking at the pages cited. Tatzref (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Nope. Quite a bit of this paraphrased paragraph is quite away from the original. The sentence fragment "Jews in displaced persons camps in Germany feared returning to Poland, and those who attempted to do so were usually blocked by the Polish authorities" whereas in Weinbaum "Others in DP (displaced persons) camps in Germany feared returning to Poland. Moreover, except for individual cases, the Polish authorities blocked the return of Jews from DP camps". So the sub-phrase "camps in Germany feared returning to Poland" (7 words) do appear in Weinbaum - this is coincidental - there aren't all that many different ways to say that "Jews in DP camps in Germany feared returning to Poland" (saying these were "German camps" would be incorrect, these were run by the allies). The rest of the passage I typed is quite different from Weinbaum.Icewhiz (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

ICEWHIZ’S TEXT ("The rest of the passage I typed is quite different from Weinbaum") In the immediate postwar period vast quantities of Jewish property were unclaimed due to many Jews being murdered when they sought restitution of family property and due to Jews fleeing postwar Poland. The murders, estimated at 1,500 Jews, intimidated Jews from filing claims. Unclaimed Jewish property devolved to the Polish state on 31 December 1948, but many Jews who had fled to the Soviet Union were only repatriated after this date and Jews in displaced persons camps in Germany feared returning to Poland, and those who attempted to do so were usually blocked by the Polish authorities. WEINBAUM’S PUBLISHED TEXT (The Plunder of Jewish Property during the Holocaust, p. 101) In the immediate postwar period vast quantities of Jewish property were unclaimed – in part due to the fact that owners or their heirs were often murdered when seeking to retrieve their property, and that many others fled the country. … the number of Jews murdered … general estimates place the number at 1500. The murder of survivors intimidated many of those who might have sought redress … According to a decree of 8 March 1946 on abandoned property, all items not claimed by 31 December 1948 devolved to the state. Many of the Polish Jews who had survived in the Soviet Union were only repatriated to Poland after the claims deadline had already past. Others in DP (displaced persons) camps in Germany feared returning to Poland. Moreover, except for individual cases, the Polish authorities blocked the return of Jews from DP camps. COMPARE TATZREF’S TEXT (original post) However, in most cases real property was returned or sold without incident. A restitution law “On Abandoned Real Estates,” with relaxed criteria and a simplified inheritance procedure, was enacted on May 6, 1945 and remained in place until the end of 1948. Dispossessed owners or their relatives and heirs, whether residing in Poland or abroad, were able to reclaim privately owned property in an expedited fashion with minimal costs. Many Poles came forward as witnesses on behalf of Jews in property claims. The American Jewish Year Book, which closely monitored conditions in Poland, reported that “The return of Jewish property, if claimed by the owner or his descendant, and if not subject to state control, proceeded more or less smoothly.” MARK PAUL’S TEXT The American Jewish Year Book, which closely monitored conditions in Poland, reported that—unlike in the Eastern Polish territories seized by the Soviet Union—“The return of Jewish property, if claimed by the owner or his descendant, and if not subject to state control, proceeded more or less smoothly.” Indeed, relaxed criteria with a simplified inheritance procedure, under a special restitution law “On Abandoned Real Estates” enacted May 6, 1945, remained in place until the end of 1948. Dispossessed owners or their relatives and heirs, whether residing in Poland or abroad, were able to reclaim privately owned property in an expedited fashion with minimal costs. The existence of these procedures were well known. Thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of properties were reclaimed by Jews without incident, which belies the notion that Jews were prevented from or were fearful of reclaiming their property through normal channels. Throughout Poland, a great many Poles came forward as witnesses on behalf of Jews in property claims filed by Jewish survivors. Tatzref (talk) 04:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Please remeber that property in Poland was nationalised, or was to be nationalised (farms) or taxed. The nation had to finance heavy industry and production of arms.Xx236 (talk) 07:40, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

40 militiamen

Milicja Obywatelska was the national police of Communist Poland. So 40 policemen.Xx236 (talk) 11:25, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Different Poland

A reader of Collaboration in German-occupied Poland or The Holocaust in Poland should be informed that this page describes post-war Poland, the one moved to the West.Xx236 (talk) 07:34, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

It actually is not that straightforward in this particular article - as the concept Poland was in transition. What you are saying is correct for 1946, but perhaps not correct for 1944 - the borders firming up in Yalta Conference in 1945 and subsequently in the months leading to the German defeat.Icewhiz (talk) 07:58, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Please show where pre-war area is referenced in the text. Xx236 (talk) 11:27, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

POV - Polish government

Poland had two governments, the Communist one imposed to Poland by the Allies, and the one in London.

Ethnic Poles were robbed by the Communist government.

Some of Polish Communist leaders had Jewish roots, especially Minc and Zambrowski who influenced the economy. So the story about ethnic POles robbing Jews is biased.

Thousands of ethnic Poles, including my uncle, haven't returned from the West.

Jews who returned to Poland from the Soviet Union and settled in the territories Poland acquired from Germany were entitled to material compensation on equal footing with ethnic Poles who were displaced from Eastern Poland. - my family was displaced and got no material compensation. We pay Perpetual usufruct. I don't know what Stola means. He is a historian, not a lawyer.

If you write about legal acts, please name the acts.

Many lands and blocks of flats in cities were robbed by criminals. Such cases are being studied by the pl:Komisja do spraw usuwania skutków prawnych decyzji reprywatyzacyjnych dotyczących nieruchomości warszawskich, wydanych z naruszeniem prawa.

Xx236 (talk) 06:20, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Heirless property

http://www.legal-glossary.org/2013/02/02/heirless-property/

The Jews died under German occupation. The Germans murdered and robbed also other ethnicities. Poland lost about half of pre-war land

and obtained some German lands. Whole cities (Warsaw) and towns were destroied and rebuild. People living in Poland were taxed and robbed, bulidings reconstructed. Poland was not a bank safe, where you put your gold and take it back after 50 years. People living in POland lost almosst all money as the result of Balcerowicz reform.

Communist Poland paid compensations to several Western nations (indemnisation).

