Jeffrey Demsky specializes in American cultural representations of the Holocaust. He completed his doctorate at the University of Florida. The American University in Washington D.C. awarded his Master's Degree. He is currently an Associate Professor of Political Science and History at San Bernardino Valley College. Phone: 909-384-8532
Nazi and Holocaust Representations in Anglo-American Popular Culture, 1945–2020 , 2021
This book analyzes sensationalized Nazi and Holocaust representations in Anglo-American cultural ... more This book analyzes sensationalized Nazi and Holocaust representations in Anglo-American cultural and political discourses. Recognizing that this history is increasingly removed from contemporary life, it explains how irreverent representations can help rejuvenate the story for successive generations of new learners. Surveying seventy-five-years of transatlantic activities, the work erects counterposing categories of “constructive and destructive memorializing,” providing scholars with a new framework for elucidating both this history and its historicization.
All in the Family’s Archie Bunker was a mouthpiece for 1970s white working-class men. Theirs was ... more All in the Family’s Archie Bunker was a mouthpiece for 1970s white working-class men. Theirs was an anxious decade. Peddling stereotypes, “othering” those unlike them, enabled this group to assert their threatened authority. Analyzed as popular media texts, the show’s many intersections with bigotry and anti-Semitism reveal unique insights into 1970s American life, especially the Jewish American experience. During the series’ decade-long run, Bunker gradually confronted and softened his prejudices. However, this was not the case among all “Archies,” a reality still visible in current times. Surveying the show’s racialist meditations against the backdrop of “tiki torchers” and Trumpism reminds viewers about the fraught nature of American identity, explaining why some Jews may elect to pass.
Hans Krabbendam and Derek Rubin, eds., American Responses to the Holocaust: Transatlantic Perspectives , Jun 30, 2017
The assertion that the US government could have, and should have, taken a more forceful stand aga... more The assertion that the US government could have, and should have, taken a more forceful stand against the Nazis’ persecution of European Jewry has become an inherited part of the country’s collective memory. Institutions of remembrance from Washington D.C. to California teach students that while the Nazis and their collaborators bear guilt for having implemented a racially-motivated program of murder, Americans also share responsibility for having been so-called bystanders to the genocide. This claim significantly influences the manner in which researchers form their questions. For many of the field’s leading authorities, the question of American governmental responses to Nazi anti-Semitism and the Holocaust appears settled.
This chapter, however, outlines a history that does not begin with the premise that Americans abandoned the Jews of Europe. Instead, I argue that some citizens saw in the reports of Nazi anti-Semitism an opportunity to initiate a public discourse that explained how the fascist vision for humankind was abhorrent. Not all Americans living during the 1930s held, or tolerated, bigoted views. Politicians spoke out repeatedly; so, too, did prominent social commentators. As members of the Christian majority learned more about Hitler’s wide-ranging intolerance, some concluded that tolerating similar prejudices was harmful to society. Although negative sentiments toward ethnic, racial, and religious minorities undoubtedly persisted, there is a larger and less well-known story involving the ways both Jewish and Christians Americans used the issue of combating Nazi intolerance to promote a more pluralist worldview.
Stephanie A.H. Berlanger and Renee Dickason eds., War Memories: Commemoration, Recollections, and Writings on War, May 2017
Americans maintain uneven memories of the twentieth century genocides that targeted the Armenian ... more Americans maintain uneven memories of the twentieth century genocides that targeted the Armenian and Jewish peoples. The war against Jews that came to be known as the Holocaust is widely remembered in American culture. This is not the case, however, with commemorations of the war on Armenian Christians. The reason for this abundance of concern for Jewish suffering, on the one hand, and the lack of interest for Armenians‘ on the other hand, is our paper‘s focus.
Victoria Khiterer ed., Resistance to the Holocaust , 2017
This chapter re-considers the value of American discursive resistance to Nazi anti-Semitism. Spec... more This chapter re-considers the value of American discursive resistance to Nazi anti-Semitism. Specifically, it examines rhetoric chronicled in the House of Representatives during the early and middle 1930s. The current trend in American Holocaust memory is to more or less ignore congressional goings on, and hammer away at State Department obstructionism. This enables forgetfulness about those in government that tried to help. This chapter remembers congressional utterances less in terms of how many Jewish lives they helped to save, but rather their intentions. Going public in support of a foreign Jewish minority, especially in an atmosphere of heightened isolationism, indicates the worth that some elected officials attached to defending their pluralist idea of Americanism. Not all experts may agree that this sort of language is worthy of greater retrospective analysis. As the familiar adage holds, “talk is cheap.” However, words cannot be undone. One may try to explain them away, but if enough language exists, and the rationales they explained persist, they may constitute a form of resistance.
