Yes, the existence of the camps was known, and documented

Glance at any of the English 'Labour' papers (Herald/ Labour Leader) and you will find references.

Similarly the UK Diplomatic Archives (FO)  have references

The Nazis did not conceal them, as wiki points out

"The first camp in Germany, Dachau, was founded in March 1933.[10] The press announcement said that "the first concentration camp is to be opened in Dachau with an accommodation for 5,000 persons. All Communists and – where necessary – Reichsbanner and Social Democratic functionaries who endanger state security are to be concentrated there, as in the long run it is not possible to keep individual functionaries in the state prisons without overburdening these prisons."[10] "

Ref 10; 

Nor were the Work Camps in the UK, US,  Azania and  Cuba hidden away

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_concentration_camps#cite_note-MNN-10

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_concentration_camps

Thank you indeed! :) 

Dear Kirill,

The existence of concentration camps was very quickly known, in Germany and abroad alike. During 1933 the Nazis opened small "camps" in all major city centres to see how the general public "approved" the new policy and by late 1933/early 1934 more and more concentration camps were erected in disclosed areas, with Dachau being one of the first and a "pure German" camp, i.e. no Jews or other groups allowed. Very quickly people knew what concentration camps were about - just not the extend as the operation of the camps spread and turned over time into death camps. But people were aware that if you go to a concentration camp you would not be able to get out. As the early saying: "Lieber Gott, mach mich stumm, dass ich nicht nach Dachau kumm!" (Dear God, make me quiet, that I won't come to Dachau).

Best wishes for your further research!

Andreas

Dear Andreas, thank you indeed! :) 

Dear Kirill

Both Andreas and Jess gave you correct answers.

If you wish to learn more about this subject see these pages:

http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=136

Topic "Origins of the Holocaust"

http://www.jewishgen.org/ForgottenCamps/General/FaqEng.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/sunday-review/the-holocaust-just-got-more-shocking.html?_r=0

Regards

Tom

Dear Dr Venetianer, thank you for such detailed references! The year statistics is of special importance to me. :) 

Dear Kirill

Glad to oblige

If I can help you further let me know.

Regards

Tom

Of course, the concentration camps per se were not secret and were widely known, as was the Nazi use of forced labor.  The extermination of the Jews, on the other hand, was something they wanted to keep secret.  Stories of the massacres and gassing were told by escapees and others and reported in the press.  The Polish Underground also was active in reporting the genocide. The Allies decided (for reasons that are still not entirely clear) to keep the matter secret. The archives of the United Nations War Crimes Commission (which was an agency of the Allied powers) are stored by the modern UN in New York.  They show a detailed knowledge of the Nazi concentration camp and extermination regime by the end of the war.

Dear Dr Roth, thank you! I suspected that the massacres themselves were not widely publicized. In fact the purpose of my question is to ascertain whether Nazi collaborationists in, say, France or Norway knew of the whole scale of atrocities or not. 

Dear Kiril: about until wich point "collabos" knew in France the scale of the massacres there is a rich bibliography about the raid of Drancy, the parisian stadium where french jews where imprisoned before they were sent to Germany.

In Pau, near to the RR station a commemorative stone was placed not many years ago to remeber the thousands that were sent by train to Germany by the so called Government of Vichy.

As it seems, nowadays is well know in France that an important number of the "collabos" and "vichystes" knew what they were doing.

Remember that spanish and british used that kind of camps during their colonial wars in Cuba and in Southafrica.

That kind of methods were "vox populi". The leftist satyrical press of France, for instance, used that against british. See for instance "Le assiette au beurre" https://www.google.es/search?q=L%27assiette+au+beurre+Boer+war&biw=1280&bih=879&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1vM3MzrbOAhWC6xoKHV-zCEQQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=AUWqyk-RPeXY-M%3A

Best R.

Dear Dr Rilova, gracias! So collaborationists were on the whole aware of the grim nature of the regime they served. Thank you for the reference too! Of course British camps for Boer families were the first of their kind in world history. (In my course on the British Empire I devote a lecture to that war as a turning point in many ways.) What I am trying to ascertain now is to what extent Indian nationalists who sought German and Japanese help in the WWII were naive and to what extent they simply closed their eyes upon the atrocities... First and foremost I mean Subhas Chandra Bose on whom I am writing a little book. 

The Spanish were the first to use concentration camps in Cuba in 1895.

So the Spanish were a little ahead. By the late XIX century the idea was in the air then...

