Talk:Expulsion of Germans after World War II/Archive1

Early discussion

To M123

I do not understand your point in reverting my changes, since the article includes some false informations.

AM

I'd like to see a source for the following (deleted) sentence:

The true aim was the plan by the Soviet Union and its satellite states to overtake as many countries as they could get away with.

I'm always interested in uncovering the true motivations of sneaky underhanded people who are trying to exploit others. user:H.J., if it was you who wrote the above, please supply the source so I can put it back in. Ed Poor

To User:Ed Poor. I just came across this. Here are some interesting websites: Truman library;[[1] (http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/BERLIN_A/BOC.HTM)] and [[2] (http://www.omnibusol.com/wcessay4.html#Section1)] There were also meetings and conferences of the Communist leaders of all European countries in the early 1930's at Moscow. I do not have a direct link to it, but when I come across it, I will let you know.

Need to state again, that under Truman a number of previous administration highest ranking US officials and policy makers were exposed as Communists and were quietly retired by Truman. Interestingly, my wikipedia start on this subject also quietly disappeared.

I just found out too, that all the so-called 'evidence' presented at the Nuremberg trials was furnished by Soviets, who made up much of the evidence.

No wonder so many people wish to keep it all under the rug. user:H.J.

I think this sentence is controversial and needs clarification :

Some allege that the purpose of this policy was to punish Germany for its actions during World War II and to create ethnically homogenous nations.

1. Who is "Some" ? We should name them.
2. Is there any support for this passage in any historical documents if not it should go away.
3. Besides, it IS natural consequence of the war started by Hitler. In this passage however there's implication that Hitler was great because he wanted prosperous Third Reich for Germans and the Allies were bad because they did not leave Germans alone after their defeat

Kpjas

user:H.J. -- I think you should be glad you live in the US. If you lived in Germany today, much of what you say might be construed as denying the Holocaust, which is illegal under German law. Ironic, isn't it?

The evidence came from German records. Many of those records had been in Soviet hands because the Soviet army liberated those cities and concentration camps. Furthermore, you have just called my grandmother and grandfather liars: I know about the Holocaust from their reporting of their own experience. Apologize. Now. Vicki Rosenzweig 12:33 Aug 22, 2002 (PDT)

--- I just found out too, that all the so-called 'evidence' presented at the Nuremberg trials was furnished by Soviets, who made up much of the evidence. No wonder so many people wish to keep it all under the rug. user:H.J.

• You know, I've stayed out of the Great user:H.J. Correction Squad because others had more knowledge of the subjects than I and were doing a better job. (Thanks, JHK and others!) But I happen to have a decent amount of information on Holocaust revisionism and its many errors of fact and logic. If things keep going in this direction I'll have to join the GHJC Squad pronto. For starters, Vicki is correct: most of the most damning evidence was from German records, and some of those were captured by the US as well as the Soviets. I growl at those trying to add non-science to science articles; kindly apply accepted techniques of historical verification before trying to add material to history articles. -- April

I showed an interesting documentary to my students -- although user:H.J. would probably say it was fabricated. It was a documentary made by the US Army at the time of the liberations. What was really amazing to me was that, at one mental hospital where the mentally ill and disabled were executed/euthanized, sometimes after experimentation, death certificates were issued and kept on file by the officials running the institution! There was a concrete paper trail for the Allies to follow. I'm sure that this must have been true for many institutions, and believe that records were also kept for some of the camps until the great push to eliminate the evidence as the Allied troops gained ground. Another interesting thing shown was the inhabitants of a neighboring town (I think near Hanover, but cant be sure) brought in by the US and British commanders in charge of the camp liberation. The civilians, mostly women, came in with smiles on their faces, clearly thinking that the silly Allies were gooing to try to make them believe something untrue about their government. It then showed these civilians as they saw the camp -- beginning with lampshades made to order for an SS commandant's wife from human skin, and then past mass graves (uncovered) and then survivors. Two things were clear -- these people had no concept of what was going on, and that they would be the first to tell you that the Holocaust had happened -- no fabrication of evidence by the Allies. JHK