Rotimi Taiwo, Akinola Odebunmi, and Akin Adetunji eds., Analyzing Language and Humor in Online Communication , Jun 2016
During the last two decades, to varying degrees, some American sitcom writers have depicted Nazis... more During the last two decades, to varying degrees, some American sitcom writers have depicted Nazism and the Holocaust humorously. This sort of activity is visible on such shows as South Park, Family Guy, and Robot Chicken. Many of the writers associated with these comedies are of Jewish heritage; but the joking has stirred only limited controversy. This chapter examines the messaging, delivery, and impact of online Holocaust humor. It studies such questions as: What are American comedy writers signaling with these absurd stories? How does their comedic employment contribute to a wider process of misremembering distorting, or diluting known Holocaust accounts? It specifically analyzes how computer-mediated communications—website like Hulu and Youtube—have transferred these false accounts beyond American audiences.
As Europeans stood at the precipice of a Second World War, isolationism remained deeply embedded ... more As Europeans stood at the precipice of a Second World War, isolationism remained deeply embedded in the American psyche. Most people in the U.S. had little knowledge of, and less interest in, tensions brewing in such remote locations as the Sudetenland or Danzig, Poland. Only two years later, however, this mentality had largely receded. American military forces joined those from the United Kingdom and Soviet Union in an alliance against the Axis Powers. This stark change in thinking and behavior traced its most immediate roots to the Japanese empire’s attacks against American naval forces stationed at Pearl Harbor, as well as Adolf Hitler’s subsequent declaration of war against the United States. However, even before the infamous events of December 1941, there is evidence that a larger shift in attitudes was unfolding.
Perhaps, the clearest example of this process involved President Franklin Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms” proclamation. Issued in January 1941, eleven months before the attack on Pearl Harbor, the remarks constituted the closing portion of his annual State of the Union address to Congress. The declaration was a sweeping piece of rhetoric in which the president took direct aim at the isolationist camp. His proclamation indicated that the U.S. would no longer shirk from international diplomacy.The“Four Freedoms” was an ecumenical vision about the type of global image the U.S. hoped to strike.
Roosevelt's themes soon permeated the country's cultural discourse. Noted American artist Norman Rockwell depicted the themes visually in a series of identically entitled portraits. In March 1943, the popular American periodical Saturday Evening Post reproduced the prints on its front covers. By the mid-1940s, pictures of Roosevelt’s ideas hung on walls, often alongside the president’s visage, in tens of millions of homes across the United States. This layering of support indicates that Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms” represented more than a well-crafted piece of political oratory. During the early 1940s, the sentiments were cornerstone themes in everyday discussions in between ordinary citizens as well as elected officials.
In Richard Nixon, scholars encounter a protean subject. A self-proclaimed simple “grocer’s son,” ... more In Richard Nixon, scholars encounter a protean subject. A self-proclaimed simple “grocer’s son,” his many personas--what onlookers termed the so-called New Nixons--confounded his enemies while delighting supporters.
This paper examines one specific aspects of Richard Nixon's character: his private bigotry. During intimate discussions, he often expressed deep animus toward Jews, blacks, Italians, and women. A snide, possibly sinister, laugh pierces through the static of his White House tapes. The conclusion appears inescapable that the thirty-seventh American president was a parlor bigot, who when among "good company" found in biased speech an effective means of self-expression.
Why did this happen? Particularly the habit seems bizarre for a chief executive that appointed various Jews to top-level posts in his administration. This paper explores the idea that in anti-Jewish language and imagery Richard Nixon found a short-hand way to express disdain toward his real and perceived enemies. The term "Jew" represented the dialectical opposite of Nixonianism. Castigating someone, or something, as "Jewish" signaled Mr. Nixon's larger mindset that beyond his control lurked people who wanted to cause him harm. It remains impossible to know his true beliefs. This paper simply offers some insights as to why he had anti-Jewish outbursts throughout his presidency.
