Richard Harwood's Politics

by K. B.

A student essay from Dr. Elliot Neaman's History 210 class (historical methods - spring 2001)

The Holocaust remains the defining event of World War II, if not all of the twentieth century. The deliberate genocide of approximately six million of the Jewish race through mass killings, death camps and gas chambers has captured the world as one of the most horrific crimes of the human race. Hitler and the followers of his Nazi regime held deep-rooted, avid anti-Semitic views toward the Jews and carried these attitudes out beginning, with anti-Jewish legislation with the Nuremberg Laws and culminating in the death camp and gas chambers at numerous camps throughout Germany, Poland and surrounding areas, all in an attempt to wipe out the hated Jewish race in favor of a pure Aryan race. The events and actions of the Germans during World War II shocked the rest of the world. As a result, the Holocaust has been and continues to be a subject of extensive investigation, research, study, scholarly publication and other literature since the Allies liberated Europe and ended World War II publicizing the atrocities that were committed in Germany, Poland and other surrounding countries, at the hands of Germany's Nazi regime under the dictatorship of Hitler. The majority of historians, while they may disagree over certain particulars of names and dates, etc. have come to the general consensus that European Jews were the victims of a genocidal plan formed by Hitler and his supporters, motivated by their strict anti-Semitic ideology, which intended on eliminating what Hitler felt was a diseased race, the Jews. This was not heavily debated in the years immediately following the war, but with the growing trend of revisionist history in the early 1960s, some people, Holocaust deniers, emerged who began claiming that the Holocaust had never occurred the way history had so far portrayed it, or claiming the Holocaust is a complete myth.

Holocaust deniers come in a range of degrees of their denial and focus on different aspects of the Holocaust such as the intention of the Final Solution, the death camps and homicidal gas chambers, or the numbers of Jews estimated to have been murdered. These deniers make various different claims, from stating Hitler was a peaceful man who never knew about the gas chambers and the horrific crimes against the Jews, to asserting that gas chambers never existed. Deniers use a variety of techniques to prove their points, usually misrepresenting facts and misquoting sources. Some seem extremely radical and present their denial in an extremist fashion that lacks credibility by their lack of scholarly experience or living extreme lifestyles. Others present their information in a very distinguished scholarly manner to the point where their work, to the naive or those who lack accurate knowledge on the subject, could be inclined to believe their denial arguments. One such denier is Richard E. Harwood, aka Richard Verall who wrote the pamphlet entitled Did Six Million Really Die? I was prompted to write about Harwood and his pamphlet due to a rather disturbing experience I encountered. While talking with a friend about World War II, I mentioned the word, Holocaust. He responded by asking me what the Holocaust was. I was shocked that he did not know. While he is not a college student, he attended high school in Europe where I assumed he would have learned extensively about WWII. I proceeded to explain what the Holocaust was. He then informed me he knew about Hitler and the devastations suffered by the Jews, but was only vaguely familiar with the term Holocaust. This conversation prompted me to think how my friend would view the Holocaust if he read some denier material such as Harwood's pamphlet. Would he be inclined to believe Harwood and take his claims and information for accurate and valid since he had minimal knowledge of the events of the Holocaust and Holocaust denial? After reading Did Six Million Really Die?, I realized how dangerous Holocaust denial material really is. To the reader who lacks knowledge of deniers and their techniques, Harwood's pamphlet seems like a legitimate piece of academic work. It is plausible that someone could read Harwood's work and actually believe his denial arguments.