Lithuania didn't pay any compensation to Polish citizens and preferred ethnic Lithuanians, discriminating Poles. Xx236 (talk) 10:30, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Reclaiming of Jewish children

According to Zaremba [1] reclaiming of children influenced people. Some of the reclaimed childen were Jewish ones, saved by Christians. There existed conflict of values, rights of children, feelings. Xx236 (talk) 13:36, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

The Jews in Poland since the Liberation. Intelligence research report OCL 2312

This was reverted due to being "Again, cherry picked and out of context, get consensus". While it seems cherry picked is a favorite phrase - this is a significant report (referred to in a secondary manner in contemporary sources), the cherry picked claim is rather odd (what was cherry picked here? The report itself? Or coverage within the report?), and the context of the report is the 1944-1946 violence against Jews in Poland.Icewhiz (talk) 15:08, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

‎Background: irrelevant, unrelated

Not only the UB but also the military security Main Directorate had Jewish high officers.

• If the UB is notable, why not Main Directorate?Xx236 (talk) 06:00, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Academic source [2].Xx236 (talk) 09:39, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

on their way west

Not only west, some travelled through Czechoslovakia (south).Xx236 (talk) 09:35, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

[3] Xx236 (talk) 09:41, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

It's Bricha, the page should be linked (now in See also only).Xx236 (talk) 09:44, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Polish authorities. Polish legislation

Please stop your propaganda. The government and legislation were controlled by the Communists. Not everything Western ignorants write is true.Xx236 (talk) 09:51, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Akcja pociągowa

https://www.tygodnikprzeglad.pl/akcja-pociagowa/ Xx236 (talk) 09:56, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Dr Weinbaum

Dr Weinbaum is far from being neutral. He is a politician involved in restitution claims. His ideas about occupied Poland:

It is not widely known, but local authorities were often left intact in German-occupied Poland, and many officials, and the notorious Blue Police, exploited their power in ways that proved fatal to the Jews in their midst.

'left-intact' - a masterpiece.

The Blue Police was organized by Germans and disbanded after the war by the Communists. Generally Western countres did not apply collective responsibility, only NSDAP, SS, SD, Gestapo were recognized to be criminal. Xx236 (talk) 11:46, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Academic, published by Palgrave. If we are to eliminate anyone advocating for the return of property, are we to eliminate all those who are liable (directly or indirectly) for payment of such restitution?Icewhiz (talk) 16:00, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Poland was divided into many parts, in any part the situation was different. If an ignorant (both Polish or Jewish) coins a general theory ('left-intact') it means he is an idiot.

In whole Poland men were mobilized in 1939, many of them died or were imprisoned as P.O.W.s., so the authorities weren't lefr intact.

In Eastern Poland Polish officials were killed, imprisoned or deported to Siberia, the whole administration was built from sratch with participation of local Jews. Not exactly left intact.

In Western Poland Polish officials were killed, imprisoned or deported to GG, so the authorities weren't lefr intact.

Grabowski describes the fate of local Polish officials in GG, terrorized by Germans. In many places the same officials were terrorized by guerilla of several types and criminals.

Germany robbed Poland (including Polish Jews), read Götz Aly Hitler's Beneficiaries: Plunder, Racial War,and the Nazi welfare state. Germany destroied about half of Poland. Now Poles are guilty. Xx236 (talk) 06:42, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Icewhiz, please learn about WWII in Poland. You lack basic knowledge, you collect trash. Xx236 (talk) 06:46, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Uninterrupted traffic across the Polish borders intensified with many Jews passing through on their way west or south.

Were all people allowed to emigrate or Jews and Germans only?

Some Jews pretended to be German (see Douglas [4])Xx236 (talk) 06:31, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Influence of Nazi propaganda

Educated Poles were exterminated or deported or run away to join Polish army abroad. Quite many educated Poles had Jewish roots and they were murdered. Many Polish survivors were illiterate, especially in former Russian partition, eg. in Kielce. Those people were influenced by extremally effective Nazi propaganda and the influence partially survived after the war.

The subject of Nazi propaganda was studied by Grabowski, but Grabowski is O.K. when he attacks Poles, but his expertise in Nazi history doesn't attract. [5] I haven't read the paper (35 EUR). Polish language texts [6] [7] [8]Xx236 (talk) 13:17, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Kielce pogrom

I believe that IPN books should be quoted. Kąkolewski speculates.Xx236 (talk) 13:25, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Lead edit

Preserving here by providing this link, showing what was taken out of the lead. Some material can be perhaps moved into the article, but the discussion of Jews unsuccessfully trying to emigrate from Palestine back to Poland seems off-topic for the lead. Please let me know if there are any concerns.

Separately, I moved the discussion on property restitution into a section within "Background", without removing content. That seemed too detailed for the lead.

Lead is now quite a bit shorter; perhaps the tag can be removed? --K.e.coffman (talk) 21:00, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Well sourced information about migration of Jews from Palestine to Poland has been removed from this article under the guise of streamlining or moving info out of the lead, with some editors concealing the fact that their intention is simply to remove this information entirely or providing spurious reasons for its removal ("original research"). What is this "original research"? Here it is: Nir Hasson. "The Untold Story of the Jews Who Left Mandatory Palestine," Haaretz February 16, 2018. Based on Meir Margalit’s book (in Hebrew) Returning in Tears: Emigration During the British Mandate Period. Since some of this information has been in the article since at least 2015, it requires consensus to be removed. There is a great deal of information about migration from various countries in this article. The issue is relevant to property restitution and fear of violence (was it universally held?), which are interrelated. A reference to Weinbaum's book that was recently added refers to an alleged migration block by Poland's communist authorities. (Weinbaum does not provide a source for this or any of his information for that period.) The fact that large numbers of Jews wanted to return to Poland from Palestine is an important fact to consider in the context of this article. It cannot simply be attributed to the prospect of a war. I created a section called "population movements" to get info out of the lead, as has been urged, but that section was removed. I also note, as others have done in other forums, that since joining Wikipedia the only contribution of יניב הורון to articles on Polish-Jewish issues has been performing numerous and serial deletions of things they don't like for no good reason. (Please check their stats & correct me if I'm wrong.) A pattern of deletions on the part of non-contributors is, in my view and others, highly questionable.Tatzref (talk) 18:27, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

I recommend that you read (or re-read) WP:No original research. The fact that Jewish settlers in Palestine were trying to return to their homes in Poland has nothing to do with the subject of this article, anti-Jewish violence in Poland, unless the sources explicitly make a connection. You may believe that the interest of those settlers in returning to Poland indicates that there was little anti-Jewish violence. I may believe that they were interested in leaving Palestine because they were Europeans who were not prepared to live in what was essentially a third-world country in the beginning of a war against the British and the Arabs. It doesn't matter what either of us believe; all that matters is what reliable sources say. Either demonstrate that the sources make an explicit connection between Jews leaving Palestine and anti-Jewish violence in Poland or drop the stick. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:34, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Misuse of allegations of Misuse of Primary Sources