Many historians point to Kristallnacht as the start of what later became the Holocaust. During th... more Many historians point to Kristallnacht as the start of what later became the Holocaust. During the days of November 9-10, 1938, Nazis officials and their supporters waged an ethno-racial and religious pogrom against Germany's Jewish population.
By the time the destruction abated, the Nazis had burned nearly three hundred synagogues, vandalized more than seven thousand Jewish-owned businesses, killed one hundred civilians, deported tens of thousands of Jews to concentration camps, and caused one billion marks worth of damage.
Western governments reacted to news of the outburt with shock and dismay. President Franklin Roosevelt recalled the American ambassador to Berlin back to the U.S. for consultations. Indeed, for many foreign observers living in Germany, the events of November 9-10 became a turning point in their estimation of the Nazi regime.
Nazi and Holocaust Representations in Anglo-American Popular Culture, 1945–2020 , 2021
This book analyzes sensationalized Nazi and Holocaust representations in Anglo-American cultural ... more This book analyzes sensationalized Nazi and Holocaust representations in Anglo-American cultural and political discourses. Recognizing that this history is increasingly removed from contemporary life, it explains how irreverent representations can help rejuvenate the story for successive generations of new learners. Surveying seventy-five-years of transatlantic activities, the work erects counterposing categories of “constructive and destructive memorializing,” providing scholars with a new framework for elucidating both this history and its historicization.
All in the Family’s Archie Bunker was a mouthpiece for 1970s white working-class men. Theirs was ... more All in the Family’s Archie Bunker was a mouthpiece for 1970s white working-class men. Theirs was an anxious decade. Peddling stereotypes, “othering” those unlike them, enabled this group to assert their threatened authority. Analyzed as popular media texts, the show’s many intersections with bigotry and anti-Semitism reveal unique insights into 1970s American life, especially the Jewish American experience. During the series’ decade-long run, Bunker gradually confronted and softened his prejudices. However, this was not the case among all “Archies,” a reality still visible in current times. Surveying the show’s racialist meditations against the backdrop of “tiki torchers” and Trumpism reminds viewers about the fraught nature of American identity, explaining why some Jews may elect to pass.
Hans Krabbendam and Derek Rubin, eds., American Responses to the Holocaust: Transatlantic Perspectives , Jun 30, 2017
The assertion that the US government could have, and should have, taken a more forceful stand aga... more The assertion that the US government could have, and should have, taken a more forceful stand against the Nazis’ persecution of European Jewry has become an inherited part of the country’s collective memory. Institutions of remembrance from Washington D.C. to California teach students that while the Nazis and their collaborators bear guilt for having implemented a racially-motivated program of murder, Americans also share responsibility for having been so-called bystanders to the genocide. This claim significantly influences the manner in which researchers form their questions. For many of the field’s leading authorities, the question of American governmental responses to Nazi anti-Semitism and the Holocaust appears settled.
This chapter, however, outlines a history that does not begin with the premise that Americans abandoned the Jews of Europe. Instead, I argue that some citizens saw in the reports of Nazi anti-Semitism an opportunity to initiate a public discourse that explained how the fascist vision for humankind was abhorrent. Not all Americans living during the 1930s held, or tolerated, bigoted views. Politicians spoke out repeatedly; so, too, did prominent social commentators. As members of the Christian majority learned more about Hitler’s wide-ranging intolerance, some concluded that tolerating similar prejudices was harmful to society. Although negative sentiments toward ethnic, racial, and religious minorities undoubtedly persisted, there is a larger and less well-known story involving the ways both Jewish and Christians Americans used the issue of combating Nazi intolerance to promote a more pluralist worldview.
Stephanie A.H. Berlanger and Renee Dickason eds., War Memories: Commemoration, Recollections, and Writings on War, May 2017
Americans maintain uneven memories of the twentieth century genocides that targeted the Armenian ... more Americans maintain uneven memories of the twentieth century genocides that targeted the Armenian and Jewish peoples. The war against Jews that came to be known as the Holocaust is widely remembered in American culture. This is not the case, however, with commemorations of the war on Armenian Christians. The reason for this abundance of concern for Jewish suffering, on the one hand, and the lack of interest for Armenians‘ on the other hand, is our paper‘s focus.