On the surface, Richard Harwood seems a credible and genuine historian and his pamphlet seems to hold the same characteristics. The pamphlet was published in 1974, at which time a paragraph at the end of the pamphlet provided information about the author. It states, "Richard Harwood is a writer and specialist in political and diplomatic aspects of the Second World War. At present he is with the University of London". This would lead the reader to think that Harwood is a legitimate historian who even specializes in his field. The way in which Harwood writes his introduction is also an attempt to give him further credibility. He begins with a statement that during World War I, the British accused the Germans of horrible crimes, which of course were false and were later retracted as the British admitted the accusations were just wartime propaganda. Harwood gives the reader another example of false accusations that were used against the Germans, he puts the possibility into the reader's mind that aspects of the Holocaust, too, could be false and used similarly. In the introduction, he continues to give an explanation as to why the "myth" of the Holocaust is believed and preserved, stating, "...it has been used quite unscrupulously to discourage any form of nationalism". He believes that the Holocaust is used to keep people from displaying any sort of patriotism or nationalism as, if they do, they will be branded "neo-Nazis". Nazism embraced nationalism and they of course killed six million Jews so therefore one should not express nationalism in fear of being affiliated with the dreaded Nazis who committed such atrocities. Harwood presents the myth of the Holocaust as something that is used to discourage nationalism and also racial pride. While Harwood may hold prejudices and stereotypes, he does not come across as an avid anti-Semite. He does not resort to calling Jews names or characterizing them as totally inferior. He even states that Jews should be admired for the way they have been able to, for centuries, preserve their race, however, this myth aides them in their endeavors. In a further attempt to present his dedication to credibility, Harwood writes, "Rightly or wrongly, the Germany of Adolf Hitler considered the Jews to be disloyal and avaricious element within the national community..." He presents himself as being somewhat neutral and the reader could take it as the author's objective stance. He continues, "It is not part of the discussion here to argue whether the German attitude to the Jews was right or not, or to judge whether its legislative measures against them were just or unjust". Harwood tries to ignore the anti-Semitic attitude behind Holocaust denial. Harwood states that his aim is to simply state the truth.

Throughout the pamphlet, he quotes and cites numerous academic texts and refers to other "distinguished" historians and their points of view, providing a section from historians who have commented about the pamphlet. At the end of the pamphlet, there is even a section, which points out the faults, discrepancies and inaccuracies others have found with his work and provides the correct information, presenting Harwood as a trustworthy person who admits to his mistakes. Harwood presents himself and his work as credible, reliable and believable. He does not come across as proposing extremely radical insights, and the pamphlet seems to hold legitimate academic styling. Unfortunately this could lead someone, who does not hold the proper knowledge, to believe what he is arguing. However, and that is a big however, when the truth about Harwood is learned, and the pamphlet is looked at more closely and carefully Harwood's tactics and falsities are uncovered. Harwood is proved not as a legitimate historian, but a typical Holocaust denier who distorts issues and presents misinformation.

Richard Harwood misrepresents himself from the beginning of the pamphlet. His real name is Richard Verall and Harwood is a pseudonym he used to publish his pamphlet. He presents himself as a political specialist "...with the University of London" which implies that he was at the time of publication, a staff member of the University. He was not in fact a staff member, but he did obtain an honors degree in history from the University of London. He was a very involved member of the British National Front and was editor of their newsletter, Spearhead. The National Front, founded in 1967, believed, "...the Britain and the British people have a right to determine their own future; that multi-racialism and mass immigration was a tragic mistake; that patriotism is laudable and that Capitalism, Communism and Internationalism take power away from the individual". The National Front faced fierce opposition in the late 1960s from Zionist organizations and the Anti-Nazi League. Harwood was clearly influenced by National Front ideology as is exampled by his argument that the myth of the Holocaust discourages nationalism and by making this statement; "Unless something is done in Britain to halt the immigration and assimilation of Africans and Asians into our country, we are faced...with the biological alteration and destruction of the British people as they have existed here since the coming of the Saxons". He does not make any reference to his National Front and anti-Semitic affiliation in the pamphlet. The National Front was dedicated to defending racial purity. This information clearly destroys any objectivity Harwood may have tried to present in his writing as the National Front shared similar ideology with the Nazi regime. The pamphlet contains comments about the text from other historians and authors. Of course, these lack any credibility as they are from such notable Holocaust deniers as Mark Weber, Ditlieb Felderer, Dr. Robert Faurisson, Harry Elmer Barnes and David Irving. Historical Review Press published the pamphlet, which is the same publisher of The Hoax of the Twentieth Century by Arthur Butz. Harwood was obviously associated with other deniers and their organizations. At the end of the pamphlet, Harwood accredits his interest in the subject of "war crimes" due to the influence of "Professor Paul Rassinier, the pioneer revisionist historian". Rassinier is a well-known Holocaust denier and has written various works on the subject including, Lies of Ulysses. What he does not mention in the original text is that he actually took most of his information from Rassinier's works. However, it is mentioned in the section containing the discrepancies in the book, which states that the errors that Harwood made in his pamphlet were errors originally made by Rassinier. Harwood did not use primary, but secondary sources, especially that of denier Rassinier. Harwood did not bother to check the accuracy of the main influence of his work; therefore we cannot be certain of the validity of any of his sources. He and his pamphlet are not reliable sources, as he did not check the sources he used, and primarily "borrowed" his information and arguments from another denier. Even the section about the falsities in the pamphlet lacks credibility. Indeed, the mistakes are pointed out as according to testimony given, however, in most instances, the correct information is further rebutted by "historian" and denier, Mark Weber. For example, the prosecution witness, Christopher Browning stated that he had never heard of the World Centre of Contemporary Jewish Documentation, which is mentioned in the text, but the section points out that "historians" David Irving and Robert Faurrison had. The pamphlet is falsely giving the reader the impression that these "historians" know more about the topics and that they are legitimate historians, and not deniers who use the same tactics as Harwood himself.

