Recently, I saw an idea circulating pro- and anti-gun subreddits about the theory that if Jews had guns, they would have been able to resist the Nazis and thus genocide. While armed rebellion may seem an obvious solution to the Final Solution. But, apparently experts disagree. Why is that?

I think the answer is best given by starting with some numbers *.

Jewish population of Germany in 1939: 237,723

Deaths: 165,200

Jewish population of France in 1937: 300,000–330,000

Deaths: 72,900–74,000

Jewish population of Poland in 1937: 3,350,000

Deaths: 2,770,000–3,000,000

Jewish population of the Soviet Union in 1939: 3,028,538

Deaths: approximately 1,340,000

And so on, for a total of over 6 million deaths out of a population of 9 million.

Jews were armed and they fought against the nazis. They did so side by side with their non-jewish compatriots in defense of their homelands. They fought as Frenchmen, as Poles, as Soviets... They fought as heroic patriots or as forced conscripts. They fought in regular armies and as partisans.

Some were Christian because they or their parents had converted. Some were atheists. Among the german victims were men who had fought and bled for Kaiser and fatherland in WW1. They had lost sons, fathers and brothers like all other Germans.

If jews were disarmed in preparation for the holocaust then that process of disarmament is the second world war in europe; or more precisely the early period of nazi military expansion. The holocaust was an integral part of the german war effort. The populations and governments of occupied lands resisted or cooperated to varying degrees which partly explains the highly variable death rates.

Some point out that partisans would have been more effective with more weapons and may point to the Warsaw ghetto uprising or the Warsaw uprising. This makes no sense because Hitler had no power in Poland or any other occupied country before the war. There is nothing that would have stopped these countries from preparing better for a defensive guerilla war. (Disclaimer: I'm not at all familiar with military planning

That leaves the question of whether jewish Germans with guns could have resisted persecution in the early stages and prevented the war and the holocaust altogether. A really in-depth answer would mean examining how Hitler rose to power which would take too long. I can only sketch out some facts relevant to this "theory".

The german monarchy collapsed with the loss of WW1. Social democrats proclaimed a republic (Weimar Republic). Large numbers of military weapons found their way into civilian hands.

The young republic faced enemies on the far left and right. Communists wanted a russian-style revolution and a Soviet Germany. People on the right sympathized with a nationalist dictatorship; what we now call fascism. Conservatives wanted a return to monarchy.

The social democratic government of the republic used volunteer military units (Freikorps) to brutally suppress communist uprisings (eg Spartacus Uprising). Thousands were killed. Many of these units were far right and refused to act against a conservative coup attempt in 1920 (Kapp Putsch). Some participated. The social democrats called for a general strike which forced the putschists to give up. There are many other such incidents such as the Hitler Putsch of 1923, as well as numerous assassination of democratic politicians.

The republic stabliized after the first few years but violence remains a part of politics. The infamous SS is created during this period for fights with political enemies.

The nazi party had no electoral success until the beginning of the great depression. Then it rapidly gained support. That was not enough to get Hitler elected. That took some scheming by the old conservative elites. They hoped to be able to control Hitler and use him to get rid of leftists and the hated republic.

Once the nazis were in power they removed political opponents from the government bureaucracy and from any positions in powerful organizations like the unions. They also began discriminating against jewish Germans or anyone with jewish grand-parents. "Jews" were fired from government employment. "Jews" could no longer practice as lawyers or doctors. They could no longer show the German flag. They could no longer marry other Germans. It's an endless list from serious to petty. What would a gun have achieved against such discrimination?

The most notorious piece of such legislation are the Nuremburg laws of 1935. Among other things, "jews" were no longer citizens.

Hitler's conservative allies forced him to make a slight concession in this, at first. Jewish Germans who fought at the front in WW1 or who had lost fathers or sons in WW1 were excluded from some of the discrimination. This lasted until Hitler's power was secure enough to no longer need allies.

The gist is that violence and guns are associated with enemies of the republic. Guns were used to murder democratic politicians.

In 1928, the republic passed a strict gun control law that still made allowances for hunters and recreational shooters. I am unaware of pro-republic paramilitary groups even demanding exception for self defense against nazis and communists.

Many democratic politicians of the era survived the nazis and the war and helped to rebuild german democracy after the war. They did not create a US style right to keep and bear arms. They even kept the nazi gun law of 1938 (minus the aryan paragraph).

There is no hint that armed uprisings failed to take place for lack of guns. In neighboring Austria one finds a somewhat parallel development. The austro-fascists destroyed democracy in 1933 in a similar quasi-legal way. Some austrian social democrats did try to resist with weapon in hand. The austrian civil war lasted three days.

It would not have needed violence to keep the nazis in check either, as the early exceptions for war veterans show. If a few more people had said 'No!' that would have sufficed.

As to jewish Germans in particular... Censuses in Germany before Hitler show less than 1% being of jewish faith.

To put this 1% into perspective: The 1860 US census shows 14% African American.(Examining the role of guns in the re-establishment of white supremacy after the civil war may shed more light on this theory than looking at Germany.)

In 1938, the nazis passed a new gun law that made getting guns slightly easier than a previous law passed by the republic but which also excludes "jews" from owning guns. Some people erroneously claim that this law disarms jews in preparation for the holocaust. In truth, "jews" in Germany have already suffered years of harsh, violent persecution. A large proportion have gone into exile. The paragraph excluding jews (aryan paragraph) is boilerplate at this point and routinely part of laws.

Sources:

Everything in this post should be commonly known facts that could be sourced from any overview of the period. Please point out if there's any dubious details.