Hans Asperger aided and supported Nazi programme, study says - Sensationalist Headlines

The Austrian doctor after whom Asperger syndrome is named was an active participant in the Nazi regime, assisting in the Third Reich’s so called euthanasia programme and supporting the concept of racial hygiene by deeming certain children unworthy to live, according to a study by a medical historian. Herwig Czech, from Vienna’s Medical University, has made the claim in an academic paper published in the open access journal Molecular Autism, following eight years of research into the paediatrician Hans Asperger. But by unearthing previously untouched documents from state archives, including Asperger’s personnel files and patient case records, Czech has revealed a scientist who allied himself so closely with the Nazi ideology that he frequently referred children to the Am Spiegelgrund clinic, which was set up as a collecting point for children who failed to conform to the regime’s criteria of “worthy to live”. Nearly 800 children died at the clinic between 1940 and 1945, many of whom were murdered under the notorious child “euthanasia” scheme. “It would have been wrong for me to have withheld this information, however difficult it might be to hear,” he said. “At the same time, there is no evidence to show his contributions to autism research were tainted by his problematic role during National Socialism. So purging the term Asperger from the medical lexicon would not be helpful. Rather, this should be an opportunity to look at the past and learn lessons from it.” Hans Asperger aided and supported Nazi programme, study says | W.. The paper: Hans Asperger, National Socialism, and “race hygiene” in Nazi

Hasn't this been well known for a long time

Not really, especially in the English soeaking world the view has generally been that he was against the Nazis. it’s a lot like how Rommel was white washed after the war.

Dude was a fucking sperg it seems

It takes one to know one it seems

Why is this being rated snowflake

See, I don't like saying "I have autism" or "I have high functioning autism" because in some people's minds that makes them think you're incapable of living a normal life. At least with Aspergers there was a distinction that even people who aren't familiar with the nuances understood.

The fact that CWC is technically a "high-functioning" autistic makes me thing it's an overly broad term. .

These headlines makes you think people don't understand what it was like living in those times. There was no internet to get information from, the science community were not as eager to share their knowledge over borders and the German propaganda machine worked all over Europe and the UK. It was not that hard for people to fall into the trap of supporting the Nazis. The Nazis in Sweden were treated by most people as friends because we didn't know better. My own grandfathers father even dined with Göring in Limhamn where he had a plane factory. He didn't like jews either and even though I don't believe he would support the genocide it's not that hard to imagine after a few years of dehumanising propaganda. When Hitler lost, a lot of lords and people all over took down their portraits of Hitler from the top of their fireplace and replaced it with Churchill. For people to have opinions at certain times that we deem despicable today is normal and they shouldn't be "punished" by getting their name struck from history, that is just a stupid way of handling it. People having these views today is a different matter of course.

If given opportunities to develop and grow, CWC could have become a functioning member of society. As stated above, he's a product of his environment, not his own condition.

Just because there was no internet did not mean there weren't avenues of getting information. People weren't stupid and were capable of making their own decisions, and in many cases they made the concious decision to support the Nazi regime. On top of that, research done since WWII has demonstrated that Propaganda reinforces what people already believe, it doesn't sway people to have new views. That's an important distinction that needs to be made. But also, I suggest reading the article - I even linked the paper with all the research! From the paper's conclusion (though I highly suggest reading the whole thing) The aim of this paper is to provide a factual basis for the debate on Hans Asperger’s career in Vienna during the Nazi period. The main conclusion is that the narrative of Asperger as a principled opponent of National Socialism and a courageous defender of his patients against Nazi “euthanasia” and other race hygiene measures needs to be revised in light of the examined evidence. What emerges is a much more problematic role played by this pioneer of autism research and the namesake of Asperger’s syndrome. Kondziella, in his 2009 paper on neurological eponyms with roots in the Nazi period, ascribed an “ambivalent role” to Asperger, classifying him as neither a “perpetrator” nor a “protestor” ([11]: 59). This broad categorization150 must be re-evaluated now that we have a basis for a much more detailed and evidence-based assessment of Asperger’s problematic role during this dark time. An overall appraisal of Asperger’s place in the history of youth psychiatry and Heilpädagogik and as a pioneer of autism research will have to go beyond the focus of this paper, which despite the importance of the Nazi period for understanding Asperger’s life and work cannot replace a long due biography. Regarding Asperger’s contributions to autism research, there is no evidence to consider them tainted by his problematic role during National Socialism.151 They are, nevertheless, inseparable from the historical context in which they were first formulated, and which I hope to have shed some new light on. The fate of “Asperger’s syndrome” will probably be determined by considerations other than the problematic historical circumstances of its first description—these should not, in any case, lead to its purge from the medical lexicon. Rather, it should be seen as an opportunity to foster awareness of the concept’s troubled origins.

Asperger's and high functioning ASD are synonymous but they shouldn't be. In very simple terms, Asperger's just limits someone's natural development of social skills and emotional intelligence, while boosting their ability in problem solving and innovation. Not to say these can't be learnt, it's just that it's more like learning a second language later in life rather than the one you grow up with. If Asperger's isn't a diagnosis used anymore, there should be something to replace it.

Outside of some social issues still, like completely avoiding eye contact as much as possible, I'm fairly normal at this point for the same reasons.