I believe, though, I am open to correction the British Empire used a policy very similar to concentration camps during the Boer War 

sorry just read the earlier entry re Boer war 

Dear Dr. Fursov: you´re very welcome. About how naive were the "collabos" it´s ever a difficult matter. I had studied during the last years the case of spanish "afrancesados", the collaborationists under the napoleonic rule in Spain (1808-1813). Many told to te restored patriot authorities that they had acted compulsorily, trying to protect the population of the invaded villages and cities.

The case of J. M. Soroa was specially interesting. He was like a kind of gauleiter in the basque provinces, there are many documents that show he was even rougher than the bonapartist officers. Despite that, he didn´t  run to France in 1813 and he defended himself before the restored authorities telling that, in fact, he had protected the population of invaded villages and cities... (!?) Surprisingly, like a little Talleyrand, he was not executed and survived to the brisk pollitical changes that Spain suffered from 1814 onwards.

The case of Bose is really interesting too. I think he was the only asian leader that "swalloved", apparently, the japanese propaganda.

Good luck!!

Best R.

Dear Dr Rilova, gracias otra vez! Surely apart from sheer force people need some inner convictions to guide their actions, to reconcile with the situation. As to Bose, I am sure you are right about his swallowing Japanese propaganda. After all Indians saw Japan as a country worthy of emulation ever since its victory over Russia back in 1905.

Yes the world knew of what was going on in the concentration camps. A couple of years ago I read a book published in the mid thirties, that graphically told of the atrocities.I truly believe that the antisemitism that existed through out the world allowed it all to happen. Also more Russians were exterminated  than Jews, but because Europe and the USA did not like Communists they all turned a blind eye to what was going on.

Edward

I fully agree that antisemitism throughout the world and specially in Europe was the main cause that allowed the killing of about 6 million innocent Jewish citizens.

As far as I know the closest statistics about Russian exterminated along WWII is around 10 million people. From that number one has to deduct around one million Jews killed mainly in the territory which today is Ukraine (SS-Einsatzgruppen actions).

But from those 9 million Russians one has to consider that not all victims were killed by the Nazis in concentration camps or by the Einsatzgruppen (as most of those 6 million Jews were). A large number of Russians were killed as result of the military actions during the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union.

Last but not least, there is ample literature that explains the Allies indifference to the Jews murdering as being a policy conceived by the British and American militaries under the rationalization that winning the war against Hitler was more important than sacrificing soldiers and spending military resources to save the defenseless Jewish populations.

Regards

Tom

I think the answer needs to be divided depending on what you mean by concentration camps.  The Nazis had camps, as said above, very early for political enemies--almost all of whom were not Jews.  The death camps for the mass killing of Jews, Roma and others were created after World War II began.  Reports of them gradually got out, but one thing to remember is that early reports were dismissed as propaganda--people could remember the stories that the British told about German treatment of Belgians in World War I, which in the years after that war were dismissed as fiction or exaggerations, so when people heard about the death camps they thought it was just another story.

Camps came in to existence in Germany shortly after the Nazis took power. Initially they were for segregation and punishment of political enemies. As time passed more Jews were sent to these camps, but as part of the elimination of civil rights after the Munich Laws, Kristalnacht etc. Conditions were harsh, and deaths not infrequent but death was not the purpose of the camps. The system evolved after the war started and especially after the Wansee Conference. The system was bifurcated with camps that were specifically for extermination, like Sobibor, and camps with sections more for labor. Auschwitz-Birkenau is an example of this, where while the primary purpose was extermination, there were factory sections using slave labor.

The vast majority of those exterminated in the camps were Jews, with the Roma being the other targeted group. Slavs, particularly Poles, were primarily used for labor and tended to be drawn from elements of Polish society the Germans considered dangerous or resisters. The civilians of Eastern Europe, other than Jews and Roma, who died in areas of Nazi occupation were victims of reprisals, casual violence, collateral damage of military operations, or starvation. While a large percentage of non-aryans in the areas the Nazis expected to rule were slated for death under Generalplan Ost, the systematic extermination of these populations was not going to start until the camps ran short of Jewish and Roma "customers".

The prewar KZL were known to the world, and as the war went on information about the death camps did reach the western allies. As has been noted, attempts to try and slow the flow to these camps were not made for many reasons, some practical (the camps were located in regions far from allied air bases), some political (don't divert efforts from beating Hitler), and many people in positions of power who simply did not care what happened to the Jews.

