Expulsion of Germans after WW2 [Archive]

View Full Version : Expulsion of Germans after WW2

spartan

20th January 2009, 04:24

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Germans_after_World_War_II

What is your feeling about this?

I know some (yes even leftists) who argue that though it wasn't right what happened to them it was necessary and besides a majority of these people happily agitated in favour of Nazi rule in the pre-war era.

Personally I think the forced expulsion of any ethnic group is wrong regardless of the political beliefs and actions of a minority or majority of them.

Thoughts?

Dr Mindbender

20th January 2009, 19:05

Devrim

20th January 2009, 19:13

Being pro-nazi doesnt constitute being part of a specific ethnic group.

I think all pro-nazis should be treated with the same contempt afforded to any follower of a dangerous, reactionary thought school. Especially fascism/nazism.

There were mass expulsions of Germans after the Second World war. I don't believe all of them were Nazis. They were ethnically cleansed.

Devrim

spartan

21st January 2009, 03:05

Being pro-nazi doesnt constitute being part of a specific ethnic group.

I think all pro-nazis should be treated with the same contempt afforded to any follower of a dangerous, reactionary thought school. Especially fascism/nazism.

I don't think you understand US, these Germans were expelled from Czechoslovakia, Poland, etc after the war because they were German not because they were Nazis (though a large amount of these people did advocate in favour of Nazi rule during the lead up to the second world war - Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia being a perfect example of this - though this was mainly due to them wanting to be reunited with Germany as German land populated by ethnic Germans had been given to new non-German countries after WW1 deeply angering the German inhabitants).

These German people's ancestors had been living in these regions for hundreds if not over a thousand years and in the Polish case most of what is today western Poland was never historically apart of Poland at all but a core part of eastern Germany/Prussia.

The 'communist' Poles simply expelled the German population after the war and repopulated the land with Poles whilst the Soviets expelled Poles in historic eastern Poland and claimed the land for Belarus and Ukraine (i.e. USSR).

21st January 2009, 05:20

The "ethnic germans" who were expelled were expelled because they signed the Nazi Volksliste indicating that they were part of the german master race outside of germany and should be given privileges as such.

You think the rest of the population should have been forced to tolerate these racists in their midst after they murdered tens of millions of them?

lombas

21st January 2009, 10:42

You have to clearly distinguish between those who

1) Fled Eastern Europe in '44-'45 because of the approaching Red Army (and why, you might ask --- certainly not because they were so well-integrated)
2) Fled Eastern Europe because they were actively involved in Nazi practices there or because they became the "victim" of angry mobs (a minority and not different from equal "outrages" against collaborators in France, Belgium, &c)
3) Were expelled from Eastern Europe because they were actively involved in Nazi practices there
4) Were expelled from Eastern Europe because they had been sent by Nazi Germany to "colonize" some lebensraum
5) Stayed and offered hard cash from the fifties on to return to their beloved, hardrock capitalist BRD
6) Still live there (hundreds of thousands of people are claiming to be Germans in Romania, Hungary, &c)

Devrim

21st January 2009, 12:06

Dean

21st January 2009, 13:29

Being pro-nazi doesnt constitute being part of a specific ethnic group.

I think all pro-nazis should be treated with the same contempt afforded to any follower of a dangerous, reactionary thought school. Especially fascism/nazism.

It said "German nationals" in the article, which you may have interpreted as "German nationalists". It confused me at first, too.

benhur

21st January 2009, 14:05

Superb, an argument in favour of ethnic cleansing using anti-racism as a justification.

Devrim

Are you suggesting that we tolerate racists? If we don't, how does that amount to ethnic cleansing, because an entire race isn't targeted but only the bad apples?

Devrim

21st January 2009, 17:44

Are you suggesting that we tolerate racists? If we don't, how does that amount to ethnic cleansing, because an entire race isn't targeted but only the bad apples?

It wasn't only fascists who were deported. If we take the Czech republic as an example approximately 2.6 million people, the vast majority of the German population were ethnically cleansed.

Of course that doesn't include the people who were murdered, or the 10,000 that died in internment camps.

Devrim

28th January 2009, 10:22

We're talking about people who *affirmatively sided with the Nazis* in order to obtain favorable treatment during occupation, often receiving property and assets the Nazis stole from their Jewish compatriots. The communists didn't classify them as foreigners, they classified themselves as foreigners by declaring themselves as such to the Nazi regime. The fact that you want to make Nazi collaborators into 'ethnic cleansing' victims when they tacitly or actively supported the greatest genocide ever is to say the least disturbing.

Dimentio

28th January 2009, 10:25

Holden Caulfield

28th January 2009, 10:26

Holden Caulfield

28th January 2009, 12:58

I think all pro-nazis should be treated with the same contempt afforded to any follower of a dangerous, reactionary thought school. Especially fascism/nazism.

