It should be noted that before invading Poland, Nazi Germany and Hitler were not unpopular in the US, and even then public support only faded slowly, so that probably would've been a hotter take.

Hindsight is always easier.

During nazi Germany, the corporation indeed did not pick a side (ala, IBM's equipment was used to do data processing for the holocaust).

But, it's too far to say that they (IBM) was pro-holocaust.

> But, it's too far to say that they (IBM) was pro-holocaust.

Only because it's inconvenient.

Hitler wrote what he wants to do with Jews in Main Kampf. There were lots of exiles from Germany before WW2.

Supporting such a regime with hardware makes you morally at fault exactly like building a crematorium in Auschwitz. In fact - many people building stuff for Germans had no choice - help or die. IBM had choice and decided to help for money.

Pro-making money is not pro-holocaust.

Lots of people were selling information about hiding Jews to Germans for money or for saving their lives.

Was that "pro-holocaust" or "pro-money"?

A lot of people were working as guards, maintenance personel, etc at death camps. Were they "pro-holocaust"?

In the end if you helped to make death camps work and had a choice to avoid doing so - you're at fault.