I'm sorry I came into this so late. I was busy at work today working with testimonies from American GIs who liberated concentration camps. user:H.J.'s claim is too ludicrous for any comment. The fact that some (or even much) evidence was brought by the Soviets does not mean that the evidence is false. If, however, other corroborative evidence is necessary for you, user:H.J., I will be happy to provide you with enough British and American testimonies to keep you quite busy. Danny

There is little doubt in my mind that Stalin had strong desires to punish Germany, in fact to an extent that seemed rather incredible to Churchill. What I do not understand about Heimatvertriebene -whose plight I deplore even though my family was on the other end of the dispute- is that even after all these years they still cannot see the real culprit of their demise : der grosse Irrefuehrer Adolf Hitler. Without him they would still have lived quite happily in Koenigsberg or whatever. User:JCWF

For those interested in the subject, a google search on Alfred de Zayas will turn up an interesting speech that he gave, as well as links to other books, articles, and discussions of his work. What we should note is that deZayas provides context in his speech, at least, and points out that first, the policy of expulsion was really one begun by Hitler, and second, that the legality of the situation was very sketchy, although his conclusion is that the expulsion of the Germans would have to qualify as a crime against humanity (he's a UN specialist on international law). He also praises the victims for their willingness to accept their change in circumstances and to work peacefully in the new West Germany. JHK

To Vicki,

I just read your note and first off let me tell you, that I am truly sorry and feel very bad about whatever happened to your family on any other family for that matter.

About 'the evidence' and 'the Soviet army liberated those cities and concentration camps, etc'

I am very sorry that I have to disagree with your official version of "cleansed history" or whatever you want to call this.

I am also sorry that you feel the need to deny the history established by a huge variety of evidence, including eyewitness testimony and German records. I am not, however, willing to grant your falsehoods because you call the truth "official" and "cleansed." There is nothing clean about the history of the Holocaust. Vicki Rosenzweig

I know this official politically correct version is written in many books. It is nevertheless a very sick and twisted statement, in light of what really went on. A glimpse of this might be read in John Sack's book "An Eye for an Eye" , http://www.amazon.com or http://www.google.com : John Sack for his own website.

Only 100% communists might truly believe this liberation bit. People, such as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who was in the Soviet military, saw what was really being done. He dared to oppose and was put in Gulag for it.

I have never spoken to or of, nore ever mentioned your grandparents and have never called them a liar. I do not doubt what your grandparents said for the simple reason that I have no idea what they said .

user:H.J.

They told me about the Holocaust. They told me about having their store and personal property taken from them because they were Jewish. They told me about fleeing from Germany, and spending the war hiding in France after the Germans invaded. My grandfather wasn't a Communist: he was a decent, honest German shopkeeper. A decent, honest German Jewish shopkeeper.

You like books, so here's a reference: _Shattered Crystals_, by Mia Amalia Kanner and Eve Rosenzweig Kugler. CIS Publishers, Lakewood, NJ. ISBN 1-56062-317-9. You can get it from Amazon if your library doesn't have it.

Oh, and while I'm glad you've finally learned to spell my first name, my username is User:Vicki Rosenzweig.

To User:Vicki Rosenzweig

I will be glad to look for your family history book and I am anxious to read about your relative's experiences.

I can understand that you are very sensitive about anything having to do with events that brought you here.

I am going to post here again the text of the messages between Ed Poor and myself. When you read this through , calmly, you will see that we were talking or rather writing about events done by Soviets Communists, and about the take-over of German land and the expulsion of Germans and in no way talked about anything else.

I already read it. You dismissed huge mountains of real documents and other evidence because they had been in Soviet hands. Yes, the Soviet Union was expansionist. So was the German empire that you valorize. So were the US and Great Britain. That doesn't mean that what they report didn't happen. Vicki Rosenzweig

user:H.J.