I'm sure many decent people were swept along with the Nazi regeime and supported it, I didn't see the entire population of the UK complaining about our nations treatment of the Irish, infact many Scots moved there to find a better life. Were the English working class responsible for the actions of the British Empire, surely they should be treated with contempt. All whites should leave Hong Kong, South Africa etc, Spanish should leave South America etc, is this what should happen.

Sure war criminals should be punished, but what about members of the German army, even the Waffen SS wasn't full of hardcore nazi psychopaths. A sensible line needs to be made on which to judge people from, not your usual line of hysterical pointing and screaming 'nazi'.

Again you have used an unmaterial approach driven by emotions.

You think the rest of the population should have been forced to tolerate these racists in their midst after they murdered tens of millions of them?
Was every German who was part of the nazi machine also personally a mass murderer? Those in the army, the 'labour movements', the Hitler Youth etc etc. I agree with what Devrim said:

Superb, an argument in favour of ethnic cleansing using anti-racism as a justification.

Devrim

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We're talking about people who *affirmatively sided with the Nazis* in order to obtain favorable treatment during occupation, often receiving property and assets the Nazis stole from their Jewish compatriots. The communists didn't classify them as foreigners, they classified themselves as foreigners by declaring themselves as such to the Nazi regime. The fact that you want to make Nazi collaborators into 'ethnic cleansing' victims when they tacitly or actively supported the greatest genocide ever is to say the least disturbing.

As I said so did many whites in South Africa. All Europeans abroad will also have blood on their hands for the atrocoties of the colonial Empires, do you also support their 'forced repatriation' as the National Front would say about ethnic minorities in England.

The correct line (not the full socialist line but a moderate one) would be to support a fair division of property and take punitive action against those who resist.

Black Dagger

30th January 2009, 00:55

The fact that you want to make Nazi collaborators into 'ethnic cleansing' victims when they tacitly or actively supported the greatest genocide ever is to say the least disturbing.

So every single person who was expelled were nazi collaborators? I really doubt this process of expulsion was as well informed and precise as you suggest. Certainly there were devout nazis involved, but all of them? Millions upon millions of 'nazi collaborators'? Is there a difference between a german citizen who didn't resist the nazi regime and a nazi collaborator?

Devrim

30th January 2009, 08:54

So every single person who was expelled were nazi collaborators?

Yes, including, for example, the baby that was taken from its pram, thrown off a bridge, and shot at, in one infamous incident in the Czechoslovakia. Actually, incident is the wrong word. Anti-German pogrom is the right one.

Devrim

Demogorgon

30th January 2009, 14:17

I agree with Devrim here. The expulsion of Germans issue has some difficulty attached because Nazi apologists like to use it as a means to detract from the Holocaust and other Nazi crimes. They make the absurd argument that the expulsion of Germans makes the Holocaust a somewhat lesser evil, a bit like how if both sides do terrible things in war, you can't really claim either side has the moral high ground. Of course claiming that a second act of ethnic cleansing makes the first one okay has to be one of the most absurd arguments you are ever going to hear, but nonetheless it is used.

This makes people with no time for such apologists get angry whenever the issue is brought up, but that isn't right. We have to look at this act on its own merits. To claim that people of German ethnicity deserved it because of the crimes of other Germans is sickening. The notion that all Germans in Eastern Europe supported the Nazis is appalling. Failing to resist, especially when the consequences of doing so were so brutal, is not the same as offering support. Of course they received preferential treatment as Germans, that isn't in doubt, we all know what the Nazi regime was about, but that justifies confiscating ill-gotten gains after the war, not ethnic cleansing.

Are we going to say that Germans belong only in Germany? Many of the Germans in Eastern Europe had been there since long before the thirties. There were some three million in Czechoslovakia for instance and plenty in Poland also. A lot of German territory had been taken away at Versailles, but the Germans living there weren't expelled, hence there were large German populations in Eastern Europe. It wasn't their fault that the Nazis made use of them as a propaganda tool and expelling them after the Second World War was not justified.

And let us not forget that many were expelled from Germany itself. The Soviet Union wanted to shrink the borders of Eastern Germany to transfer a lot of territory to Poland. Officially as war reparations, but actually to compensate for the Soviet Union annexing much of Poland's Eastern Territory. Now you can argue about the justification for that, the issue of where borers should lie isn't one I want to get into, but what certainly was not justified was expelling most of the Germans who lived there. They wanted Poland to be ethnically Polish. Is that the sort of thing Communists should be supporting?

There was plenty of other crimes committed by the Soviets after the war of course. The treatment of German POWs was outrageous. People are people regardless of how their Government might have behaved. Prescribing "Blood Guilt" upon them was outrageous.