Victoria Khiterer ed., Resistance to the Holocaust , 2017
This chapter re-considers the value of American discursive resistance to Nazi anti-Semitism. Spec... more This chapter re-considers the value of American discursive resistance to Nazi anti-Semitism. Specifically, it examines rhetoric chronicled in the House of Representatives during the early and middle 1930s. The current trend in American Holocaust memory is to more or less ignore congressional goings on, and hammer away at State Department obstructionism. This enables forgetfulness about those in government that tried to help. This chapter remembers congressional utterances less in terms of how many Jewish lives they helped to save, but rather their intentions. Going public in support of a foreign Jewish minority, especially in an atmosphere of heightened isolationism, indicates the worth that some elected officials attached to defending their pluralist idea of Americanism. Not all experts may agree that this sort of language is worthy of greater retrospective analysis. As the familiar adage holds, “talk is cheap.” However, words cannot be undone. One may try to explain them away, but if enough language exists, and the rationales they explained persist, they may constitute a form of resistance.
Rotimi Taiwo, Akinola Odebunmi, and Akin Adetunji eds., Analyzing Language and Humor in Online Communication , Jun 2016
During the last two decades, to varying degrees, some American sitcom writers have depicted Nazis... more During the last two decades, to varying degrees, some American sitcom writers have depicted Nazism and the Holocaust humorously. This sort of activity is visible on such shows as South Park, Family Guy, and Robot Chicken. Many of the writers associated with these comedies are of Jewish heritage; but the joking has stirred only limited controversy. This chapter examines the messaging, delivery, and impact of online Holocaust humor. It studies such questions as: What are American comedy writers signaling with these absurd stories? How does their comedic employment contribute to a wider process of misremembering distorting, or diluting known Holocaust accounts? It specifically analyzes how computer-mediated communications—website like Hulu and Youtube—have transferred these false accounts beyond American audiences.
As Europeans stood at the precipice of a Second World War, isolationism remained deeply embedded ... more As Europeans stood at the precipice of a Second World War, isolationism remained deeply embedded in the American psyche. Most people in the U.S. had little knowledge of, and less interest in, tensions brewing in such remote locations as the Sudetenland or Danzig, Poland. Only two years later, however, this mentality had largely receded. American military forces joined those from the United Kingdom and Soviet Union in an alliance against the Axis Powers. This stark change in thinking and behavior traced its most immediate roots to the Japanese empire’s attacks against American naval forces stationed at Pearl Harbor, as well as Adolf Hitler’s subsequent declaration of war against the United States. However, even before the infamous events of December 1941, there is evidence that a larger shift in attitudes was unfolding.
Perhaps, the clearest example of this process involved President Franklin Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms” proclamation. Issued in January 1941, eleven months before the attack on Pearl Harbor, the remarks constituted the closing portion of his annual State of the Union address to Congress. The declaration was a sweeping piece of rhetoric in which the president took direct aim at the isolationist camp. His proclamation indicated that the U.S. would no longer shirk from international diplomacy.The“Four Freedoms” was an ecumenical vision about the type of global image the U.S. hoped to strike.
Roosevelt's themes soon permeated the country's cultural discourse. Noted American artist Norman Rockwell depicted the themes visually in a series of identically entitled portraits. In March 1943, the popular American periodical Saturday Evening Post reproduced the prints on its front covers. By the mid-1940s, pictures of Roosevelt’s ideas hung on walls, often alongside the president’s visage, in tens of millions of homes across the United States. This layering of support indicates that Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms” represented more than a well-crafted piece of political oratory. During the early 1940s, the sentiments were cornerstone themes in everyday discussions in between ordinary citizens as well as elected officials.
In Richard Nixon, scholars encounter a protean subject. A self-proclaimed simple “grocer’s son,” ... more In Richard Nixon, scholars encounter a protean subject. A self-proclaimed simple “grocer’s son,” his many personas--what onlookers termed the so-called New Nixons--confounded his enemies while delighting supporters.
This paper examines one specific aspects of Richard Nixon's character: his private bigotry. During intimate discussions, he often expressed deep animus toward Jews, blacks, Italians, and women. A snide, possibly sinister, laugh pierces through the static of his White House tapes. The conclusion appears inescapable that the thirty-seventh American president was a parlor bigot, who when among "good company" found in biased speech an effective means of self-expression.