So a direct, verbatim quote from the American Jewish Year book is a misuse of a primary source because it "probably" didn't really know what was happening in Poland at the time??? Likely it was written by a bunch of amateurs! American Jewish Year Book, 5708 (1947–1948), vol. 49 (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1947) http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1947_1948_2_Formatter.pdf HARRY SCHNEIDERMAN AND MORRIS FINE, Editors MAURICE SPECTOR, MAURICE BASSECHES, Assistant Editors LEON SHAPIRO, Lie. en Droit, Research Associate, American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1947_1948_10_PolandSoviet.pdf POLAND By Leon Shapiro [p. 390] Restitution: The return of Jewish property, if claimed by the owner or his descendant, and if not subject to state control, proceeded more or less smoothly. A little backgound about the American Jewish Year Book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Jewish_Year_Book The American Jewish Year Book is "The Annual Record of American Jewish Civilization." The Year Book is a very important and prestigious annual publication because it acts as a major resource for academic researchers, as well as researchers and practitioners at Jewish institutions and organizations, the media (both Jewish and secular), educated leaders and lay persons, and libraries (particularly University and Jewish libraries), for up-to-date information about the North American Jewish communities. For decades, the American Jewish Year Book has been the premier place for leading academics to publish long review chapters on topics of interest to the North American Jewish community. Previous editors included: Cyrus Adler, Maurice Basseches, Herman Bernstein, Morris Fine, Herbert Friedenwald, H.G. Friedman, Lawrence Grossman, Milton Himmelfarb, Joseph Jacobs, Martha Jelenko, Julius B. Maller, Samson D. Oppenheim, Harry Schneiderman, Ruth R. Seldin, David Singer, Jacob Sloan, Maurice Spector, and Henrietta Szold. The statement "The return of Jewish property, if claimed by the owner or his descendant, and if not subject to state control, proceeded more or less smoothly," is entirely consistent with the most up-to-date and authoritative research on the topic: Under the restitution law “On Abandoned Real Estates,” which was enacted May 6, 1945 and remained in force until the end of 1948, dispossessed owners or their relatives and heirs, whether residing in Poland or abroad, could reclaim privately owned property in an expedited fashion and with minimal costs. Thousands upon thousands of properties were returned without any problem, usually within days of filing an application. This was well publicized in the Jewish media in Palestine/Israel, Germany and North America, and specialized Jewish law firms handled many of the claims. Thousands of Poles came forward as witnesses on behalf of Jews in these property claims. See Alina Skibińska, “Problemy rewindykacji żydowskich nieruchomości w latach 1944–1950: Zagadnienia ogólne i szczegółowe (na przykładzie Szczebrzeszyna),” and Łukasz Krzyżanowski, “‘Chcielibyśmy, by ten dom nie pozostał w obcych rękach’: Sądowa restytucja prywatnego mienia żydowskiego w Polsce na przykładzie Radomia i Kalisza 1945–1948,” in Jan Grabowski and Dariusz Libionka, eds., Klucze i kasa: O mieniu żydowskim w Polsce pod okupacją niemiecką i we wczesnych latach powojennych 1939–1950 (Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Centrum Badań nad Zagładą, 2014), 522–23, 529, 568–69, 575–607 Title to hundreds of properties was recovered by Jews in Kielce. Regional historian Stanisław Meducki summarizes the findings of his research as follows: “By the strength of a special law enacted 6 May 1945 ‘On Abandoned Real Estates’, a strongly simplified inheritance procedure was applied. Jews could recover their property: former apartments, workshops, firms, on condition that they had not been seized by the Nazis. Courts had to examine every motion within 21 days. In Kielce, Jews did not have any difficulties with recovering their own property. As a rule, every motion was settled favorably and quickly. In most cases, the property was taken over by the relatives of the former owners, whose rights were ascertained on the grounds of witnesses’ testimony. Witnesses, most often Poles, neighbors or acquaintances from before the war, testified before the court willingly, without reluctance or prejudice.” See Marta Pawlina-Meducka, ed., Z kroniki utraconego sąsiedztwa: Kielce, wrzesień 2000/From the Chronicle of the Lost Neighborhood: Kielce, September 2000 (Kielce: Kieleckie Towarzystwo Naukowe, 2001), 202. See also Krzysztof Urbański, Kieleccy Żydzi (Kraków: Pracownia Konserwacji Zabytków w Kielcach and Małopolska Oficyna Wydawnicza, n.d. [1993]), 180–90. Jews brought 291 successful court applications for the return of property in Zamość. See Adam Kopciowski, Zagłada Żydów w Zamościu (Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, 2005), 203. Jews successfully submitted 240 applications in the municipal court in Włodawa, and were able to recover real estate, houses, farm buildings, livestock, carriages, and utensils. See Adam Kopciowski, “Anti-Jewish Incidents in the Lublin Region in the Early Years after World War II,” in Holocaust: Studies and Materials, vol. 1 (2008): 188. Tatzref (talk) 01:19, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

These sre PRIMARY period sources which are not making some of the claims attributed to them. The topic has been treated extensively in modern SECONDARY academic literature, whose conclusion is opposite than the text introduced. It would seem that while some claims were processed, Jew were prevented from returning to Poland, intimidated and murdered, and prevented by legal measures from submitting claims - thus leaving the vast majority of property unclaimed.