The true aim was the plan by the Soviet Union and its satellite states to overtake as many countries as they could get away with. I'm always interested in uncovering the true motivations of sneaky underhanded people who are trying to exploit others. user:H.J., if it was you who wrote the above, please supply the source so I can put it back in. Ed Poor

To Ed Poor. I just came across this. Here are some interesting websites: Truman library;1 and 2 There were also meetings and conferences of the Communist leaders of all European countries in the early 1930's at Moscow. I do not have a direct link to it, but when I come across it, I will let you know. Need to state again, that under Truman a number of previous administration highest ranking US officials and policy makers were exposed as Communists and were quietly retired by Truman. Interestingly, my wikipedia start on this subject also quietly disappeared.

I just found out too, that all the so-called 'evidence' presented at the Nuremberg trials was furnished by Soviets, who made up much of the evidence.

No wonder so many people wish to keep it all under the rug. user:H.J.

user:H.J., if you can't see the connection between what you said and how all of the rest of us took it, I am truly sorry for you. Apparently, you just don't get it. JHK

The evidence came from German records. Many of those records had been in Soviet hands because the Soviet army liberated those cities and concentration camps. Furthermore, you have just called my grandmother and grandfather liars: I know about the Holocaust from their reporting of their own experience. Apologize. Now. Vicki Rosenzweig 12:33 Aug 22, 2002 (PDT)

I just found out too, that all the so-called 'evidence' presented at the Nuremberg trials was furnished by Soviets, who made up much of the evidence. No wonder so many people wish to keep it all under the rug. user:H.J.

user:H.J. --

As i said above, you are damned lucky to be living in the States, because in Germany, you might be liable for prosecution as a Holocaust denier. The only sick and twisted person around here is you. If you look back over months of working on this site, you will find that people have continually objected to the fact that you have no earthly idea how to read sources critically and how to interpret information in ways acceptable to people who actually do know these things.

You are absolutely correct that the plight of the Heimatvertriebene is something more people should know about. This is normal in history -- new things come to light after many years, and historians examine the evidence and help integrate it into a larger picture.

HOWEVER -- you are absolutely wrong to try to compare it to the Holocaust in any way. You are also wrong to try to discuss it without judging it in the context of the time. This was not just a horrible Soviet plan carried out by Poles who wanted to take away Prussia's land, which is what you seem to be saying. One of your sources, de Zayas, even says that the forced expulsion and massacre of ethnic populations was something begun by the Germans, and that the expulsion of ethnic Germans has much to do with retribution. He doesn't say it was right, but he also doesn't try to present a one-sided, Germans were the greatest victims, picture.

This last is what you do. You cannot seem to be able to look at issues from more than your viewpoint. Your sources are often questionable. Even when you do present facts that are correct, you interpret them in ways that no legitimate historian would conceive. This means, that however noble your intent, you often imply things that are incorrect and even lies. Because of this, no one can take the issues seriously, and you come off as being someone stuck in Bismarck's (and occasionally Hitler's) Germany. Either try to work with us and apologize to Vicki (that was no apology -- it implies that her grandparents could have been lying, but you don't know), or leave.JHK

I think it's time for Frau user:H.J. to find another place to peddle her nonsense. -- Zoe

To User:Vicki Rosenzweig

Again, let me state, that the discussion with Ed Poor was about the intentions of the Soviet Union in their take-over of as many countries as they could get away with. For text , which affirms that same motive , read the Truman library web site, which I have posted above. I will also post it on the subject page. Neither Ed, nore I had discussed any other topic.

You are the one that mentioned the holocaust. Since John Sack's book An Eye for an Eye talks about Polish Soviet take-over of Silesia, I am entering this here also. For John Sack's website see: http://www.johnsack.com/about_john_sack.htm and http://www.johnsack.com/dictionary_of_literary_biography_an_eye_for_an_eye.htm

His socalled enormously controversial and provocative statements are actually very careful and timid statement of facts. The truth is much worth. There were the same number of camps, the same brutal murders of ethnic civilian Germans by Czechoslowakians and both the Polish and Czech brutality was mild compared to the Soviet Russian Army. I have to also tell you at the same time, that among Polish, Russians and Lithuanians, there were a lot of good people also, who did their best to help. To this day there are people, who were hidden as orphaned German children in land overrun by Soviets and they were raised by Russians, Poles or Lithuanians. They were old enough to remember their real name and are now looking for surviving relatives. There is a lot on internet.