Why did this happen? Particularly the habit seems bizarre for a chief executive that appointed various Jews to top-level posts in his administration. This paper explores the idea that in anti-Jewish language and imagery Richard Nixon found a short-hand way to express disdain toward his real and perceived enemies. The term "Jew" represented the dialectical opposite of Nixonianism. Castigating someone, or something, as "Jewish" signaled Mr. Nixon's larger mindset that beyond his control lurked people who wanted to cause him harm. It remains impossible to know his true beliefs. This paper simply offers some insights as to why he had anti-Jewish outbursts throughout his presidency.
Many historians point to Kristallnacht as the start of what later became the Holocaust. During th... more Many historians point to Kristallnacht as the start of what later became the Holocaust. During the days of November 9-10, 1938, Nazis officials and their supporters waged an ethno-racial and religious pogrom against Germany's Jewish population.
By the time the destruction abated, the Nazis had burned nearly three hundred synagogues, vandalized more than seven thousand Jewish-owned businesses, killed one hundred civilians, deported tens of thousands of Jews to concentration camps, and caused one billion marks worth of damage.
Western governments reacted to news of the outburt with shock and dismay. President Franklin Roosevelt recalled the American ambassador to Berlin back to the U.S. for consultations. Indeed, for many foreign observers living in Germany, the events of November 9-10 became a turning point in their estimation of the Nazi regime.
Today’s global citizens are highly sensitive to the cultural, ethnic, religious, and racial diffe... more Today’s global citizens are highly sensitive to the cultural, ethnic, religious, and racial differences between people. The U.S. in particular is a land in which one generally takes great care to demonstrate respect toward the many unique races, creeds, and colors found throughout our collective population. Historically, however, this has not always been the case. Racism, bigotry, prejudice, and discrimination are just a few of the terms used to describe the injustices visited upon certain groups of human beings. In this talk, I will discuss with you a very unusual but deadly form of historical racism--something called as scientific racism--that was common at the end of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Scientific racism was a worldwide phenomenon that spanned across the globe. It was the driving factor behind the medical experiments performed on human beings in Tuskegee, Alabama, Auschwitz, Poland, and Harbin, China. Ultimately, the doctrines, and those who adhered to its rationales, resulted in the sterilization of thousands of African Americans, the deaths of several hundred thousand Chinese, and the systematic extermination of six million European Jews.
Uploads
Papers by Jeffrey Demsky
This chapter, however, outlines a history that does not begin with the premise that Americans abandoned the Jews of Europe. Instead, I argue that some citizens saw in the reports of Nazi anti-Semitism an opportunity to initiate a public discourse that explained how the fascist vision for humankind was abhorrent. Not all Americans living during the 1930s held, or tolerated, bigoted views. Politicians spoke out repeatedly; so, too, did prominent social commentators. As members of the Christian majority learned more about Hitler’s wide-ranging intolerance, some concluded that tolerating similar prejudices was harmful to society. Although negative sentiments toward ethnic, racial, and religious minorities undoubtedly persisted, there is a larger and less well-known story involving the ways both Jewish and Christians Americans used the issue of combating Nazi intolerance to promote a more pluralist worldview.
Perhaps, the clearest example of this process involved President Franklin Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms” proclamation. Issued in January 1941, eleven months before the attack on Pearl Harbor, the remarks constituted the closing portion of his annual State of the Union address to Congress. The declaration was a sweeping piece of rhetoric in which the president took direct aim at the isolationist camp. His proclamation indicated that the U.S. would no longer shirk from international diplomacy.The“Four Freedoms” was an ecumenical vision about the type of global image the U.S. hoped to strike.
Roosevelt's themes soon permeated the country's cultural discourse. Noted American artist Norman Rockwell depicted the themes visually in a series of identically entitled portraits. In March 1943, the popular American periodical Saturday Evening Post reproduced the prints on its front covers. By the mid-1940s, pictures of Roosevelt’s ideas hung on walls, often alongside the president’s visage, in tens of millions of homes across the United States. This layering of support indicates that Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms” represented more than a well-crafted piece of political oratory. During the early 1940s, the sentiments were cornerstone themes in everyday discussions in between ordinary citizens as well as elected officials.
Talks by Jeffrey Demsky
This paper examines one specific aspects of Richard Nixon's character: his private bigotry. During intimate discussions, he often expressed deep animus toward Jews, blacks, Italians, and women. A snide, possibly sinister, laugh pierces through the static of his White House tapes. The conclusion appears inescapable that the thirty-seventh American president was a parlor bigot, who when among "good company" found in biased speech an effective means of self-expression.