References

None of these sources are primary sources (they are not collections of documents). They are all derivative. The ones cited by Tatzref are based on the most recent in-depth archival sources by professional historians, some of whom are associated with the Polish Centre of Holocaust Studies, and are, therefore, more reliable. They fully support what Tatzref wrote. The fact that some Jews were intimidated does not negate the fact at least 10,000 restitution applications were successfully brought in 1945-1948 with no significant problems and very often with the help of Polish neighbors and acquaintances. THE FOLLOWING TEXT BY TATZREF WAS REMOVED BY ICEWHIZ. No specific inaccuracies have been identified by Icewhiz. His charge cannot be taken seriously without hard evidence. "A restitution law “On Abandoned Real Estates,” enacted on May 6, 1945, allowed dispossessed owners of property, or their relatives and heirs, whether they lived in Poland or outside the country, to reclaim privately owned property. A simplified inheritance procedure remained in place until the end of 1948, with an expedited process (courts had to examine every motion within 21 days, but many claims were processed on the day they were filed), minimal costs and relaxed formalities. Poles willingly served as witnesses to corroborate claims of Jewish neighbors and acquaintances. Jan Grabowski and Dariusz Libionka, eds., Klucze i kasa: O mieniu żydowskim w Polsce pod okupacją niemiecką i we wczesnych latach powojennych 1939–1950 (Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Centrum Badań nad Zagładą, 2014), 522–23, 529, 568–69, 575–607; Marta Pawlina-Meducka, ed., Z kroniki utraconego sąsiedztwa: Kielce, wrzesień 2000/From the Chronicle of the Lost Neighborhood: Kielce, September 2000 (Kielce: Kieleckie Towarzystwo Naukowe, 2001), 202; Krzysztof Urbański, Kieleccy Żydzi (Kraków: Pracownia Konserwacji Zabytków w Kielcach and Małopolska Oficyna Wydawnicza, n.d. [1993]), 180–90. According to the American Jewish Year Book, which closely monitored conditions in Poland, “The return of Jewish property, if claimed by the owner or his descendant, and if not subject to state control [i.e., nationalized], proceeded more or less smoothly.” American Jewish Year Book, 5708 (1947–1948), vol. 49 (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1947), 390. The existence of these procedures was well known, and Jewish law firms outside Poland specialized in submitting applications on behalf of non-residents. Official records confirm that thousands upon thousands of properties were successfully reclaimed without any significant problems, for example, 291 applications in Zamość and 240 in Włodawa. Adam Kopciowski, Zagłada Żydów w Zamościu (Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, 2005), 203; Adam Kopciowski, “Anti-Jewish Incidents in the Lublin Region in the Early Years after World War II,” in Holocaust: Studies and Materials, vol. 1 (2008): 188. Most of these properties were then sold to Poles. Since the criteria were so lax, there were cases of Jews advancing fraudulent property claims. Grabowski and Libionka, Klucze i kasa, 528, 532, 536–37, 595–600. Many Jews did not bother to apply because buildings were often destroyed, properties were indebted, and property values were low because of the uncertain political situation (fear of nationalization). According to a scholarly source, "the question of appropriated Jewish property ... is almost never mentioned in Jewish testimonies after the war." Monika Rice, “What! Still Alive?!”: Jewish Survivors in Poland and Israel Remember Homecoming (Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 2017), 77." Since Icewhiz is insisting, I have no problem adding another excellent source that he now appears to value very highly: Mark Paul, A Tangled Web: Polish-Jewish Relations in Wartime Northeastern Poland and the Aftermath, http://kpk-toronto.org/wp-content/uploads/Tangled-Web-3-2.doc THE FOLLOWING TEXT BY ICEWHIZ WAS RESTORED. It contains verbatim cuts & pastes from a published book, Weinbaum's, The Plunder of Jewish Property, which can be readily verified by looking at the pages cited. For example, "Jews in displaced persons camps in Germany feared returning to Poland, and those who attempted to do so were usually blocked by the Polish authorities," is not a paraphrase but direct lifting word for word. Once this is verified, there must be consequences. The 1,500 estimate should also be removed here because there are much lower estimates made by other historians, and this is discussed later on in the article at length. So this is cherry picking. "In the immediate postwar period vast quantities of Jewish property were unclaimed due to many Jews being murdered when they sought restitution of family property and due to Jews fleeing postwar Poland. The murders, estimated at 1,500 Jews, intimidated Jews from filing claims. Unclaimed Jewish property devolved to the Polish state on 31 December 1948, but many Jews who had fled to the Soviet Union were only repatriated after this date and Jews in displaced persons camps in Germany feared returning to Poland, and those who attempted to do so were usually blocked by the Polish authorities. Polish legislation in 1947 severely restricted interstate succession, limiting inheritance by distant family members. No provision was made for transfer of unclaimed Jewish property to appropriate Jewish organizations or to other survivors.[26][27]" Tatzref (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Certainly a small minority of Poles helped Jews - during the Holocaust and in the aftermath. And certainly there were a number of successful restitution cases (though the Polish government subsequently nationalized the property) - but the vast majority lay unclaimed - due to the Polish authorities blocking the return of Jews (or Jews not being able to return from the Soviet Union), legal limitations (e.g. - blocking inheritance to non-immediate relatives), and some Poles murdering Jews (and a greater number - intimidated from said murders and threats of murder) who attempted to claim their property that was taken over - and for this 2 strong published sources, from established academics, were provided.

The American Jewish Year Book, 5708 (1947–1948) - giving a summary of the same year's events - would be typically considered a WP:PRIMARY source - and if not - quite dated and not reflecting scholarly consensus.

As for Mark Paul's tangled web - this is a WP:SPS by a WP:QS author - and is not an appropriate source. That being said - copy-pasting from him is still a copyright violation. The passage copied from Mark Paul, which in 180 degrees from mainstream, published, work on the subject of Jewish property in Poland - demonstrates why this is a WP:QS/WP:FRINGE author little used by others (and when mentioned by RS - often in the context of mentioning Paul as an example of fringe promotion).Icewhiz (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