ComradeOm

30th January 2009, 17:56

I'm sure many decent people were swept along with the Nazi regeime and supported itThere is no such thing as a good Nazi. Anyone who was "swept along" with the Nazis would have been would have been openly endorsing a programme of racial discrimination and genocidal hatred. You may be willing to consider such a person to be "decent" - indeed the "swept away" excuse was extremely popular amongst post-war bureaucrats eager to secure a place in the new West German government - and that alone speaks volumes

All this was particularly true in the eastern territories of Prussia (particularly Pomerania, Silesia, and East Prussia where NSDAP support was much higher than the national average) which formed something of a Nazi stronghold. The peasantry and landowners of the region were solidly conservative and as a class were implacably opposed to democratic practices, a trend that goes back to their domination of the Prussian Landtag in Imperial Germany. These eastern provinces were also unique in that they contained large Polish minorities. These had suffered in the Weimar Republic but under Nazi Gleichschaltung laws the oppression was taken to new levels. Anti-Polish campaigns, conducted by local officials, were very public. Once the Nazis had arrived at the decision to effectively purge these provinces of their Polish minorities there was simply no way that the wider population could have been unaware of the new extermination camps

I don't necessarily support the post-war expulsions but there can be no question that the populations of these territories were fully aware of, and in many cases benefited from, the atrocities committed against their Jewish and Polish neighbours

Sure war criminals should be punished, but what about members of the German army, even the Waffen SS wasn't full of hardcore nazi psychopaths. A sensible line needs to be made on which to judge people from, not your usual line of hysterical pointing and screaming 'nazi'Ah, so you are openly a Nazi apologist. The collaboration of the Wehrmacht in Hitler's genocidal campaigns* is well documented (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht). German soldiers of all ranks were intimately involved in the planning and execution of the Holocaust and carried out countless other atrocities against civilian populations (http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/USSR4.htm). This went far beyond 'individual actions' and blame can only be allocated at an institutional level

Your defence of the Waffen SS is even more baffling. Here was the very epitome of a thoroughly politicised army awash with concepts of martial and racial superiority. Its guilt in a staggering number of atrocities, many relating to the Holocaust, has been well documented (some examples, here (http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/holocaust/h-einz-42.htm), here (http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/imt/tgmwc/judgment/j-accused-organisations-04-02.html), here (http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-20/tgmwc-20-195-08.shtml)) to the extent that it, and other SS elements, were ruled to be a criminal organisation at Nuremberg. The only good thing about the SS was that relatively few of its members were taken alive

*A poor label considering that this was the work of tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of Germans rather than a single Austrian. For example, the infamous Hunger Plan - which called for the mass starvation of tens of millions of Jews, Poles, and Slavs - was originally devised by Nazi politicians but was enthusiastically championed and implemented by the Wehrmacht

It wasn't their fault that the Nazis made use of them as a propaganda toolYou're aware that the Sudetendeutsche Heimatfront, essentially pan-Germanic fascists, received over 60% of the German vote in the 1935 Czech elections? By 1938 they were pushing extremely hard for integration into the German state. Don't try to make out that these were innocent bystanders

Lynx

31st January 2009, 02:53

Was the exodus of Germans from Yugoslavia voluntary?
It does seem to have been the sensible thing to do, especially for Germans living in what is now Croatia.

Holden Caulfield

1st February 2009, 14:16

There is no such thing as a good Nazi. Anyone who was "swept along" with the Nazis would have been would have been openly endorsing a programme of racial discrimination and genocidal hatred. You may be willing to consider such a person to be "decent" - indeed the "swept away" excuse was extremely popular amongst post-war bureaucrats eager to secure a place in the new West German government - and that alone speaks volumes
How very materialist, all these former SPD members just became evil fascists and the material circumstances had nothing to do with it, all those youngsters born in the 1920's+ and had known nothing much more than Nazi propaganda, and indoctrination through school and youth clubs. All these people were evil bastards. And so if you were a German communist there was no hope as the working classes were evil *boo hiss* and so trying to educate and push for socialism was impossible as long as these people lived.

Do you want to know why i often come in these thread tothe apparent 'defence of nazi/members of the BNP'? it is because where I come from working class politics is the BNP, and if I hold the ignorant as fuck position that these people are some how evil 'fascists' and that all of them have flicked a switch in their heads and they have gone from mislead members of the working class to 'generic nazis', then i would probably give up politics all together and go live under a rock with my fingers in my ears.

Luckily i am a Marxist, and so take an objective and material approach to my politics, I feel that material conditions and the effects of the bourgeois media can push the working classes into reactionary views to defend the 'bourgeois state'. And feel it is my duty to my class and to history to try and push for a leftist alternative, to educate, to fight (if necessary) fascist agression and to argue my case, not merely look down from my tower of enlightenment screaming 'nazi!' at the ignorant masses of the working class like some middle class UAF wanker.

