Posted on 10/17/2013 12:28:59 PM PDT by Olympiad Fisherman
A plan used in the 1950s to build a system of towns and villages in the northern Negev was based on a theory developed in the Third Reich, to be used for populating an Eastern Europe cleansed of Jews. Did Zionist planners not know, or not care?
(Excerpt) Read more at timesofisrael.com ...
The Nazis were using the rockets for terrorism ...
Be rest assured that the Dallas model in America has been replaced with heavy environmental spatial planning ideas borrowed from Europe - which are anti-private property and strongly tends toward totalitarian state control - http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/green_lebensraum_the_nazi_roots_of_sustainable_development.html.
The Wikipedia page you point out really just focuses on what a central place was as a definition rather than an applied science relative to making planning decisions. It does not talk about how planners have used that definition to make master planned communities for us all. Christaller was given that opportunity by the Nazis to start putting his so-called principle into practice, and much of that planning revolved around what today we would call environmental sustainability under the auspices of Konrad Meyer and the SS where a synthesis between racial development (blood) and harmony with the landscape (soil)was explicitly sought. Christaller’s central place theory under Nazism started with rural farms around small villages and went from there ...
You are certainly right about regional planning. Christaller said, “The aim of regional planning … is to introduce order into impractical, outdated and arbitrary urban forms or transport networks, and this order can only be achieved on the basis of an ideal plan – which means in spatial terms a geometrical schema ... Central places will be spaced an equal distance apart, so that they form equilateral triangles. These triangles will in turn form regular hexagons, with the central place in the middle of
these hexagons assuming a greater importance.” None of this can be accomplished by letting people freely come and go ...
Yes, but you need to put it in a context. You get empty land, relatively flat. You want to put people there in an organized way, to maximize the efficiency of distribution, in a chain of interconnected settlements. They also occupy as much area as possible, so establish their control over a large area.
This means that it is *their* land, that no interloper can occupy a large area within their area. And this was Israel’s national prerogative, to not have non-Israeli squatters interspersed with Israelis.
Granted, in the early days, Israel was all about socialism and government everything. But my point is that this doesn’t have to be that way.
As a logistical and mathematical model it makes sense.
And importantly, again, it is “formative”. Once set up, it should slowly change and adapt and specialize, while retaining the advantages. Much like planting seedlings a given distance apart so that they will have room to grow, but still be in the same overall field.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
IMO the title is quite a stretch. Christaller's Central Place Theory predates the Nazis, isn't accepted by everyone, and is more an academic explanation of urban development than a concrete plan of development. And which is certainly relevant to development of an economic region from scratch. I don't think calling it a Nazi theory.
Just what he did working for Himmler planning a new Germanic Poland without Poles is a different issue, certainly guided by his theories.
Yes, you make an often overlooked point. He was planning communities to be settled by German pioneers on the land of Poles when able. The Jewish poles to be killed, the Christian Poles enslaved. Of course he knew, everything. Many, many Germans are guilty of ambivalence, which is at the heart of it.
> According to Haifa University’s Dr. Arnon Golan, who was the first Israeli academic to write about Christaller’s Nazi past in 1997, the Israel Defense Forces also bases some of its tank warfare doctrine on maneuvers innovated by Rommel as he swept through North Africa.
Imagine, effective combat tactics are best abandoned. Pathetic.
This current piece is just another “Israel is the new Third Reich” agitprop hit piece.
Medical research carried out on concentration (extermination) camp prisoners led to a body of information still in use today, quite controversially.
> It is difficult to know how devoted Christaller was to the Nazi cause. A Social Democrat, he fled Germany for France on his bicycle in 1933, after Adolf Hitler took power, for fear that he would be persecuted by the Nazis. It was the same year that he published his seminal thesis “Central Places in Southern Germany,” which became the lodestar of the central places movement in geography... After the war, Christaller joined the Communist cause (and was rumored to have worked for the Stasi) and became widely respected in planning circles, winning the Victoria Medal from the Royal Geographic Society in 1968.