Dear Dr Lane and Dr Oreck, thank you! Of course there was a distinction between concentration camps and "death camps". I meant both categories, but I suspected just what you have confirmed - that the news of death camps had been dismissed at first. 

Dachau opened six weeks after Hitler became Chancellor.  It was his immediate attempt to go after clergy, media and intellectuals precisely because he wanted to mute - and then silence - the ability of anyone to report what was happening in Germany.  

Others have already noted many of the distinctions.  In general, there were roughly  2200 KZL in the Reich system.  Auschwitz alone had more than twenty.  What is important, though is that there were only four "pure" extermination camps and two "hybrid" camps.

It is also worth noting that the Allies did bomb Auschwitz III (Monowitz) but driven by a strategic war production calculus, not a intervention or humanitarian calculus.  The bottom line is that knowledge of the Reich KZL system was available before the war external to Germany began, but you had to want to know and know where to look, as being willing to suspend disbelief and listen - all of which are hard to do.  

Let me know if this helps or I can add further refinements for you, 

Don is correct about the military calculus of bombing.  What is more problematic is the question of why the Allies did not publicize the extermination of the Jews, of which they were very well informed, in 1944 at the latest.   As a graduate student I worked in the archive of the United Nations War Crimes Commission. (This was a branch of the Allied Powers, formally known as the UN--it is now held be the present UNO).  They had very detailed information about the Holocaust but it was kept secret. The experience of the anti-German propaganda in World War One played a role, but I can't help thinking that there was a fear that if they announced "The Nazis are exterminating the Jews" many people would respond "good". In any case, a fruitful field for examination.

In response to Johnathan - I think the reasons that the evidence of the Holocaust was not broadcast widely are several. The Nazis presented the war as being "forced" on them by the Jews (and those in thrall to the Jews) so making the "freeing of the Jews" a war aim played in to Nazi propaganda. I agree that there was a great deal of antisemitism amongst the western allies, and many were not interested in doing anything to save Jews and this could actually be a negative motivation for some soldiers, as in "I don't want to die for the Jews". For this latter thought, the responses of many Union soldiers to the Emancipation Proclamation is relevant - willing to fight for the Union but not for "niggers". On the other side of that coin, the revelation of the Holocaust could call in to question the action of the USA and other countries in aggressively denying refuge to Jews trying to flee Europe. finally, there was the military reality that very little could be done to stop the Holocaust. Bombing death camps was somewhat of a stretch due to location, and cutting rail lines and keeping them out of service requires a sustained effort, meaning missions against rail lines that would otherwise be directed elsewhere. The attitude that the best solution was winning the war as quickly as possible, rather than specific attacks, was probably correct unfortunately.

As others have pointed out, Nazi concentration camps were exceedingly well known before World War II, and the literature denouncing them, though mostly forgotten due to the modern concentration on the Holocaust as the fundamental Nazi crime, was immense. As was press coverage. But they were not really death camps yet, for Jews or anyone else. Though some preliminary relatively small scale exterminatory actions towards Jews did take place in occupied Poland, essentially the Holocaust began together with "Operation Barbarossa," the invasion of the Soviet Union. The Jewish death toll in German-occupied Soviet territory already was huge even before the infamous Wannsee Conference. The "Kommissarbefehl," the order for the extermination of Jews and communists in the Soviet Union, was the authorization memo for the Holocaust, which from Hitler's point of view, was, like Barbarossa, motivated by the Nazi campaign vs. "JudeoBolshevism," which ultimately is what Nazi anti-Semitism was really all about. As Hitler explains in Mein Kampf, it was when he "realised" that Jews in Austria were behind Social Democracy and Marxism, that is when the "scales fell from his eyes" and he "understood" that exterminating Jews was necessary. In his mind, Barbarossa and the Holocaust were two sides of a single coin. The extermination of Jews elsewhere in Europe was to some degree an afterthought.

Good afternoon.

Thank you for your comments. They help elucidating Mr. Fursov initial question.

The attachment answers it clearly. Published by the NYT on July 2, 1942 this is probably the earliest date when the Western world, and the Allies in particular, learned about the Nazis' murderous plans and barbarity against the Jews.

Regards

Tom

Adam Von Trott said he got to know in 1943 and he was one of the people coordinating with Bose. So how could Bose know. Source - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_von_Trott_zu_Solz#CITEREFMommsen2003. Also if Britain and USA knew why they restricted immigration of Jews.

Kirill Fursov

Thanks to all who answered! :)