There are a lot of events, that are very inaccurately described in the official histories of the last 50 years. Why ??? Why did John Sack have such a hard time publishing his book ? As he says, he had to tell it, knowing about it and not telling about it, is wrong.

user:H.J.

No user:H.J. you were the one who brought the Holocaust into this when you said that the information at the Nuremburg trials was falsified by the Soviets. Many countries included the Soviets contributed evidence to the trials which were about German war crimes especially the Holocaust.

--rmhermen

to Rmhermen,

There were a number of people aquitted, charges dropped and their charges against them had nothing to do with the holocaust to begin with. In the case of Karl Doenitz , navy commander , even US navy commander (Nimitz ?) spoke in behalf of him. The Nuremburg trial was not only about the holocaust. But I am sorry, that my mentioning it, could be taken for mentioning the holocaust. That was not my intention. Perhaps you , or anyone else, can let me know here, if it is a standard procedure, that any mentioning of the Nuremberg trial is automatically taken as talking about the holocaust. Or is this more your personal opinion ? I will look at the answer(s), but this is the last thing I will have said about this.

Thanks for letting me know. user:H.J.

Someone removed this from genocide, but maybe it belongs here:

Soviet expulsions of Germans east of the Oder-Neisse line. Between 1945-1950 about 9 million Germans from Germany east of the Oder-Neisse line plus 9 million ethnic Germans from various parts of eastern Europe were resettled. About 2.1 million Germans died as a result of the resettlement. They included many distinct different ethnic German groups. The brutal expulsions were done by Soviet Union, Poland and Czechoslovakia's military and civilian authorities. Expulsion survivors live scattered as refugees.

Should the above be part of this expulsion article? What do you think, user:H.J.? --Ed Poor

to User:Ed Poor I think it was JHK who condensed it to what it now says. It is ok now, because it does state "that Germans living east of the Oder-Neisse line, etchnic Germans living in Poland and Sudeten-Germans in Czechoslowakia..and etchnic Germans from other easter European countries..were expelled. The article does connect to Heimatverstriebene and to Oder-Neisse line. Lets leave that part the way it is. Back to the other discussion about the Soviet take-over. I am going to post the websites here again:

Truman library;[[3] (http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/BERLIN_A/BOC.HTM)] and [[4] (http://www.omnibusol.com/wcessay4.html#Section1)] There were also meetings and conferences of the Communist leaders of all European countries in the early 1930's at Moscow. I do not have a direct link to it, but when I come across it, I will let you know.

Need to state again, that under Truman a number of previous administration highest ranking US officials and policy makers were exposed as Communists and were quietly retired by Truman.

The Soviet Communist take-over plans were a well-known fact at that time in history and they went as far as they were 'allowed' to. Please let me know after you read them, if you think that warrants re-inserting the Soviet planned take-over again.

Thanks for taking the time user:H.J.

The links to the Truman library don't say anything about Communist meetings in the 30's or about Communists in the Truman administration. What are they supposed to illustrate? What are the names of some of these Truman Communists anyway? Rmhermen 06:41 Aug 29, 2002 (PDT)

Rmhermen, I had started writing about the communists in US government before, but it all disappeared. Here are two websites: http://www.americasfuture.net/bookmonitor/2002/2002-06-30.html and the Hoover Institute http://www-hoover.stanford.edu/pubaffairs/newsletter/99summer/venona.html declassification of Venona project etc user:H.J.

user:H.J. -- do you ever actually read the websites you post and think about them? The first is what appears to be a fairly right-wing scare site -- one that actually claims that Alger hiss was the first Secretary General of the UN -- He wasn't, Trygvye Lie was.