IOW, he wasn’t working under the Nazis when he wrote the paper.
The modern divided highway? Hitler.
Hitler’s last motorway to disappear
TheLocal.de | 30 Sep 2013 15:03 CET | (The Local/tsb)
Posted on 10/13/2013 11:14:20 PM PDT by Olog-hai
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3078576/posts
> Trevor Barnes, a geography professor at the University of British Columbia, told this reporter recently that “it involved creating this empty space without people and then refilling it with a Germanized population... If that’s what happened in Israel, it’s repeating exactly the same narrative, the same set of relations as there were in Nazi Germany.”
An empty space without people is what the Negev was (thanks to centuries of dessication of both natural and Arab / muzzie origin); the Nazis by contrast intended to ethnically cleanse large areas prior to resettling them with Germans.
additional:
Critical notes on economic geography from an aging radical. Or radical notes on economic geography from a critical age
Trevor J. Barnes
http://www.acme-journal.org/vol1/barnes.pdf
By contrast, the Arab “resistance” “movement” (astroturf terrorists) are direct-line descended from the Third Reich.
Ex-Mufti, Criminal Ally
http://www.varchive.org/obs/480223.htm
Atlantropa — The (pre-Nazi) German plans to dam the straits of Gibraltar and flood the Sahara:
http://bigthink.com/strange-maps/287-dam-you-mediterranean-the-atlantropa-project
http://www.damninteresting.com/mediterranean-be-dammed/
http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi2313.htm
Our World: The Bothersome, Annoying Truth
Townhall.com | October 17, 2013 | Caroline Glick
Posted on 10/17/2013 1:42:02 PM PDT by Kaslin
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3080246/posts
Doesn’t sound too different from the Northwest Act development of State Counties and Townships.
Okay - you obviously like government planning as you keep defending it as some kind of neutral operation devoid of politics. Here is a really good book to read if you are so inclined - http://store.cato.org/books/best-laid-plans-how-government-planning-harms-quality-life-pocketbook-future-hardback.
Which is my whole point. Christaller is at the heart of the best laid government plans for us all. He worked for the SS and later joined the Communist Party. Wonderful ...
While some government planning is good, think Planning & Zoning, for the most part it is initial planning to make maintenance planning in the future easier.
Think about a building. You want it to have electricity, water, and sewage. But these are not independent operations, they connect to larger systems. This saves everybody money, time, effort, and keeps the value of the area. Then, if the building is in the middle of nowhere, it is going to be a pain for whoever lives there to buy groceries, gasoline, and whatever else they want.
I also agree that if an area is already built up, you should not interfere with those who live there. But in the case of Israel, this was empty desert. No infrastructure, roads, agriculture, business, industry, or any appreciable local government.
So their overall prerogative was to build interconnected settlements, at least as far as infrastructure goes, that make it as easy as possible for the Israelis to dominate the area, mutually support each other, and have what they need to develop.
Everything else in there, you added, but is not an inherent part of doing this. “Oh, oh! Having paved roads will make it easier for government tanks to roll in and kill everyone!”
Well, yes, but the vast majority of the idea of paved roads is not for that purpose. In fact that almost never happens.
“But it could, so we should never have paved roads!” Which just sounds silly.
If that’s all there was to modern planning as you just outlined here, I would have no argument with you at all. I would agree with you wholeheartedly, but today, most of what is called planning is actually working against as much as possible the things you just mentioned. It is a strange form of anti-planning in the name of planning. So many totalitarian impulses and instincts are at work these days in the modern planning department thanks largely to growing clout of the environmental movement.
Baron Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild had more to do with it a whole lot earlier on, imho, than any Zionists, Nazis or English lords.
Incorrect. Large Jewish immigration made the State of Israel a forgone conclusion by the early 1930s, roughly a decade before the Holocaust. Partition , in fact, was first proposed by the Peel Commission. What Hitler did was deprive the State of Israel of 6 million potential immigrants.
A good number of Jews in Poland belonged to the Socialist Jewish Labor Bund organization, which was vehemently anti-Zionist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.