I would also suppose that our families are also some type of capitalist/imperialist bastards as well, and it is their own fault for upholding the system, for fighting for imperialism and for opressing the colonials through proxy?

The peasantry and landowners of the region were solidly conservative and as a class were implacably opposed to democratic practices,
As they were in Russia, might I also add all supporters of Lenin must have the crimes of Stalinism put on them as well by your logic.

Ah, so you are openly a Nazi apologist.
No but I suppose I have some faith in humanity, and I don't get hysterical about things. Rather than use broad sweeping statement i feel that crimes should be punished, I do not feel that entire social groups should be the victim of mass genocidal for revenge. The Wehrmacht and even those in the Waffen-SS were primarily soldiers, yes terrible atrocoties were committed and people should be brough to justice, but there is the fact that many will have fought for their country in the same way many on the Allies side fought for theirs, not for nazism and not for imperialism or capitalism.

Your defence of the Waffen SS is even more baffling

Well for started the majority of the SS have gallons of blood on their hands, they were made up mostly of brainwashed fanatics, and nazis from outside Germany, but there was elements in the SS who were not committed nazis but who joined as it was the elite regiment, my dad knows a guy who was in the Waffen-SS who he works with, and he joined as he wanted to prove himselve, get better rations and better prestige, which is common is armies all across the planet.

The Russian soldiers and the German soldiers on the eastern front committed artocoties, as both dehumanised their enemy, something you see keen on. How abouts we judge with some objectivity and do not commit the entire German population to historical damnation just yet.

I do not defend anybody who is guilty, i do not defend nazis, I do support an objective marxist position when dealing with such matters, and I do not allow emotion to drag me to a hysterical fever pitch where i make broad sweeping statements and dehumanise an entire people.

The hardest part of being mod of the antifa forum was keeping my cool with people who act like 13 year old anti-fascists, like yourself, and who lack objectivity, rationality, and any sort of Marxist approach to very complicated and sensitive matters.

ComradeOm

1st February 2009, 16:04

How very materialist, all these former SPD members just became evil fascists and the material circumstances had nothing to do with it, all those youngsters born in the 1920's+ and had known nothing much more than Nazi propaganda, and indoctrination through school and youth clubs. All these people were evil bastards. And so if you were a German communist there was no hope as the working classes were evil *boo hiss* and so trying to educate and push for socialism was impossible as long as these people lived.

Do you want to know why i often come in these thread tothe apparent 'defence of nazi/members of the BNP'? it is because where I come from working class politics is the BNP, and if I hold the ignorant as fuck position that these people are some how evil 'fascists' and that all of them have flicked a switch in their heads and they have gone from mislead members of the working class to 'generic nazis', then i would probably give up politics all together and go live under a rock with my fingers in my ears.

Luckily i am a Marxist, and so take an objective and material approach to my politics, I feel that material conditions and the effects of the bourgeois media can push the working classes into reactionary views to defend the 'bourgeois state'. And feel it is my duty to my class and to history to try and push for a leftist alternative, to educate, to fight (if necessary) fascist agression and to argue my case, not merely look down from my tower of enlightenment screaming 'nazi!' at the ignorant masses of the working class like some middle class UAF wankerAll very impassioned but completely irrelevant to the points I made. I can only wonder if you read my post at all. For your sake I'll spell it out again but I have to emphasise that this is not a discussion about BNP on the streets of some Birmingham/Bradford/wherever but a discussion about the NSDAP in East Prussia. Now you may feel the need to conflate the two to make some moral point but I prefer to address the situation at hand. That's because I'm a Marxist and thus concerned with making the correct historical/class analysis

As I said, the whole point is that we are not talking about Berlin or Hamburg or your hometown. We are discussing the eastern provinces of Germany in the years prior to and following WWII. Instead of simply assuming that everyone was a SPD worker duped into following Hitler (and simply tarring everybody with the same brush) I'll elaborate slightly on the class composition of these provinces. The first point to note is that, with the exception of Silesia* and the odd city, these were overwhelmingly rural areas dominated by large estates and small towns. These were the strongholds of the Junkers (peasantry and landowners) and Nazis (petite-bourgeoisie and peasantry) respectively. There was a very strong tradition of openly reactionary politics in the region as its various classes (of which the urban proletariat was a decided minority) remained unreconciled with liberal, socialist, or even conservative parties

To understand the class composition of these provinces, and their role in history, you have to go back to when the Junkers got a taste of power in Imperial Germany which was not a unitary state. Rather the Empire was comprised of a number of semi-independent states nominally unified within the Reich. These maintained their own political customs, Bavaria for example kept its king until 1918. While the socialists of the SPD did well at Reich-level elections, their political ambitions were restrained by conservative dominance of the state of Prussia. This was of course the leading member state of the Empire and totalled over 50% of the Empire's land and population. Its veto/power was in turn controlled by the Prussian Landtag which, unlike the Reich elections, did not operate under the principles of universal suffrage and was effectively rigged to favour the extremely powerful agricultural lobby of East Prussia