The second deals with a similar subject, but it is clear from the small excerpt that the Professors who wrote the book see the communists in a different context, i.e., as people who thought that communism would help to ensure a better, more equitable world and were motivated by ideals. This is a far cry from your implication that there was some kind of plot to encourage and support Stalin and the Soviet governments' atrocities. JHK

JHK read Josef Stalin Stalin, one of the biggest mass murderers, is by true communists regarded as having destroyed communism user:H.J.

user:H.J. -- my point is, that, from what I understood from the article you cited, the communists in question were motivated by idealism for true communism -- it is very unclear that they knew about Stalin's atrocities or that they weould have supported them. At least, that's what the article implies. Please stop trying to teach your grandmother to suck eggs. JHK

Dear JHK, the people in Soviet Russia and other countries k n e w and experienced what Stalin and his system w a s and what he and his people d i d starting long before September 1939. Only Americans publicly profess to not have known about America's Great War Ally, dear Uncle Joe, but suddenly mysteriously found out by 1947 and immediately upon this at the very same time , started the Cold War. user:H.J.

Dear user:H.J., now you're just being sarcastic and offensive. Please stop. You don't do your case any good. My point was, that the article you cited as support for your claims was not, in fact much support. I didn't say that no one in the US knew about what was going on in the Soviet Union (although I think they knew much more about us than we did about them. What I did say was that, from the article you cited, the authors seem to think that the people you think of as backers of atrocities may have had entirely different reasons for spying, and that it isn't clear FROM THAT ARTICLE that they knew wht Stalin ws doing. Please stop. I'm tired of having to deal with personal onslaughts from you every time I ask valid questions or make valid points that are almost always evidenciary in nature. You may not realize it, but I'm one of the people who actually sympathizes with many of your goals, but not your methods. Oh, and by the way, the issue of Soviet atrocities against ethnic Germans (among others), isn't really that big a secret. My daughter says that it's part of the regular curriculum in Bavarian schools. JHK

Heimatvertriebene

Shoudn't this article be merge w/ Heimatvertriebene? --Ann O'nyme 04:52, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Please respond on Talk:Heimatvertriebene.

I wonder whether a sentence or two should be added to the article that policy of expulsion was started by Hitler. After all, he expelled about million of Poles from Greater Poland into GG, he expelled Poles from Zamojszczyzna region.. One should provide context for what happened. Szopen

Unless you can prove that the Eastern countries expelled only those Ethnic Germans who signed the volkslist and so became legal German citizens (Volksdeutsche) and not just any German, the article should say that the expelled were ethnic Germans not German citizens. Rmhermen 13:38, Oct 18, 2003 (UTC)

Why dont you prove otherwise. Many Germans from Poland that refused to get Volkslist and survived Nazis enjoyed respect of their neighbours. Have you ever heart of Polish Habsburg family, Germans of Lodz / leaders of Confederation of Polish industry and many others. I have friends that their families followed this way. By the way, who was Maximilian Kolbe if not a Pole of German descent. AM

I don't claim that all ethnic Germans were expelled. You however are claiming that only German citizens were expeled. That means you have to prove the citizenship of what a couple million people but I have to prove only one non-signer of the Volsklist was deported, transported or fled. I think I would take the odds on this one. Rmhermen 16:35, Oct 18, 2003 (UTC)

I guess discussion is pointless. Whoever signed volkslist, was considered German citizen, right? Moreover, not only ethnic Germans were expelled. A lot of so called "autochtones" (Silesians, Masurians) were expelled also, which sometimes didn't consider themselves (at that time) neither Poles, or Germans. But my quesiton remains (from other article talk): how many? 2,2 million as according to Polish official data, 10 million as quote in some other places?! szopen

According to "Siegfried Kogelfranz (Hg.): Die Vertriebenen. Reinbek b. Hamburg: Rowohlt 1985, S. 122f." about 11 Million Ethnic Germans were expulsed. You can find this figure in a document of the state of Saxony, too: http://www.sachsen.de/de/bf/staatsregierung/ministerien/smi/schwerpunkte/kulturfoerderung/download/broschuere.pdf Since large parts of Silesia and East Prussia were cleansed ethnically, 2 Million seems to be too small. But, since, 2 Million is an official Polish figure, the reason therefore is quite clear (-: 82.82.126.247 12:41, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

A reason for the small Polish figure might be, that many Germans lost their passports, to complicate their departure to Germany. For a short time they became stateless. Perhaps the Polish figure counted Germans with passports. 82.82.126.247 12:45, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Polish figure is about Germans expelled. Standard answer i've read is that majority of Germans escaped before Polish officials arrived, either escaping before Soviet army or killed by Soviet army, or evacuated by Nazis or whatever. 10-11 million is all Germans who escaped, were killed, died, or were evacuated.

