@Mav: actually this (whether they knew or not) has been the subject of much historical debate and research. But I'm afraid I'll disagree.
I remember some ten years ago reading a big review of the German press, and it was quite clear that, not only was knowledge about the concentration camps widely spread, but they were also openly reported -nay, boasted about in the papers.
I wasn't talking about concentration camps at all. I thought I had made that clear. I'd like to separate the topic concentration camps from atrocities at the front (which I was talking about).
On the other hand, let's assume, for one moment, that all that evidence did not register, which is indeed true to a large extend; it's not like the Germans didn't know, they just "didn't know" - that is, they chose to not know. For me, this is not an excuse - and in some respects, it's even worse.
What's the point of your argument here? This never was a secret. Concentration camps were known long before the war. They were set up with the excuse that people can be "re-educated" there to live up to the Nazis standards, when they're finished with them. And it turned out not to be so. At the beginning the population for sure did not conceive them as death camps.
Yes, shootings and burnings in the camps were known for sure at least in the sorrounding villages themselves, as time went on.
Please, Gryzor, put the facts in a very strict yearly context. The Nazis were masters at manipulation, what was sold as a good idea to the population at first (re-education - which by today's standards is appalling) was later put to another use.
I'm beginning to suspect that you're taking the high moral standpoint and judge history by today's standards. That's ok, but in the end it won't lead you anywhere.
It is extremely difficult even for Germans to get the gist of the situation that the population was in before, during and after the Nazis. It may be even more difficult for people who are not raised in this culture, albeit a good sixty years later.
As so many have told since then, it's not perceivable today how the infamous speeches of Hitler and the festivities of the Nazis exerted influence on the people. There's reports even of jews who were carried away by that pompous presentations and rhetoric. The recordings of these can't convey that feeling, and comtemporary witnesses have made that point clear as well.
The best thing you can do, beyond reading history books about the era, is learning German, living a few years in a German-speaking country, and trying to befriend people from every social class there.
Since today is a culmination of things past, you'll still find a lot of "references" (for lack of a word) which you'll be able to put into context, perhaps even easier than the Germans themselves, since you've been raised in a different context.
But, sure enough, (referring to your next post now), the rulers exerted a huge influence and vast control over the people, that cannot be denied (nor is). As for finding answers... well, the journey is as enlightening as the destination! As a final note, though: the control of a ruler cannot explain the extend to which a whole people went. What's more, don't forget that Hitler got a solid 30-something percent in 1932, and subsequently his popularity roared, *before* he was able to exert total control. But, important enough, *after* openly stating what he would do.
I remember a present-day philosopher - was it Slavoj Zizek? - stating that 15% of any population tends towards the extreme right. So while the 30% is still way too high, I might add that they Nazis knew even then how to kindle certain sentiments in the population, some of them problems of their day and age, some of them pointing back to WWI.
There's a lot of evidence of manipulation during the elections. And even with this in mind it took the decision of one Alfred Hugenberg - IIRC - to let the Nazis to power (yes, a conservative business tycoon who would not want socialists in the lead, tipped the scales in favour of the Nazis!).
I personally find that much more important to remind than deliberately recounting endless tales of the atrocities and daily life in concentration camps. There's only so much you can take of that in the end, and you're none the wiser because of it. You can't imagine the death of a few relatives, much less those of millions; or the nightmares of the survivors. Or do we really need to get into the details of what it looks like when a body of a human being is burned in a furnace? I've read and heard those countless times as well.
Let me quote Ian Kershaw from his book Popular Opinion and Political Dissent in the Third Reich. It's in German, but I guess you'll get it: "[Es ist] für den Außenstehenden, den Nichtdeutschen, der den Nationalsozialismus nicht erlebt hat, ... möglicherweise zu leicht, zu kritisieren und Verhaltensmaßstäbe anzulegen, deren Einhaltung unter den gegebenen Umständen nahezu unmöglich war."
Since we're beginning to go in circles with our arguments, I see no real point going into any more detail. Partly because that's about as much as I can remember from my readings, of which I've forgotten a lot, and partly because I do not have enough time to catch up to your reading list.
Also, my current spleen is WWI which is where the catastrophes of the 20th (and 21st) centuries took it's start. So when I have time, I prefer to read about this period.