The issue is not merely whether some Jews had problems reclaiming property, which no one disputes, but rather how much property was reclaimed and how that process worked. Weinbaum’s 2001 article contains no references to any sources, published or archival, on how property claims were processed under the restitution law/decree of May 6, 1945, and how many were successfully made. In fact, Weinbaum gets the date of the decree wrong (March 8, 1946) and provides no bibliography. So this is not any remarkable scholarship by any stretch. Dariusz Stola’s 2007 article is far better sourced, but has limitations. While it mentions problems Jews encountered in reclaiming property, it does not canvas the actual operation of the courts that processed restitution claims, based on actual court records. That task was undertaken by Alina Skibińska and Łukasz Krzyżanowski, scholars associated with the Polish Center for Holocaust Research (Centrum Badań nad Zagładą Żydów), and their in-depth studies were published in a massive 2014 book Klucze i kasa: O mieniu żydowskim w Polsce pod okupacją niemiecką i we wczesnych latach powojennych 1939–1950, edited by Jan Grabowski and Dariusz Libionka, that deals with Jewish property issues. These studies complement other regional studies by historians such as Krzysztof Urbański, Adam Kopciowski, Grzegorz Miernik, Sebastian Piątkowski, and others. Their findings are accurately set out by Mark Paul. Thousands upon thousands of claims were processed expeditiously between May 1945 and the end of 1948 (531 successful applications, sometimes for multiple properties, in two county towns of Lublin province alone: 291 in Zamość and 240 in Włodawa.) In almost all cases, these properties were then sold to Poles. They were not subsequently nationalized as you state. Read the book. Only certain categories of properties, mainly industrial, landed estates, and large commercial properties were nationalized, regardless of who owned them. Polish neighbors and acquaintances came forward frequently to testify on behalf of Jewish claimants. In addition, thousands of properties were sold or transferred by Jews outside the court restitution process. These studies are clearly consistent with what the American Jewish Year Book reported in 1947–1948. They were monitoring the situation through Jewish agencies in Poland and had no reason to misrepresent the true state. It is strange to learn that Mark Paul is “180 degrees from mainstream, published, work on the subject of Jewish property in Poland,” considering that the Polish Center for Holocaust Research (Centrum Badań nad Zagładą Żydów) is widely considered to be mainstream and cutting edge on these topics, and the studies in question appeared in a book edited by Jan Grabowski. Imagine, Mark Paul’s reporting of the findings of these scholars has now tainted them and turned them into non-mainstream fringe writing. Only in some bizarre universe. Tatzref (talk) 05:13, 24 May 2018 (UTC) Corrected a slip. The law on abandoned properties was in effect until the end of 1948, not 1946. So there were 3-1/2 years to make restitution claims under the simplified and expedited court process. Thousands upon thousands of successful claims were made.Tatzref (talk) 15:02, 29 May 2018 (UTC) I just noticed that in the process of impugning Tatzref’s text, and despite a caution from GizzyCatBella not to remove sourced information Revision as of 08:10, 22 May 2018 (view source) GizzyCatBella (talk | contribs) (Take it to the talk page, don’t remove sourced info), Icewhiz appears to have removed the following sourced information entered earlier by someone else: Revision as of 10:15, 22 May 2018 (view source) Icewhiz (talk | contribs) (Use proper secondary soruce instread of OR and PRIMARY source.)Some homeowner property claims were fraudulent.[26] Meng, Michael (2008). "Shattered Spaces : Jewish Sites in Germany and Poland after 1945". Chapel Hill 2008. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. p. 84, Note 130. Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History. Local Polish courts handled the claims that began first with a special procedure to certify birth, wedding, and death certificates before moving onto the actual claim of the property. This legal process was understandably necessary given the destruction of files throughout Poland and the possibility for fraud, which turned out to be a legitimate concern as some Jews and Poles worked together to lodge false claims. Given the lack of research on this topic, it is not clear how great of a problem fraudulent claims were, but it was significant enough for the AJDC to write: »The Polish courts have become increasingly alerted to the ‘racket’ of some Jews in going around making a business of making claims for the restitution of property belonging to people they know or did not know, alleging that they are relatives or that they are the persons to whom the property belongs.« In fact, fraudulent claims were a big problem. Dariusz Stola, whose article Icewhiz added, points this out as well: “Recent research … has brought to light many cases of abuse and forgery in these procedures.” (p. 245) His footnote 10 refers to an organized group in the Bialystok region, and suggests that the same was probably the case in other regions. Stola refers to Krzysztof Persak’s article in the 2002 IPN book Wokol Jedwabnego, vol. 2, 375-414. Persak’s article, as well as other scholarly articles, refer to a mafia-like ring headed by two Jewish officials in the Bialystok Security Office, Samuel Faber or Farber and Eliasz Trokenheim, that fraudulently “reclaimed” scores of properties of deceased Jews in Białystok, Łomża, Jedwabne, and elsewhere. The properties were then sold to Poles, and the profits divided among the ring members. See Krzysztof Persak, “Akta postępowań cywilnych z lat 1947–1949 w sprawach dotyczących zmarłych żydowskich mieszkańców Jedwabnego,” in Wokół Jedwabnego, 379–87. See also Jerzy Kułak, “Faber i S-ka—krótka historia pewnego przekrętu,” Biuletyn Instytutu Pamięci Narodowej, no. 6 (June 2002): 80–83. Trokenheim, by the way, was welcomed by Sweden as a political refugee after 1968. Persak is associated with the Polish Center for Holocaust Research. As Mark Paul, the alleged myth propagator, points out, Polish courts increasingly became aware of these scams. The Central Committee of Jews in Poland also had concerns but was powerless to stop this abuse. Mar Paul refers to Grabowski and Libionka, Klucze i kasa, 528, 532, 536–37, 595–600. The existence of these scams appears to have been common knowledge at the time, as confirmed by the memoir of a Jewish returnee to Kraków: Henryk Vogler, Autoportret z pamięci, Part 3: Dojrzałość (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie, 1981), 7. Of course, such scams, which likely involved hundreds of properties, were but a tiny fraction of the total number of properties successfully, expeditiously and uneventfully reclaimed through the court restitution process. The number of such transactions, as well as uneventful sales and transfers of property by Jews outside this process, was easily 10 - 20 times higher than the number of hostile clashes over property. Just for the record, Mark Paul's unpublished work has been mentioned in publications of numerous academics and professional historians, among them, Tillar Mazzeo, Eike Lossin, Marek Wierzbicki, Bogdan Musial, Peter Stachura, Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, M.B. Biskupski.Tatzref (talk) 15:19, 24 May 2018 (UTC) Regarding the argument that Polish authorities blocked the return of Jews and Jews were not able to return from the Soviet Union. The law provided for claims to be made from outside Poland, and a large part of the claims were made by relatives of deceased Jews who lived in Palestine/Israel. Jews who returned to Poland from the Soviet Union and settled in the territories Poland acquired from Germany received material compensation in kind for property left behind in Eastern Poland on the same basis as Polish resettlers from the East. See Dariusz Stola, “The Polish Debate on the Holocaust and the Restitution of Property,” in Robbery and Restitution: The Conflict over Jewish Property in Europe (New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2007), 244. The vast majority of the much smaller number of post-1948 returnees from the Soviet Union originally hailed from Eastern Poland, and very few of them had legitimate property claims to advance within the territories of the shrunken Polish state. Thus an estimated 300,000 Jewish survivors as well as hundreds of thousands of relatives of deceased Jews residing outside Poland - providing they were heirs of property owners - had ample access to the restitution process between May 1945 and the end of December 1948. Its existence was publicized in the Jewish press and specialized agencies and law firms sprung up in Palestine (Israel), Germany, and the USA to submit claims. The authors of the American Jewish Year Book were no stooges. They had first hand information from Jewish agencies and knew what they wrote in 1947-1948 to be true: “The return of Jewish property, if claimed by the owner or his descendant, and if not subject to state control, proceeded more or less smoothly.” The latest research based on court records - including that of historians from the mainstream Polish Center for Holocaust Research -- fully supports that statement. Tatzref (talk) 20:33, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