Ratio of suicides, especially between women was also very high. I think reasons are quite clear. I read really, really... terrifying article about one village when all woman killed themselves when Soviet army approached village. That one which were still alive where "saved" by Soviet soldiers (cut from the line) and raped. szopen

I'll throw my two eurocents but (hopefully) without messing into the whole Shoah/good guys/bad guys issue. One major inconsistence I noticed is the assumption that the decision of expelling the Germans out of Central Europe has been taken by the Soviets. It is very often overlooked that this decision has been decided by the Big Three at Yalta conference, not by Stalin alone. Halibutt 07:24, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Following statement has been removed from article Restated it here:

Nowhere is it recorded that Germans from the Deutsche Reich or Germany were to be expelled. However Stalin's Soviet army conquered all of Germany situated east of the Oder and Western Neisse rivers and Soviet Russian and Polish communist administrations took over and expelled Germans from Germany as well.

Adding here: The Polish exile government in London was vehemently against this, but the Soviet Union under Stalin put a different communist Polish administration in the part of Germany east of the Oder and Neisse Rivers and in the actual Poland as well.

Lev Kopelev opposed the treatment of Germans in East Prussia, not Solshenitzyn: See e.g.: http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/1997/279712.shtml

Page title

Wouldn't a title "Expulsion of Germans" be more appropriate than "German expulsions"?

Yes. "German expulsions" is ambiguous, since it could also mean expulsion by Germany. ☮ Eclecticology 11:13, 2004 Feb 29 (UTC)

Could some body move this page to "Expulsion of Germans after World War II"

The general remark: if this includes expulsion after WW2, the number of expelled was not higher then 4-5 milions. If the number of expelled is put at 15 milions, it also includes evacuation, escape, emigration etc. Cautious 09:46, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

http://groups.google.de/groups?q=Lower+Silesia+expulsion&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=31705bcb.27930093%40news.netaxs.com&rnum=1

"An Allied agreement of November 1945 set the number of Germans to be transferred from Poland to either the British or Soviet occupation zones in Germany at 3.5 million. Of this total, some 1.77 million Germans were expelled from Lower Silesia (144). " 3.5 milion at most, not 15 milion. Cautious 14:16, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Yeah. Of course some people claim the nazis or the stalinists didn't kill anybody... So what? Revisionism is irrelevant. Nico 15:06, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Gentlemen, if you can't agree on which source to trust, then please leave it up to the reader. State the competing figures and which authority that supports them.
--Ruhrjung 15:59, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I think, if there were any crimes against humanity, please inform the IPN in Poland and perpetrators will be chased. Since 1990 the historical events are examined by Polish Instytut Pamieci Narodowej Institue of National Rememberance. His role is to investigate and to hunt the crimes of the past, without the difference of nationality of victims and perpetrators. In Poland, crimes motivated by the nationality of victims are nevere expired, therefore the criminals are chased for ever. In few cases, the crimes against Germans were examined. One suspected perpetrator, Salomon Morel fled the country.Cautious 21:31, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

German expulsions map

Please move your map out of Oder-Neisse line. The article is dealing only with the border. Rxpulsion please move to expulsion article. Thanks. Cautious 13:46, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Not my map, I didn't draw it. Jor 13:47, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I look at that map and I don't like it. It contains many factual errors, including 3 milion of murdered, that is obviously false. In addition, it contains partly provinces of Nazi Germany, partly Imperial Germany. Wouldn't be better to move it to consequences of Nazi Germany?? Cautious 13:52, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Obviously false? I beg to differ. The map deals with Germany, and the land lost in 1918 and then again in 1945, as any contemporary history book can show the borders are correct. As for the numbers, they are indeed very low. Jor 14:00, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