Now when the Reich did collapse much of the influence was lost in the Weimar Republic. It is no surprise therefore that the peasantry and landowners of East Prussia remained opposed - to a degree unimaginable in today's Germany and akin to the response of the 19thC French right to the Third Republic - to the democratic practices of the Republic. It was in these eastern provinces that the notorious Freikorps were primarily raised, funded, and active. It was also amongst these reactionary classes that the monarchist and fascist parties, most notably the DNVP and NSDAP counted some of their strongest supporters

The point of this little history lesson is to demonstrate that a) I'm not talking about the BNP or any modern movement, and that b) the overwhelming class interest of these regions was diametrically opposed to democracy, toleration, or any progressive ideology. Nor is it a coincidence that many of the most radical demands of the Nazi regime originated with this peasant lobby (Herbert Backe, Nazi Minister for Agriculture drafted the genocidal Hunger Plan mentioned in my previous post and was a central figure of the Nazi regime). This is not because many SPD members were suddenly joining the Nazis but because there were so few SPD members in these regions in the first place! Indeed, and as an aside, the German proletariat remained largely, if not entirely, immune to the Nazi election programme

Were some good workers amongst those expelled following WWII? Undoubtedly. I obviously don't endorse that. However the fact remains that these few did not characterise the politics of the region and were unquestionably in a distinct minority

*Itself an exception in that the demographics showed an almost equal split in the Polish-German population.

I would also suppose that our families are also some type of capitalist/imperialist bastards as well, and it is their own fault for upholding the system, for fighting for imperialism and for opressing the colonials through proxy?Speak for yourself. My grandfather fought British imperialism

As they were in Russia, might I also add all supporters of Lenin must have the crimes of Stalinism put on them as well by your logicWhat? This statement makes no sense. Explain please

No but I suppose I have some faith in humanity, and I don't get hysterical about things. Rather than use broad sweeping statement i feel that crimes should be punished, I do not feel that entire social groups should be the victim of mass genocidal for revengeNow who is being hysterical? The only power that indulged in mass genocide during this period was Nazi Germany and the only person that is defending those organisations involved is you

But I've noted your attempt to establish equivalence between the expulsions from East Prussia and the Holocaust. This is a standard Neo-Nazi tactic intended to a) arouse sympathy for the 'German race', b) suggest that the various Allies were no more morally correct than the Nazi regime. I'm not suggesting they you've done this intentionally but perhaps you've spent too much time listening to the BNP or other fascist apologists?

The Wehrmacht and even those in the Waffen-SS were primarily soldiers, yes terrible atrocoties were committed and people should be brough to justice, but there is the fact that many will have fought for their country in the same way many on the Allies side fought for theirs, not for nazism and not for imperialism or capitalismI hate to break it to you but the idea that there was some dividing line between those organisations who exterminated civilians en masse and those comprised of "primarily soldiers" is a relic of the 1950s. Its now recognised that both the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS were involved at every level in the murder of millions of civilians throughout Europe. This is not a matter of a few bad commanders or a few rogue grunts but rather a systematic campaign of destruction that involved virtually every formation in the German war machine

Now I'm sure there were some individual German soldiers who somehow managed to stay aloof of the massacres (although I'd imagine its impossible to remain ignorant of them - not when they were being openly advocated in official orders - certainly not for anyone who served on the Eastern Front) but trying to isolate these from the majority who eagerly indulged is unfortunately impossible. What we can however say, and which there is ample evidence for, is that on an institutional level both the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS were criminal organisations that openly advocated and perpetrated gross crimes against defenceless civilian populations (indeed the latter was condemned as such at Nuremberg)

This of course in no way excuses your own disgraceful apology that these soldiers were somehow innocent patriots or "brainwashed fanatics". It never occurred to you that either can still commit atrocities?

my dad knows a guy who was in the Waffen-SS who he works with, and he joined as he wanted to prove himselve, get better rations and better prestige, which is common is armies all across the planetAnd what exactly was he going to say - "I joined to kill some Jews and Slavs" :rolleyes:

Its an unfortunate fact that some people believe this bullshit. That is was somehow possible to join a hyper-militaristic organisation whose emphasis on racial supremacy was such that they only accepted recruits of 'Aryan appearance'. Not to mention the fact that the Waffen SS was an explicitly political organisation with political 'education' forming a major part of the training process and subsequent barracks life. But hey, I can't prove that your friend has no blood on his hands (well I'm sure he owns up to a few Russians, but they don't count) so he must be innocent. Its funny how so very many German soldiers, at least those around to tell of it, spent the war doing nothing more harmless than cursing Hitler and those other 'bad Germans'

I do not defend anybody who is guilty, i do not defend nazis, I do support an objective marxist position when dealing with such matters, and I do not allow emotion to drag me to a hysterical fever pitch where i make broad sweeping statements and dehumanise an entire people.

