Further Evidence that Pat Buchanan is a Hitler Apologist

Pat Buchanan recently wrote an editorial in which he attempted to argue that the Holocaust was not inevitable, which is true. Nothing in history was inevitable. Buchanan, however, had other motives in arguing this notion. He argued that Churchill's unnecessary war on Germany, in turn, forced Hitler to systematically murder 6 million Jews. What?!?!

Buchanan wrote: "That Hitler was a rabid anti-Semite is undeniable. "Mein Kampf" is saturated in anti-Semitism. The Nuremberg Laws confirm it. But for the six years before Britain declared war, there was no Holocaust, and for two years after the war began, there was no Holocaust."

"Not until midwinter 1942 was the Wannsee Conference held, where the Final Solution was on the table."

"That conference was not convened until Hitler had been halted in Russia, was at war with America and sensed doom was inevitable. Then the trains began to roll."

Yes, Pat, there was no Holocaust prior to the outbreak of World War II, but that does not mean that one can absolve Hitler of his actions. The war provided Hitler with a golden opportunity to rid Europe of those "sub-human" Jews. In fact, some real historians have argued that Hitler started the war with the destruction of European Jewry in mind. Pat chooses to ignore the idea of lebensraum, or living space. The German people, according to Hitler, needed plenty of living space and that space would be found in Eastern Europe. How was Hitler going to acquire more living space? He was going to conquer it. Where did Europe's largest population of Jews reside? In the countries of Eastern Europe. Was the "superior" German race going to live side-by-side with millions of Jews? No. So, what else, Pat, was Hitler going to do with Europe's Jews besides exterminate them?

Now, I am an advocate of non-historians writing and arguing about history, but what I can't stand is pseudo-historical nonsense like this crap that Buchanan is dumping on a gullible American reading public. Pat Buchanan is not a historian, but is merely an apologist for Hitler.

Buchanan's editorial can be read here.