This entire section is incomprehensible. What are the problems? What is being proposed as a remedy? – Muboshgu (talk) 21:09, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: - I agree. - at question is this diff (which copy pasted (somewhat reordered, but each sentence is) from a WP:SPS by a highly WP:QS author, citing PRIMARY sources, and with OR (as Mark Paul is not cited) reaches conclusions not supported by published research) vs. this diff which cites two academic books by established scholars and reflects academic consensus on what happened to Jewish property and the difficulties, intimidation, and outright murder of many Jews who sought their property back.Icewhiz (talk) 04:24, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

This is what I propose to post in the article - it is all thoroughly documented and relies heavily on a recent publication of the Polish Center for Holocaust Research edited by Jan Grabowski: START POST A restitution law “On Abandoned Real Estates” was enacted on May 6, 1945 to permit dispossessed property owners, or their relatives and heirs, including those residing outside of Poland, to reclaim privately owned property. This simplified inheritance procedure remained in place until the end of 1948. The process was expedited (courts had to examine every motion within 21 days, and many claims were processed the day they were filed), costs were minimal and the formalities were relaxed. Poles willingly served as witnesses to corroborate claims of Jewish neighbors and acquaintances. Jan Grabowski and Dariusz Libionka, eds., Klucze i kasa: O mieniu żydowskim w Polsce pod okupacją niemiecką i we wczesnych latach powojennych 1939–1950 (Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Centrum Badań nad Zagładą, 2014), 522–523, 529, 568–569, 575–607; Marta Pawlina-Meducka, ed., Z kroniki utraconego sąsiedztwa: Kielce, wrzesień 2000/From the Chronicle of the Lost Neighborhood: Kielce, September 2000 (Kielce: Kieleckie Towarzystwo Naukowe, 2001), 202; Krzysztof Urbański, Kieleccy Żydzi (Kraków: Pracownia Konserwacji Zabytków w Kielcach and Małopolska Oficyna Wydawnicza, n.d. [1993]), 180–190. According to the American Jewish Year Book, “The return of Jewish property, if claimed by the owner or his descendant, and if not subject to state control [i.e., nationalized], proceeded more or less smoothly.” American Jewish Year Book, 5708 (1947–1948), vol. 49 (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1947), 390. The existence of these procedures was well known, and Jewish law firms outside Poland specialized in submitting applications on behalf of non-residents. Official records confirm that many thousands of properties were successfully reclaimed without any significant problems, for example, 291 applications in Zamość and 240 in Włodawa. Almost all of these properties were then sold to Poles. Jan Grabowski and Dariusz Libionka, eds., Klucze i kasa: O mieniu żydowskim w Polsce pod okupacją niemiecką i we wczesnych latach powojennych 1939–1950 (Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Centrum Badań nad Zagładą, 2014), 522–523, 529, 568–569, 575–607; Adam Kopciowski, Zagłada Żydów w Zamościu (Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej, 2005), 203; Adam Kopciowski, “Anti-Jewish Incidents in the Lublin Region in the Early Years after World War II,” in Holocaust: Studies and Materials, vol. 1 (2008), 188. Given the lax criteria, there were cases of Jews advancing fraudulent property claims, which gave rise to concerns on the part of the courts and the Central Committee of Jews in Poland. Grabowski and Libionka, Klucze i kasa, 528, 532, 536–537, 595–600. Krzysztof Persak, “Akta postępowań cywilnych z lat 1947–1949 w sprawach dotyczących zmarłych żydowskich mieszkańców Jedwabnego,” in Paweł Machcewicz and Krzysztof Persak, eds., Wokół Jedwabnego (Warsaw: Instytut Pamięci Narodowej—Komisja Ścigania Zbrodni przeciwko Narodowi Polskiemu, 2002) vol. 1, 379–87. Many Jews did not bother to apply because buildings were often destroyed, properties were indebted, and property values were low because of the uncertain political situation (fear of nationalization). Mark Paul, A Tangled-Web: Polish-Jewish Relations in Wartime Northeastern Poland and the Aftermath, Part 3 (Toronto: The Polish Educational Foundation in North America, 2018) http://kpk-toronto.org/wp-content/uploads/Tangled-Web-3-2.doc END POST Could I please get a response as to whether or not Icewhiz's post offends copyright: ICEWHIZ’S TEXT In the immediate postwar period vast quantities of Jewish property were unclaimed due to many Jews being murdered when they sought restitution of family property and due to Jews fleeing postwar Poland. The murders, estimated at 1,500 Jews, intimidated Jews from filing claims. Unclaimed Jewish property devolved to the Polish state on 31 December 1948, but many Jews who had fled to the Soviet Union were only repatriated after this date and Jews in displaced persons camps in Germany feared returning to Poland, and those who attempted to do so were usually blocked by the Polish authorities. WEINBAUM’S PUBLISHED TEXT (The Plunder of Jewish Property during the Holocaust, p. 101) In the immediate postwar period vast quantities of Jewish property were unclaimed – in part due to the fact that owners or their heirs were often murdered when seeking to retrieve their property, and that many others fled the country. … the number of Jews murdered … general estimates place the number at 1500. The murder of survivors intimidated many of those who might have sought redress … According to a decree of 8 March 1946 on abandoned property, all items not claimed by 31 December 1948 devolved to the state. Many of the Polish Jews who had survived in the Soviet Union were only repatriated to Poland after the claims deadline had already past. Others in DP (displaced persons) camps in Germany feared returning to Poland. Moreover, except for individual cases, the Polish authorities blocked the return of Jews from DP camps. Tatzref (talk) 19:40, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@Tatzref: This is still illegible. Please mind tl;dr and format this in a way that can be comprehended. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:44, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

The proposed text above misrepresents the sources. It ignores Jews who were unable to return to Poland (in part due to the actions of the Polish government), intimidation and murder of Jews by Poles who took over the properties, severe legal restrictions on inheritance to more distance family members, leading to the factual result that the vast majority of Jewish property went unclaimed. It is true that if a Jew managed to get to Poland, was scared by other threats, other Jews being murdered, wasn't murdered himself, and had legal recourse under the revised succession laws to inherit - it is true if all of the aforementioned was met, then the case was handled by the Polish courts. In the context of anti-Jewish violence, the documented (and well referenced) widespread murder (and even wider intimidation) of Jews to prevent restitution claims (usually by people who held the property) is of obvious relevance to this article - this is supported by strong academic publicly published books by experts in the field in the present version of the article.Icewhiz (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

This is the revised text that I propose to submit minus the footnotes:

A restitution law “On Abandoned Real Estates” was enacted on May 6, 1945 to permit dispossessed property owners, or their relatives and heirs, including those residing outside of Poland, to reclaim privately owned property. This simplified inheritance procedure remained in place until the end of 1948, with an expedited process (courts had to examine every motion within 21 days, and many claims were processed the day they were filed), minimal costs and relaxed formalities. Poles willingly served as witnesses to corroborate claims of Jewish neighbors and acquaintances. These procedures were well known. Jewish law firms outside Poland specialized in submitting applications on behalf of non-residents. Official records confirm that many thousands of properties were successfully reclaimed without any significant problems, for example, 291 applications in Zamość and 240 in Włodawa. Almost all of these properties were then sold to Poles. According to the American Jewish Year Book, “The return of Jewish property, if claimed by the owner or his descendant, and if not subject to state control [i.e., nationalized], proceeded more or less smoothly.” Given the lax criteria, there were cases of Jews advancing fraudulent property claims, which gave rise to concerns on the part of the courts and the Central Committee of Jews in Poland. Since buildings were often destroyed, properties were indebted, and property values were low because of the uncertain political situation (fear of nationalization), many Jews chose not to make applications for restitution.

Icewhiz already posted the following, which addresses his points and which in no way negates my proposed text, which is based on more recent research by Poland's leading Holocaust research institution.

Icewhiz's post:

In the immediate postwar period vast quantities of Jewish property were unclaimed due to many Jews being murdered when they sought restitution of family property and due to Jews fleeing postwar Poland. The murders, estimated at 1,500 Jews, intimidated Jews from filing claims. Unclaimed Jewish property devolved to the Polish state on 31 December 1948, but many Jews who had fled to the Soviet Union were only repatriated after this date and Jews in displaced persons camps in Germany feared returning to Poland, and those who attempted to do so were usually blocked by the Polish authorities. Polish legislation in 1947 severely restricted interstate succession, limiting inheritance by distant family members. No provision was made for transfer of unclaimed Jewish property to appropriate Jewish organizations or to other survivors.[26][27]

As I mentioned, the following passages were lifted verbatim from Weinbaum's book: "In the immediate postwar period vast quantities of Jewish property were unclaimed ... the Soviet Union were only repatriated ... in DP (displaced persons) camps in Germany feared returning to Poland." The 1500 estimate does not belong here because that matter is discussed later on in the article and historian David Engel believes that were fewer than 500 deaths.Tatzref (talk) 20:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

By way of explanation, the reference to Tadeusz Piotrowski's estimate (1,500–2,000) was removed because, in this case, he provided no basis for this information and the estimate ran higher than other sources reported. So I didn't think it added anything reliable to the treatment of this issue.Tatzref (talk) 15:16, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Polish authorities, Polish legislation - which Polish? There were two governments and two legislations at that time. You mean the Communist authorities and legislation, anticapitalistic, influenced by Jewish Communists. Now you suggest that the Communists were POlish nationalists who robbed Jews only. No, they robbed almost everyone.Xx236 (talk) 09:48, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

ICEWHIZ'S DEFAMATORY REMARKS ON YANIV'S TALK

Icewhiz’s allegation that the text purged by Yaniv (יניב הורון), as allegedly “antisemitic vandalism,” in fact constitutes “WP:HOAX material - blatant and libelous misrepresentation of sources” is every bit as offensive and baseless as Yaniv’s. Wikipedia defines “hoax” as “a falsehood deliberately fabricated to masquerade as the truth.” Set out below is the impugned text in question. No cogent evidence had been presented that any statement it contains is a “hoax” or that the sources (pages of publications) cited do not support those statements. Until Icewhiz produces such evidence serious consideration should be given to blocking his participation in Polish-related issues for the same reason that Yaniv has been blocked: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%91_%D7%94%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%9F

IMPUGNED TEXT

Anti-Jewish violence in Poland, 1944–1946

Property claims and restitution A restitution law "On Abandoned Real Estates" of May 6, 1945 allowed property owners who had been dispossessed, or their relatives and heirs, whether residing in Poland or outside the country, to reclaim privately owned property under a simplified inheritance procedure. The law remained in effect until the end of 1948. An expedited court process with minimal costs was put in place to handle claims. Applications had to be examined within 21 days, and many claims were processed the day they were filed. Poles often served as witnesses to corroborate claims of Jewish neighbors and acquaintances. Jewish law firms and agencies outside Poland specialized in submitting applications on behalf of non-residents. Properties were also transferred and sold by Jewish owners outside this process.[23]. The American Jewish Year Book reported, at the time, “The return of Jewish property, if claimed by the owner or his descendant, and if not subject to state control, proceeded more or less smoothly.”[24] Thousands of properties were successfully reclaimed, for example, more than 520 properties were reclaimed in two county towns of Lublin province alone (281 applications in Zamość, and 240 in Włodawa - some applications involved multiple properties).[25] Given the lax criteria, there were a number of cases of Jews advancing fraudulent property claims.[26]

The American Jewish Year Book for 1947-1948 is available online for anyone to examine at http://www.ajcarchives.org/main.php?GroupingId=10082;http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1947_1948_10_PolandSoviet.pdf

Furthermore, Icewhiz’s claim that Mark Paul propagates hoaxes such as the myth of “the ungrateful Jew” has no merit. The relevant text, found in Mark Paul’s “Wartime Rescue of Jews by the Polish Catholic Clergy,” is available online (http://kpk-toronto.org/wp-content/uploads/CLERGY-RESCUE-KPK-9.doc). The section headed “Recognition and (In)Gratitude” compiles many statements by Jews regarding Polish rescue efforts, some expressing gratitude, others not – hence the ambivalent wording of the heading. An example of the latter is former Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s infamous remarks, “What concerns the Jews, the Poles have been collaborating with the Germans. … only at most one hundred people have been helping Jews. … Polish priests did not save even one Jewish life.” Icewhiz (and Joanna Michlic, whom he cites) may not like to be reminded of such statements but they are part of the historical record. Mark Paul’s “Patterns of Cooperation, Collaboration and Betrayal: Jews, Germans and Poles in Occupied Poland during World War II” was recognized recently as an important study in a major publication of the prestigious Jagiellonian University: Wymuszona współpraca czy zdrada? Wokół przypadków kolaboracji Żydów w okupowanym Krakowie (Kraków: Universitas, 2018), at p. 34. The author, Alicja Jarkowska-Natkaniec, has impeccable academic credentials: http://fellowships.claimscon.org/fellows/cohort-xi-academic-year-2018-2019/jarkowska-natkaniec-alicja/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatzref (talk • contribs) 17:16, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Anti-Jewish Violence Targets Jews