The hardest part of being mod of the antifa forum was keeping my cool with people who act like 13 year old anti-fascists, like yourself, and who lack objectivity, rationality, and any sort of Marxist approach to very complicated and sensitive matters.You are the mod of the antifa forum? And I thought the CC had no sense of humour :lol:

Let me get this straight. You are an anti-Fascist who rejects the idea that both the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS were criminal institutions that were inherently compromised by their proximity to a genocidal regime. You are a Marxist who makes no allowances for class composition/interests/history and who condones those who "fought for their country". Yeah

Devrim

1st February 2009, 16:13

But I've noted your attempt to establish equivalence between the expulsions from East Prussia and the Holocaust. This is a standard Neo-Nazi tactic intended to a) arouse sympathy for the 'German race', b) suggest that the various Allies were no more morally correct than the Nazi regime. I'm not suggesting they you've done this intentionally but perhaps you've spent too much time listening to the BNP or other fascist apologists?

I say that it was an imperialist war, and that there was no 'morally correct' side for workers to choose.

What we can however say, and which there is ample evidence for, is that on an institutional level both the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS were criminal organisations that openly advocated and perpetrated gross crimes against defenceless civilian populations (indeed the latter was condemned as such at Nuremberg)

So did bomber command and the Red Army. What is your point?

Devrim

ComradeOm

1st February 2009, 16:24

I say that it was an imperialist war, and that there was no 'morally correct' side for workers to chooseHow about the side that wasn't executing Jews and Slavs by the million?

So did bomber command and the Red Army. What is your point?Ah, whataboutism rears its ugly head again. I'll tell you what, if you can any actions by either Bomber Command or the Red Army (and I'm well aware of dehousing policies and the atrocities in East Prussia) that compares to the sheer scale of the terror, destruction, and death visited upon Poland and the USSR by the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS then I'll respond to any particular charges

Devrim

1st February 2009, 16:42

Leo

1st February 2009, 17:05

How about the side that wasn't executing Jews and Slavs by the million?

They share the responsibility of the countless massacres: http://en.internationalism.org/ir/120_holocaust.html

ComradeOm

1st February 2009, 17:13

There isn't a lot to say to that really. It isn't class politics. It is the politics of national defence taking it as far to justify massacres, and ethnic cleansing committed by your own sideNo, its accepting that one side openly endorsed genocide and bizarre theories of racial supremacy - positions unacceptable (or so you'd think) to the labour movement. Marx himself spoke out against slavery during the ACW and its disgusting to see supposed Marxists turn a blind eye to the even more heinous crimes committed by Nazi Germany

Now not once have I pretended that the Allied armies/governments were innocent of their own crimes but to suggest that these were equal in scale or character to those of the Nazis is nonsense. Its ignorance of history, betrayal of principles, and disrespectful to the memory of countless communists who died on Hitler's orders

They share the responsibility of the countless massacres: http://en.internationalism.org/ir/120_holocaust.htmlAnd that says all you need to know about the ICC

Devrim

4th February 2009, 12:23

No, its accepting that one side openly endorsed genocide and bizarre theories of racial supremacy - positions unacceptable (or so you'd think) to the labour movement.

Whereas the other did its ethnic cleansing more discreetly. Historians today believe that contrary to earlier estimates only about 12,000,000 Germans were ethnically cleansed and up to 1,000,000 more died in the process. Of course this doesn't include those ethnically cleansed by the Stalinist regime during and after the war, who include Poles, Rumanians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Chechens, Inguish, Koreans, etc. Between 1941 and 1949 3,300,000 were deported to Siberia and Central Asia.

its disgusting to see supposed Marxists turn a blind eye to the even more heinous crimes committed by Nazi Germany

Nobody has turned a 'blind eye'. There is a difference between turning a blind eye and not supporting ethnic cleansing.

Now not once have I pretended that the Allied armies/governments were innocent of their own crimes but to suggest that these were equal in scale or character to those of the Nazis is nonsense.

Even if they weren't equally in scale, would that justify the post-war ethnic cleansing?

Devrim

L.J.Solidarity

4th February 2009, 12:50

Aside from the question wether the expulsion of Germans was morally correct or not, historically speaking I'm sure it was the best thing that could happen to everyone involved (except the comparatively few who were killed, of course), as the Eastern European countries had more property to divide among less people in their stalinist/bureaucratic form of socialism while the expelled Germans were made comparatively rich in virtually no time thanks to US economic aid.
I also think sending the ethnic Germans literally "heim ins Reich" has helped prevent fascism from growing much stronger than it actually did in postwar Germany, as without German minorities in other countries there wasn't much to annex/"liberate" from the evil eastern european "communists". The expelled people formed a fascist(oid) party and where represented in parliament in the 50s and 60s, but they failed to gain influence outside their own community and shrunk away by natural courses fairly quickly.