One of Harwood's primary arguments contends that Nazi persecution and internment of the Jews was legitimate, as the Jews had declared war on the Germans. He states that, "It is not widely known that world Jewry declared itself to be a belligerent party in the Second World War, and there was ample basis under international law for the Germans to intern the Jewish population as a hostile force". He quotes a statement made by Zionist leader, Chaim Weizmann in 1939 in which Harwood claims that Weizmann said the Jews would stand by Great Britain and other democracies against Germany. Harwood saw this as the Jewish declaration of war against Germany and that under international law Germany had the right to intern the Jews, ignoring the fact that the Jews were not an established nation state. The Jews were civilians spread out throughout Europe. They did not have a country, or political power or official political representation and could hardly have managed to produce resources and manpower to actually wage a military war. He also compares the internment of the Jews by the Germans to the internment of Japanese by the Americans during World War II, stating, "It is worth noting that the United States and Canada had already interned all Japanese aliens and citizens of Japanese descent in detention amps before the Germans applied the same security measures against the Jews of Europe". Or course, he does not mention that the United States and Canada did not have an extensive plan to kill all of the Japanese.

Lipstadt also points out that Harwood misquoted Weizmann, adding the reference to Great Britain. Harwood neglected to mention that Germany had initiated anti-Semitic legislation and polices years prior to the Weizmann's statement in 1939. The National-Socialist Party organized a boycott against Jews in 1933. Propaganda for the boycott stated, "The principle must be that no German will any longer buy from a Jew, or allow Jews or their agents to recommend goods. The boycott must be general. It must be carried out by the whole nation and must hit the Jews in their most sensitive spot". The Germans clearly began to take measures against the Jews before 1939. The implementation of the Nuremberg Laws in 1935, which denied Jews any and all civil rights, as they were not citizens was official legislation against the Jews. Nazis also enforced violence on the Jews prior to the Jewish statement, "declaring war". Kristallnact, the night of glass, occurred in 1938 during which Nazis burned down and vandalized synagogues and other Jewish institutions and property. While, Hitler, himself, never publicly ordered this night of violence against the Jews, "...[the] events could not have occurred without his approval". Hitler and the Nazi party initiated programs and policies to persecute the Jews way before 1939 and Wiezmann's statement could hardly be classified as a declaration of war on Germany.

Harwood continues to argue that the Jews have mistaken the Final Solution to mean elimination when it never meant more than emigration. He says that Jews, "...were quick to interpret ... policies of internal discrimination as equivalent to extermination itself". However, Dawidowicz offers an explanation, quoting Hitler from the early 1920's:

Rational anti-Semitism, however, must lead to a systematic legal opposition and elimination [Beseitigung] of the special privileges that Jews hold, in contrast to the other aliens living among us (aliens' legislation). Its final objective must unswervingly be the removal [Entfernung] of the Jews altogether.