Yeah it's crazy how environments affect people. I got great luck with my mom and my girlfriend got shit luck with her parents for her development as a child. (We both have Aspegers)

He has the potential to be high-functioning (or at least that's what was expected when he was diagnosed), but being raised in a terrible environment and the possibility that some more severe, previously unrecognized mental health problems are starting to manifest has prevented him from reaching that potential.

Yeah you're right, now when I've read it it's a good paper and the researchers are surprisingly impartial for this kind of work and I would say that Hans was informed. I do however disagree with people being informed in those times, from what I've read and heard it could take weeks to get information and almost all avenues were tainted by propaganda whether it be pro Nazi or not. Furthermore, I don't see how you could make a good valid study on the effectiveness of propaganda today as there are too many factors to consider. People in general hold social science in to high regard when it comes to stuff like this as it can not prove causation and the authors are very prone to draw conclusions they can't draw given their presented information. That last thing is actually surprisingly common in "real" science as well which has recently been brought to light as a big problem. When people quote a study with a bad conclusion in their own study with a bad conclusion that will be used in another study you can quickly see how everything they say becomes irrelevant opinion pieces. What I'm saying is that our opinions from reading and hearing about history should be held in the same regard as social science on a subject like this. I would however be interested in reading some of the reports you are talking about if you would link them.

what the did you expect him to be exactly? what do you think Historians actually do? By the 1940s you had the telephone, telegraph, radio, etc... information moved quickly. And even if it didn't, that doesn't make a group of people stupid or uninformed. Limited communication technology is not a sign of a lack of intelligence. To insinuate that is just some presentism of the highest order. well then you're not thinking hard enough and have not read any of the relevant literature. lmao what. no, they will be held in high regard because historians and social scientists have actual standards. typical devaluation of the humanities though. i have them printed out at home (i had them for a class) and I won't be home for a few days so you'll have to wait. but the general consensous has been this since WWII. Study after study finding the same conclusion.

Yes many wealthy people had telephones but I couldn't exactly call Germany and ask them about the jews. I'm saying media was slow and full of propaganda (like today).But the general perception of things was not very accurate since you couldn't take part of media from other parts of the world. Here for example the state media was too nice on the Nazis and almost everyone supported sterilization of blacks and other "inferior" races because of faulty science and strange politics. It was a whole other time to be alive and things we consider extreme today was not considered extreme by their standards. Also, a majority of people here wasn't aware of the death camps here. There were some rumors during the later part of the war and a very small minority of people here helping jews. Also the level of higher education since then has skyrocketed in most countries. As for the historians. Yes they should be impartial but when it comes to things like the holocaust, black history or other emotionally engaging topics a lot of them simply aren't. Historians make educated guesses about earlier life from literature and people's accounts of past events mixed with archeology. They are very valuable and knowledgeable but they are not scientists in the slightest and are not experts on propaganda or sociology. Social science has its place, I'm in the field of medicine myself so I need to read a lot of hard and soft science alike. I have a very good understanding of the limitations and roles of them both and you can't use social science and make a valid conclusion that propaganda in 1930 - 1940 didn't sway people's minds. That is impossible. Social science and hard science to a surprisingly large degree is filled with faulty conclusions and that is evident to anyone in the field. There are even published studies and pieces on it and how a study isn't necessarily good just because it's peer reviewed.

Roughly 40% of US households in 1940 had telephones. That's not a small percentage. And while true international calls weren't a thing yet (it was certainly possible, but took a while just to get patched through) you still had many other avenues of communication. Being able to get media from other parts of the world doesn't suddenly make it more accurate. except there were plenty of people who were against the ideas that the nazis were espousing - both within and outside of Nazi Germany. Besides, having a different frame of reference doesn't mean you can't pass judgement. For example, it's perfectly fine to judge cultures that practice female circumcision as wrong - even though from their frame of reference it is ok. Moral relativism does not mean you can't judge. Intelligence doesn't automatically equate with higher education. The Egyptians for instance were able to build structures like no other, yet they didn't have what we would consider "higher education". Timeline wise, our idea of "higher education" is fairly recent. do you have anything to actually back this up or are you just talking out of your ass. Because as a historian, you're talking out of your ass. It's a little more than an "Educated Guess" buddy. you have not demonstrated this in the slightest. except if you read what I wrote you'd have noticed I said the consensus has been this since wwii. it's not just newer studies on propaganda, but studies ranging all the way back to the war.

Well, that sucks.

That's kind of the distinction used between mild and severe autism nowadays? Well, sort of. Aspergers doesn't really boost people's problem solving abilities or intellect, intellect is either relatively in-line with neurotypicals, and they tend to hyperfocus in on a narrow range of topics. But yeah, language acquisition and intellectual disabilities are the lines between high functioning autism vs. more severe autism. The main reason aspergers was delisted was because w/ those criteria it was too difficult to justify it not simply fitting as a mild variant of autism. Also, a lot of people who previously would have had aspergers do not qualify for ASD at all anymore. They're being diagnosed with other disorders such as communication disorders, if they lack the repetitive behavior of autistic people.

Oh right that's interesting. I think that's what I meant when I say there should be a different term seperate to ASD, such as a communication disorder.