Why did this happen? Particularly the habit seems bizarre for a chief executive that appointed various Jews to top-level posts in his administration. This paper explores the idea that in anti-Jewish language and imagery Richard Nixon found a short-hand way to express disdain toward his real and perceived enemies. The term "Jew" represented the dialectical opposite of Nixonianism. Castigating someone, or something, as "Jewish" signaled Mr. Nixon's larger mindset that beyond his control lurked people who wanted to cause him harm. It remains impossible to know his true beliefs. This paper simply offers some insights as to why he had anti-Jewish outbursts throughout his presidency.
By the time the destruction abated, the Nazis had burned nearly three hundred synagogues, vandalized more than seven thousand Jewish-owned businesses, killed one hundred civilians, deported tens of thousands of Jews to concentration camps, and caused one billion marks worth of damage.
Western governments reacted to news of the outburt with shock and dismay. President Franklin Roosevelt recalled the American ambassador to Berlin back to the U.S. for consultations. Indeed, for many foreign observers living in Germany, the events of November 9-10 became a turning point in their estimation of the Nazi regime.
This chapter, however, outlines a history that does not begin with the premise that Americans abandoned the Jews of Europe. Instead, I argue that some citizens saw in the reports of Nazi anti-Semitism an opportunity to initiate a public discourse that explained how the fascist vision for humankind was abhorrent. Not all Americans living during the 1930s held, or tolerated, bigoted views. Politicians spoke out repeatedly; so, too, did prominent social commentators. As members of the Christian majority learned more about Hitler’s wide-ranging intolerance, some concluded that tolerating similar prejudices was harmful to society. Although negative sentiments toward ethnic, racial, and religious minorities undoubtedly persisted, there is a larger and less well-known story involving the ways both Jewish and Christians Americans used the issue of combating Nazi intolerance to promote a more pluralist worldview.
Perhaps, the clearest example of this process involved President Franklin Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms” proclamation. Issued in January 1941, eleven months before the attack on Pearl Harbor, the remarks constituted the closing portion of his annual State of the Union address to Congress. The declaration was a sweeping piece of rhetoric in which the president took direct aim at the isolationist camp. His proclamation indicated that the U.S. would no longer shirk from international diplomacy.The“Four Freedoms” was an ecumenical vision about the type of global image the U.S. hoped to strike.
Roosevelt's themes soon permeated the country's cultural discourse. Noted American artist Norman Rockwell depicted the themes visually in a series of identically entitled portraits. In March 1943, the popular American periodical Saturday Evening Post reproduced the prints on its front covers. By the mid-1940s, pictures of Roosevelt’s ideas hung on walls, often alongside the president’s visage, in tens of millions of homes across the United States. This layering of support indicates that Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms” represented more than a well-crafted piece of political oratory. During the early 1940s, the sentiments were cornerstone themes in everyday discussions in between ordinary citizens as well as elected officials.
This paper examines one specific aspects of Richard Nixon's character: his private bigotry. During intimate discussions, he often expressed deep animus toward Jews, blacks, Italians, and women. A snide, possibly sinister, laugh pierces through the static of his White House tapes. The conclusion appears inescapable that the thirty-seventh American president was a parlor bigot, who when among "good company" found in biased speech an effective means of self-expression.
Why did this happen? Particularly the habit seems bizarre for a chief executive that appointed various Jews to top-level posts in his administration. This paper explores the idea that in anti-Jewish language and imagery Richard Nixon found a short-hand way to express disdain toward his real and perceived enemies. The term "Jew" represented the dialectical opposite of Nixonianism. Castigating someone, or something, as "Jewish" signaled Mr. Nixon's larger mindset that beyond his control lurked people who wanted to cause him harm. It remains impossible to know his true beliefs. This paper simply offers some insights as to why he had anti-Jewish outbursts throughout his presidency.
By the time the destruction abated, the Nazis had burned nearly three hundred synagogues, vandalized more than seven thousand Jewish-owned businesses, killed one hundred civilians, deported tens of thousands of Jews to concentration camps, and caused one billion marks worth of damage.
Western governments reacted to news of the outburt with shock and dismay. President Franklin Roosevelt recalled the American ambassador to Berlin back to the U.S. for consultations. Indeed, for many foreign observers living in Germany, the events of November 9-10 became a turning point in their estimation of the Nazi regime.