Hitler had two stages in his program of anti-Semitism, "...a preliminary stage in which Jews are deprived of all rights, and then the accomplishment of a 'final objective' --'removal of the Jews altogether". Hitler knew he wanted to get rid of the Jews from early on in the 1920s; he had a plan to strip them of their rights and then eliminate them. The discrimination polices were a precursor to the final objective of eradicating the Jews. The final objective was definitely death:

The planners did not always know how. They were not sure what methods the captive populations would accept...They were not even sure what facilities were available, and they were certainly not clear about the technical expertise. But they were sure of the end--death. And the ghettos and the labor camps were but way stations on the road to destruction.

The Nazi regime had every intention of truly eliminating and not just transferring the Jews. They held such strong anti-Semitic beliefs that they wanted to, beyond a doubt, rid Germany and in turn all of Europe of what they called the "Jewish problem".

Harwood states that a majority of Germans were allowed to emigrate prior to 1939. He does not say where these Jews went, but does mention that they were allowed to leave with most of their wealth. This is highly unlikely. Most German Jews had been stripped of their jobs, their companies, businesses and property were confiscated, and they were charged an emigration tax. With these measures imposed on the Jews, it is highly improbable they could have carried wealth with them. He does not mention specifically where these Germans emigrated to, but most of them could only have gone to the surrounding countries of France, the Netherlands and Belgium which were all overtaken by the Nazis. Just because Jews did emigrate from Germany does not mean they escaped persecution and even death.

Harwood also tries to prove a point by giving statistics of how many Jews were living in Europe at the time and subtracting how many immigrated, saying that it was impossible for the Germans to kill close to six million Jews. He gives the initial figure of 6,500,000 Jews living in pre-war Europe saying that according to the myth, this would mean that all but approximately 500,000 Jews were killed during the war. He goes on to subtract 1,5000,000 Jews who emigrated from 1933-1945. He then subtracts another 1,250,000 Jews who emigrated from Poland to the Soviet Union and another 300,000 other European Jews who also went to the Soviet Union. This leaves him with a total of 3,450,000 Jews left in Europe, therefore the figure of six million could not possibly have been under German control in the first place, never mind actually killed. The problem is that Harwood's first figure, as stated by Lipstadt, of 6,500,000 is misquoted. The Chambers Encyclopedia from which Harwood took the number counts this figure as the total number of pre-war Jews in Europe, excluding the Soviet Union. A more accurate figure and the one that holds the most consensus reveals that in all of pre-war Europe, including the Soviet Union, there were 8,861,800 Jews and that 5,933,900 were annihilated. Harwood tries to cross check his numbers so as to prove his figure of only three million pre-war Jews in Europe. He does this through presenting the numbers of Jews remaining in the countries occupied by the Reich. Of course, this does not work when he falsely came to the conclusion of three million Jews in the first place.

Harwood also tries to use numbers to prove that the gas chambers, specifically at Auschwitz-Birkenau could not have possibly have gassed so many people. He writes:

The exterminations at Auschwitz are alleged to have occurred between March 1942 and October 1944; the figure of half of six million [exterminated at Auschwitz], therefore, would mean the extermination and disposal of about 94,000 people per month for thirty two months- approximately 3,350 people every day, day and night, for over two and a half years.

Harwood goes on to say that, "This kind of thing is so ludicrous that it scarcely needs refuting". Yet, he does try to refute the numbers, by skillfully playing around with various conflicting statistics from various sources. His theory, however, is wrong. It was quite possible for Auschwitz to eliminate roughly four thousand souls a day. As described in Hitler's Death Camps, it was "...theoretically possible to cremate about 12,000 corpses in twenty-four hours or 4,380,000 a year". It is mentioned that this was only in theory and that the camps should have been able to handle these numbers but were not. However, it also states that, "In August [1944] the total cremation reached a peak one day of 24,000..." Even if this was a peak it is still six times what Harwood quoted would be required to meet the three million people who were said to be exterminated at Auschwitz. It is highly possible that the camp did reach and even surpass eliminating four thousand people per day.