Devrim

4th February 2009, 13:37

Bilan

4th February 2009, 13:47

And that says all you need to know about the ICC

what, that they're not going to ignore the crimes of imperialist nations just because they fought Nazis? Or because they wont side with either bourgeois state, and stick to the correct line for communists?
I suppose it says a lot more about you, in the negative sense.

Holden Caulfield

4th February 2009, 22:57

what, that they're not going to ignore the crimes of imperialist nations just because they fought Nazis? Or because they wont side with either bourgeois state, and stick to the correct line for communists?
I suppose it says a lot more about you, in the negative sense.

Lets keep perspective here, it is possible to think Left Communism is a dumb ideology and still hold a correct communist line on this issue.

This isn't just the usual left communists vs. the world thread, this is sensible materialists vs. dumb hysterical users thread.

Devrim

5th February 2009, 11:29

Lets keep perspective here, it is possible to think Left Communism is a dumb ideology and still hold a correct communist line on this issue.

This isn't just the usual left communists vs. the world thread, this is sensible materialists vs. dumb hysterical users thread.

Holden, he is not a left communist. What are you talking about?

The question he is was ethnic cleansing justified after the war. There is a secondary question of were both sides reactionary during the war, and could workers support one imperialist camp or the other*.

One this question, yes it is left communists verses the world. The communist left was the only Marxist** current to hold to an internationalist position during the Second World War. All of the others ended up in the camps of the imperialists.

Devrim

*It seems a bit bizarre to put it like this as the majority of the leftists supported the allies. However, I think that there was at least one Trotskyist group that supported the Germans.

**Some anarchists also opposed WWII.

Holden Caulfield

5th February 2009, 11:42

Holden, he is not a left communist. What are you talking about?

ComOm attacked the ICC, i was pointing out that your position, the correct position, isn't some exclusively an ICC position

Devrim

5th February 2009, 11:45

You are right. Of course it isn't. It is the internationalist position and is held by all of the left communist groups and some anarchists. To my knowledge it is diametrically opposed to the position of virtually every Trotskyist group though.

Devrim

Holden Caulfield

5th February 2009, 11:57

my bad I was meaning the entire argument, about being nice to nazis and such lark:cool:

gimme a break ive had a rough night

ComradeOm

5th February 2009, 12:31

Whereas the other did its ethnic cleansing more discreetly. Historians today believe that contrary to earlier estimates only about 12,000,000 Germans were ethnically cleansed and up to 1,000,000 more died in the process. Of course this doesn't include those ethnically cleansed by the Stalinist regime during and after the war, who include Poles, Rumanians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Chechens, Inguish, Koreans, etc. Between 1941 and 1949 3,300,000 were deported to Siberia and Central Asia.Fine. You want to play the numbers game? Its not the same as any real analysis into either Nazi Germany or the Allies but you've already proven yourself incapable of that

Jews: 5.9 million
Soviet POWs: 2–3 million
Ethnic Poles: 1.8–2 million
Roma: 220,000–500,000
Disabled: 200,000–250,000
Freemasons: 80,000–200,000
Homosexuals: 5,000–15,000
Jehovah's Witnesses: 2,500–5,000

Note that this list is limited to those killed in Nazi camps or Jews who had the misfortune to encounter Einsatzgruppen. It does not include the 10m plus Soviet civilians killed by the Wehrmacht and other German institutions

Now if you can look at that list and honestly claim that Nazi Germany was no worse than any other bourgeois government at the time... well then I suggest that you go BEEP yourself. Certainly I want nothing more to do with the likes of you

what, that they're not going to ignore the crimes of imperialist nations just because they fought Nazis? Or because they wont side with either bourgeois state, and stick to the correct line for communists?
I suppose it says a lot more about you, in the negative sense.Did you actually read either the article or my posts? I ask because if you'd read the latter you'd see that I in no way condone or endorse the Allied crimes, nor do I deny their existence, but rather deny that they were of the same scale or nature as that of the Nazi regime. If you read the former, and actually agree with that tripe, then you're an idiot. Sorry, but there's no way to sugarcoat that. I hoped that it wouldn't come to this but I guess I'd better shovel through this shite… so let's summarise these bizarre charges

First up. The Allies knew about the existence of the camps but suppressed the information. As a charge this doesn't really amount to much except that the article makes a fantastic leap of logic - the Allies knew about the camps and purposefully did nothing so that they would have less mouths to feed. Of course the author studiously avoids mentioning just what the Allies could have done. Send Rambo in? Bomb the camps like they bombed Hamburg? Airlift "several hundred thousand" inmates out of Central and Eastern Europe? Or perhaps some maintain a costal blockade along the entire European coast in order to scoop up the odd refugee ship?