No, they are not correct. Let's discuss the issue on the talk page of the expulsion. Cautious 15:01, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

First of all. This fantastic number of 3 milion of murdered. Do you have any evidence? Cautious 15:02, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Take a look at your history books. Where do you get your fantastic number of only a few hundred thousands? Jor 15:07, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Let's start from the beginning. Do you have any evidence, that 3 milions of Germans were murdered after WW2? Cautious 15:09, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I will post it as soon as I have the links. In the mean time, do you have evidence that there were only a few hundred thousands, as you claim? Jor 15:12, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

See for example Stanislaw Schimitzek, in his 1966 book "Truth or Conjecture? German Civilian War Losses in the East.", chapter 14. His lowest figures are 800,000 to 3,200,000 dead

The West German Federal Ministry for Expellees, Refugees, and War Victims calculated the loss from 1945 to 1950 as 1,225,000 for Germany's eastern territories (according to Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, in "Nemesis at Potsdam: The Anglo-Americans and the expulsion of the Germans", 1979). The German Statistisches Bundesamt in Wiesbaden put the number at 1,339,000 for just the former eastern territories (number from Hans Schoenberg, in "Germans From The East", 1970).

The problem with those numbers is, that it includes also victims of evacuation. But at least we have number around 1.3 milion including evacuation. So there is no evidence for 3 milion Germans murdered. Cautious 15:31, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

We have evidence for 1.3–3 million indeed. Another half million at least should be added for the refugees murdered when the ships in the Baltic Sea were sunk (sources can be found if needed, but you can also do your own homework). So that gives 1.8-3 million, which was in the article before you started lowering it to a few hundred thousands. I admit the map is flawed because it adds the maybe 2/3 million murdered after WW1, but I do not have a source map for only after WW2. It is better than nothing imnsho. Jor 15:36, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Half a milion for sunk ships. Give me the list of them. The biggest I know Gustloff sunk with 5000 people. You mean Russians torpedoed 100 such a ships? No way. Besides it is already in the 1.3 milion number you gave me.Cautious 15:40, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Half a million for murdered refugee ships, and the thousands ethnic Germans killed who lived outside of the eastern territories (i.e. in pre-1919 Germany or outside). Why don't you find some counter-evidence, evidence for your incredibly low numbers? Jor 15:44, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

OK. We just have 1.3 milion including ships Prussian Holocaust, Stalingrad, Volksdeutsche etc. Were are missing 1.7 milions? According to numbers I have, 7 milion of refugees from former German East were in W. Germany. Adding 1.5 milions that stayed in Poland and 600 000 that died during evacuation, we have 9.1 milion. And German Eastern provinces had 8.8 milion before the WW2. So died 600 000 and this is proper number. Cautious 15:48, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Proper Red Army numbers, yes. Real numbers were much higher. Jor 15:49, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

OK, facts, statistics, evidence. No propganada. Cautious 15:50, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

About time. I have some business to take care off now, but when I return I'll read your evidence carefully. Jor 15:52, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The map in question

Missing image
German-losses.jpg
German losses 1919-1945


German losses after both world wars and numbers killed/expelled. Numbers are high estimates

Placing here to easily place back when dispute is over, and to try out a better caption that is acceptable to more people. Jor 15:41, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Correct caption is "German nacionalis's propaganda". Territories marked as "German" in Czechoslovakia were German exactly once in history - during Third Reich. Only sense in which they were lost by Germany is that sense, in which they returned to Germany thanks to Adolf Hitler and Munich agreement. 81.27.192.19

That holds only if you forget all about the Habsburgs and the reason the Sudetenland were claimed by the Third Reich. However, of course the figures on the map have propagandist merits.