Is this info box serious? The article is titled 'Anti-Jewish Violence' and the info box needs to tell me that jews were the target? Wasted bandwidth. 67.52.60.180 (talk) 13:47, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Undue weight

Kielce pogrom section gives undue weight to a non-notable author via interview. The second source doesn't back most of it up. I've deleted the content, which could rewritten if reliable sources can be found substantiating the theories. buidhe 19:09, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Did you mean non-reliable author? He seems notable: Krzysztof Kąkolewski. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:58, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Abandoned properties targeting mainly jews to begin with

There had been a claim in the article, which was not very precise and which was therefore removed recently in a good faith edit. The claim was the following:

The unprecedented rate of extermination of Polish Jews in conjunction with the fact that only Jewish property was officially confiscated by the Nazis suggests "abandoned property" was equivalent to "Jewish property". Communist officials did not conceal this, the formulators of the law argued that it was necessary to prevent wealth concentration in the hands of "unproductive and parasite factors"

The remove note was the following

not sure what's going on here - probably the source is being misrepresented - by the claim that only Jewish property was seized by the Nazis is pretty blatantly false - entire regions and sections of cities were designated for Germans only, Polish pop expelled (or worse) and their property seized. All Polish businesses over certain size taken over by nazis etc.

I think that the remove note shows that the removed section was (partially) misunderstood. I also find it problematic that the section could be read as if only Jews had been evicted. The point, however, was that up to/around 90% of the Jewish population in Poland died during the war, while this number is around 10% for "ethnic Poles". This means that the harsher inheritance laws mainly affected Jewish properties, as the likelihood for a previous owner or a direct heir surviving the war were comparatively low. Additionally, ethnic Poles were officially given the option of accepting germanization (Volksliste) wherever the germanization policies were put into motion. This view does not take into account the destruction of Polish villages and neither so-called "wild evictions", nor the large-scale deportation of ethnic Poles into forced labor and the further plans laid out in the Generalplan Ost, but still - a clear order of confiscation was only given for Jewish property which is why the statement was not really wrong, only misunderstood. I think that this section should be reintroduced into the article as it emphasizes how the law targeted holocaust victims after the war, even using antisemitic stereotypes to justify it, but it should probably be re-written to not be as easily misunderstood anymore. Liekveel (talk) 12:04, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

" ethnic Poles were officially given the option of accepting germanization (Volksliste)" No, they were not. Volunteer Marek 15:10, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

You are right, I misunderstood something in another article. Instead of "Poles who were considered racially valuable" I misread it as if all Poles were considered "racially valuable" in this scheme, even though I know that the Generalplan Ost aimed to displace nearly all Poles from the occupied territory. I found that strange, yes, but I just thought they were trying to hide their long-term goals in the beginning, at least on an official level. I should have reread that part, my bad. Anyways, the statement is still not entirely wrong when you look at the "legal" basis for this process, the "Polenvermögensverordnung", which only explicitly makes confiscation from Jews legal or even obligatory. The other part could in theory just as well refer to anyone else, for example hypothetical Germans who refused to become citizens of the German Reich (communists e.g.).

1. Die Beschlagnahme ist auszusprechen bei Vermögen a) von Juden, b) von Personen, die geflüchtet oder nicht nur vorübergehend abwesend sind.

2. Die Beschlagnahme kann ausgesprochen werden, a) wenn das Vermögen zum öffentlichen Wohl, insbesondere im Interesse der Reichsverteidigung oder der Festigung des deutschen Volkstums benötigt wird.

To reiterate, my mistake was in no way meant as a defense. I am well aware of the German crimes committed against Slavs on a racial basis. Do you have any comments about the other aspects I pointed out about your deletion? I would still say that it was just not very well phrased, but still a very important fact in the scope of this article.Liekveel (talk) 16:16, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aserota1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Undue and unverified sentences in the lead downplaying antisemitic violence

With this edit [9] I removed the following contet from the lead:

Tens of thousands of people were killed in Poland's two-year civil war, but also due to indiscriminate postwar lawlessness and abject poverty. Among the Jewish victims of violence directed against the new government were numerous functionaries of the new Stalinist regime, assassinated by the so-called cursed soldiers of the anti-communist underground due to their political loyalties.

But Marcelus reverted [10]. However,

• The WP:WEASEL words numerous functionaries are not supported by the quoted sources. Who says they were numerous? Sources in the section on "Anti-communist armed resistance" need to be carefully checked.
• The sentence Tens of thousands of people were killed creates the impression that anti-Jewish violence was just a drop in the ocean: "yeah, right, many others were killed, so what?". This is not acceptable: 1,000 Jews killed in post-war Poland is an enormity compared to 10,000 ethnic Poles killed. Try to transalte these numbers into percentages and you will understand why.

IMO this dubious and POV content evokes the antisemitic trope of Jewish Bolshevism to downplay and possibly justify antisemitic violence. Compared to this recent essay by a Polish scholar on the same topic, which highlights the "mass scale of the persecutions" [11], our lead section is quite defective. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 17:21, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Check my recent changes, I think they resolve most of the issues Marcelus (talk) 20:25, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm happy that the "numerous functionaries" are gone. However, Tens of thousands of people were killed in Poland's two-year civil war, but also due to indiscriminate postwar lawlessness and abject poverty (+ source): why is this sentece WP:DUE in the lead? Gitz (talk) (contribs) 23:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

It adds an important context, a general situation of lawlessness and contempt for human life, it is rather clear. Read the source, Gross is quite specific on the subject. Marcelus (talk) 00:02, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Exactly, "a general situation of lawlessness and contempt for human life" - the sentence belittles the subject of the article and downplays antisemitic violence. It is also extremly dishonest because 10,000 Poles killed is not compareble to 1,000 Jews killed in Poland in 1945-1947: these numbers mean that a Jew in Poland was exposed to a much greater risk of violence than a Pole. At that time there were at most 200,000 Jews in Poland and more than 20 million Poles: let's say, 1 Jew for every 100 Poles? if 1,000 Jews and 10,000 Poles were killed, then the Jews were at ten times more risk of being killed than the Poles. We should say this instead of there was "a general situation of lawlessness and disregard for human life". Gitz (talk) (contribs) 00:41, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

@Gitz6666 Tens of thousands doesn't mean 10 000, but at least 20,000 and fewer than 200,000 Marcelus (talk) 01:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

References. Undue and unverified sentences

References