(Incidentally I can't find a copy of the source 'The Desertion of the Jews' on either Amazon or Google Books. Capitalist conspiracy or irrelevant crack – you decide!)

The second charge is the infamous Blood for Goods deal in which Himmler attempted to get Allied attention by bartering Jews for trucks. There's plenty of legitimate debate on these events which has always been controversial (its hardly a new revelation) but the real crux of the issue here is that the Allies never pretended to be fighting for "humanitarian considerations". Sure, democracy, the American Way, blah blah, but never for the Jews. The objective of the Western and Soviet governments was simply to win the war as quickly as possible. From this perspective the decision to reject the deal – which was never realistic, Hitler would never consent to freeing a million Jews – is understandable, if not perhaps forgiveable. Its also worthwhile noting that by 1943 the German extermination machine had reached its peak and had already claimed the majority of its victims

But what is so unforgivable about that article is not the shoddy scholarship (completely ignoring, for example, the 1938 Evian conference) or out of context quotes but the ridiculously idea that even if the above charges were entirely true the Allied governments were equally responsible for the deliberate and industrial-scale extermination of over ten million defenceless persons. That is, that the programmes of racial supremacy, mass starvation, deliberate liquidation that were initiated, implemented, eagerly supported by the Nazis, as a result of their virulent ideology of racial supremacy, are somehow the responsibility of the Allied governments. That London, Washington, and Moscow, while no saints themselves, share equal responsibility for a horrific programme that they were completely uninvolved in

Frankly that entire article is a disgrace and nothing but an exceedingly crude ideological effort to paint both sides as identical. This is the typical ICC black-on-black worldview that refuses point blank to differentiate between capitalist regimes. As a result their analyses lack anything even approaching nuance and leads to such desperate attempts to paint all bourgeois everywhere as identical. Normally this is highly frustrating but when it comes to their defence of Nazism – naturally completely void of any structural analysis of the German war economy or political superstructure - its nothing but sickening

Or because they wont side with either bourgeois state, and stick to the correct line for communists?I suppose that Marx was not a communist because he supported the bourgeois Union in the ACW? :rolleyes:

Leo

5th February 2009, 13:10

well then I suggest that you go fuck yourself.Flaming is not allowed on RevLeft, consider this a verbal warning for flaming.

The communist left was the only Marxist** current to hold to an internationalist position during the Second World War.I want to add a small side note here. Some groups, like the Internationalist Communist Group around Aghis Stinas in Greece, The Internationalist group of Zheng Chaolin in China, Revolutionaire Kommunisten Deutschlands in Germany-Austria, Marx-Lenin-Luxemburg Front in Holland, by the Grandizo Munis-Natalia Sedova tendency among others, coming from the left opposition, opposed the position of the Fourth International and eventually split and distanced themselves from Trotskyism, in a sense following the example of the irreconcilables of the Russian left opposition. These groups nevertheless did come close to the positions of the communist left and some even became left communists themselves.

Edelweiss

5th February 2009, 13:20

I really don't give a fuck about the expulsion, it was a logical consequence of German aggression and war crimes.

The only one who serves this whining about it, are the nationalist, revaunchist associations of the German "vetriebenen".

However, to say that all Germans who had to suffer from the expulsions have been Nazis and therefore deserved it, is really plain idiocy!

Devrim

5th February 2009, 13:26

Fine. You want to play the numbers game? Its not the same as any real analysis into either Nazi Germany or the Allies but you've already proven yourself incapable of that

Jews: 5.9 million
Soviet POWs: 2–3 million
Ethnic Poles: 1.8–2 million
Roma: 220,000–500,000
Disabled: 200,000–250,000
Freemasons: 80,000–200,000
Homosexuals: 5,000–15,000
Jehovah's Witnesses: 2,500–5,000

No, it isn't about a numbers game though if it were you could include massive things such as the 3 million who died in the Bengal famine as a direct result of allied policy, and the half a million killed by US bombing of Japan including Hiroshima and Nagasaki going down to the 'small' things like the massacre of over 20,000 Polish prisoners by the Red Army.

There is no real moral difference between murdering one million or six million. All of the imperialist powers were fighting for their own interests, all of them massacred workers, and none of them had anything 'progressive' to offer the working class.

The main point of this thread though is actually the massacres and ethnic cleansing that took place after the end of the war that you are justifying.

Devrim

Devrim

5th February 2009, 13:29

I really don't give a fuck about the expulsion, it was a logical consequence of German aggression and war crimes.

However, to say that all Germans who had to suffer from the expulsions have been Nazis and therefore deserved it, is really plain idiocy!

This is a step away from saying that the Germans were collectivity guilty and deserved it, some sort of blood guilt.

Devrim