Talk:Night of the Long Knives - Wikipedia

I removed the article from WikiProject LGBT studies because it is not related to LGBT at all. Some people might belive that Ernst Röhm was murdered because of his homosexuality, but this is wrong. See the following quotes from the article:

Adolf Hitler moved against the SA and its leader, Ernst Röhm, because he saw the independence of the SA and the penchant of its members for street violence as a direct threat to his newly gained political power.

While Röhm's homosexuality did not endear him to conservatives, they were more concerned about his political ambitions.

Sapere aude22 (talk) 09:26, 22 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

I don't think a Wikipedia article can be used as a source for argumentation on Wikipedia. Whether he was murdered because of his homosexuality or not, it's a fact that his homosexuality and alleged orgies at Bad Wiessee were the key arguments used in propaganda as a justification for the murders. -- megA (talk) 14:43, 9 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

The section that's titled "Reaction" concludes with the following paragraph:

German citizens also supported this Military operation carried out by the SS. The SA were very disorganised and in reality, were nothing but Nazi 'street thugs'. They often attacked communists ( Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands) and sometimes even civilians. The German people almost commended the elimination of this violent force. This also was due to the fact German law courts were quick to declare this legal. however obviously this action was clearly not fully legal. The Nazi party had not consulted the reichstag, thus the mass murder had not been reviewed by the Weirmar republic. Thus this action cannot be argued completely legal. However the Reichstag were all too happy to get rid of the German StormTrooper organisation. This meant this could be passed by German law courts immediately after the killing had taken place.

This paragraph was added on 8 November 2013‎ by 194.6.0.243.

(1) This paragraph contains no citations for the sweeping statements that it makes.
(2) This paragraph is almost incoherent.

• It characterizes the Night of the Long Knives as a "Military operation". The German military did not commit any of the murders; indeed, the author himself states that it was an "operation carried out by the SS."
• Furthermore, it states that "… this action was clearly not fully legal. The Nazi party had not consulted the reichstag … ." Consulting the Reichstag would not have given the government authority to commit mass murder.
• It also states: "This meant this could be passed by German law courts immediately after the killing had taken place." What "could be passed by German law courts"? Consistent with what law?
  

(3) The author capitalizes words inconsistently: Military ; Reichstag and reichstag ; however ; etc.
(4) The statement that the SA "often attacked communists ( Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands) and sometimes even civilians" is redundant: the behavior of the SA is mentioned earlier in the article.

Delete this confused, unsubstantiated mess — unless someone wants to edit it and add citations. Cwkmail (talk) 16:16, 25 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Done per WP:BOLD.--Darius (talk) 21:39, 25 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

In the Wikipedia article on Michael Lippert, there is this paragraph:

"In 1956, the Munich authorities began an investigation into the Night of the Long Knives and in August arrested Lippert and Sepp Dietrich for their part in it. They were bailed, and the trial itself did not commence until 6 May 1957. They were represented by the lawyer Dr Alfred Seidl who had defended Rudolf Hess at the Nuremberg Trials. Lippert and Dietrich were charged with manslaughter, in Lippert's case for the death of Röhm. Lippert asserted that he had remained outside Röhm's cell, and only Theodor Eicke had gone in. On 10 May the case was summed-up and the prosecutor demanded a two-year sentence for Lippert. On 14 May the President of the Court found both Lippert and Dietrich guilty and sentenced both men to 18 months. He described Lippert as "filled with a dangerous and unrepentant fanaticism"."

Shouldn't there be something about this post-war investigation in _this_ article? 101.117.68.213 (talk) 04:39, 31 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Some context for this expression: Mockery of the inflationary usage of the prefix Reichs- in German officialese at the time led to popular derogatory nicknames formed after the same pattern, such as Reichslügenbold for Goebbels, Reichstrunkenbold for Robert Ley and Reichswasserleiche for Kristina Söderbaum. Reichskristallnacht was originally a sardonic epithet as well, until it was appropriated by the Nazi Party. An earlier example is Reichshund. Reichsflugscheibe appears to be a more recent coinage. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 16:46, 7 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

This is an excellent article. I would point out a couple of things though.

1) I think that when "Reichsmordwoche" is mentioned there should be an immediate translation (lit. Reich murder Week but it may have a more colloquial meaning) given after it. (How many readers will know what it means?)

2) In the part where it's stated that Hitler was appointed Chancellor I would include a brief note explaining that in parliamentary systems the head of the government isn't determined by an election by the people. For those of you who live in such places this might sound unnecessary, but for Americans it's inconceivable that the people would have no say in who is in charge of the government.

3) I think that there should be more info given about the agreement between Hitler and the Army leaders about their support of getting rid of Rohm, as that went a long way to cementing the two together. Since Hitler knew Hindenburg was dying, he wanted to assume the office of President as well as Chancellor without having to run an election (as the President was an elected official). Hitler planned to hold a plebiscite, not an election, that would endorse his extra-constitutionary ploy, rather than real election. In exchange for the Army endorsing this (along with promising to disregard the Versailles Treaty and rebuild the military), Hitler agreed to get rid of Rohm and the SA and forever do away with any talk of changing the traditional standing of the Army and making it subordinate to the SA. This point is very important to understanding why this whole event occurred and should not be left out. __209.179.86.123 (talk) 02:46, 17 January 2016 (UTC)Reply