Richard Harwood is a typical Holocaust denier. He twists quotes and misuses numbers to fit the argument that he wants to give. He tries to legitimize himself and his pamphlet by writing in a tone that presents him in a neutral or at least objective way. Harwood does not deny that Hitler and his Nazi regime killed Jews. What Harwood does is legitimize these killings, saying that the Jews had declared war on the Germans; therefore the Germans had a right to intern the Jews. He does not deny the existence of Auschwitz, but plays with the numbers of people that have been thought to have been killed there, putting skepticism in the minds of the reader. Harwood is probably the most dangerous type of denier because on the surface, his work comes across as legitimate. He seems to be a valid historian examining and investigating aspects of the Holocaust, seeing things in a different light and proving his point with well cited sources. Of course the average reader would not take the time to check the accuracy of the sources and could believe Harwood's claims as truth. He does not present himself as a radical thinker, who is motivated to deny the Holocaust by his anti-Semitic views. Harwood does not come across as avidly anti-Semitic at all. He comes across as someone with experience in academics, which he is and which makes him all the more shocking. The fact that he, with an honors degree in history from the University of London, denies the Holocaust gives Holocaust denial a place in academics. It is not just radical, ill-educated people who have tendencies to believe in denial. Harwood's motives for his denial seem to come from his involvement in the British National Front. His arguments about nationalism seem to stem directly from National Front ideology. The fact that Harwood based his information on the work of Paul Rassinier reflects how deniers, once they find an argument that suits them, whether true of full of falsities, tend to stick to that argument even if the inaccuracies have been pointed out. One million copies of Harwood's pamphlets had been distributed by 1984 and no doubt many copies have circulated since as the pamphlet is now available on the Internet, and deniers frequently cite his work as one of their sources. Harwood's work is now mainstream denier ideology.

Unfortunately to the person who comes across Did Six Million Really Die?, it could seem a valid and accurate historical text. To a person who has limited knowledge about the Holocaust, it could seem like a legitimate rebuttal to the commonly held consensus about the events of the Holocaust during World War II. Harwood mixes truth with false information and presents it all as the truth. As he says the truth is all he is trying to accomplish. This gives the impression that he should be given a chance to prove his point. Holocaust deniers take fact and turn it around to make it work for their point of view. Deniers do an injustice to historical revisionism, which intends to take another look at history in order to get to the real truth, not to misquotes and neglected information. As a denier, Harwood is not telling the truth, not about the supposed Jewish declaration of war, not about the Final Solution solely meaning evacuation, and not about the "myth" of the Holocaust. Holocaust denial needs to be recognized for what it really is and not misrepresented as valid, legitimate, credible, trustworthy historical revisionism.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arad, Yitzhak, Gutman, Israel and Abraham Margaliot eds. Documents on the Holocaust; Selected Sources on the Destruction of the Jews of Germany and Austria, Poland and the Soviet Union. University of Nebraska Press. Lincoln, 1999.

"British Politics page-Far Right Parties in the UK". Internet:
http://www.club.demon.co.uk/Politics/farright.html
as accessed on 4/7/01

Dawidowicz, Lucy. The War Against the Jews, 1933-1945. Holt, Rinehart and Winston. New York, 1975.

Feig, Konnilyn G. Hitler's Death Camps: The Sanity of Madness. Holmes and Meier Publishers. New York, 1979.

Gilbert, Martin. Final Journey: The Fate of the Jews in Nazi Europe. Mayflower Books. New York, 1979.

Gilbert, Martin. The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe During the Second World War. Holt Rinehart and Winston. New York, 1985.

Harwood, Richard. "Did Six Million Really Die?" Internet:
http://www.ihr.org/books/harwood
as accessed on 4/7/01

"History of the National Front". Internet:
http://www.natfront.com/history.html
as accessed on 4/7/01

Lipstsdt, Deborah. Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and P>Memory. Plume. New York, 193