The area marked on the map is propaganda itself. It is not a historical teritory, administrative teritory, or anything like. It is area which Hitler gained. Populations of Bohemia were never geographicaly separated. Marked border has no other meaning that measure of Nazi influence in 1938. If speaking about expulsion, marked line had only that meaning that most ethnic Czechs and some anti-Nazi Germans fled from green area in 1938. Post WW-II population tansfers/ expulsions were done from whole area of Czechoslovakia.

Austro-Hungarian empire was multi-nation state. Lands of Bohemian Crown were part of it, thats all. Under Habsburg rule land of Bohemia was still land of Bohemia, not part of Germany. Btw, dont forget that modern concept of nation and nationalism is relatively new invention.

Reasons why Sudetenland was claimed by Hitler were ideas such as Lebensraum and Drang nach Osten on one side and fact that majority of Bohemian Germans was as stupid or more stupid than other Germans, and supported Hitler and voted for Nazis.

"Brutal oppression by Czechs" is Nazi propaganda - it was very sad, when I read such statements repeated by some wikipedians. Leaders of Czechoslovakia between wars, like Masaryk were everything but nationalists. Czechoslovakia was by far the most democratic state of central Europe. Moderate German parties participated in government.

Me thinks some non-Germans ought to consider how and why pacifism became such a strong current among post-war Germans. My own conclusion is that plenty of ordinary civilians and returning soldiers felt to have gained nothing but lost tremendously much from these two wars. The non-conservative figures on the map have relevance in such a context.

Maybe. I hope many of that Germans also come to conclusion that some things which they had personaly done were bad and felt guilty. Here the map was used in other context. What I'm mainly objecting is factual content of the map, e.g. "border" of land "losses of Germany" in Czechoslovakia.

It's understandable if the neighbour peoples of the Germans suspiciously see German expansionism also in German mournings over being "the first and last victims of the Nazis" (although I do not for a second claim that this particular map has, or has not, such an origin), but it would be good if the wikipedia tried to maintain NPOV.

--Ruhrjung 15:56, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

This is not a question of POV or balanced selection of facts. In case of Czechoslovakia the line in the map epresses German nationalist's propaganda and has no other factual merit. So it should be labeled "German nationalist's propaganda" or not included.

81.27.192.19 22:16, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

While I probably agree more with you than you seem to assume (I agree for instance that the map rightfully is labled nationalist propaganda.) I would like to point out that a German loss of home is a German loss regardless of if the territory ever was under the souvereignty of any German state (and, as you surely know, many such have existed). While, for instance, the existence of Sudetenland is disputable, the existence of the Sudeten Germans is not. Nor were they any recent or transitory phenomenon. The expulsion of the Sudeten Germans thusly was a German loss (beside being a loss for the Third Reich's very deplorable policies - being a Nazi loss does not negate being a German loss).

--Ruhrjung 16:50, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You are obviously right and I thank you for such a moderate response. However, we should not forget that in many cases the German loss of home was in close relation to previous Polish, Jewish or Ukrainian loss of home. Most notably in the territories incorporated into the Reich, but also in Zamosc region and Ukraine. See the biography of Erika Steinbach, for instance...Halibutt 02:58, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

XII. ORDERLY TRANSFER OF GERMAN POPULATIONS

Nico (again...) removed some parts of this article. The most important part is switching from population transfer to ethnic cleansing (which is not a big problem, however Nico would probably say that there were millions of Germans killed during the process). However, the removal of the source text of the Allied treaty is important. Without it the article suggests that it was an independent decision of Poland, Czechoslovakia or Hungary to expell Germans, while it wasn't. What should we do about it?Halibutt 18:48, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I haven't removed anything, but I have marked the quote as a HTML comment. It does not belong in the introduction, so I have prososed to move it somewhere else.

So, I've now moved it. Hope it's to your liking.--Ruhrjung 22:24, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Basically, I'm also reverting the page because a certain user is trying to change "ethnic cleansing" to "population transfer". Imagine if I had done the same in the Holocaust article. The ethnic cleansing of the Germans is even listed an an example of ethnic cleaning in the article dealing with - exactly - ethnic cleansing. Nico 19:17, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Do not even dare to compare Holocaust, were people transfered to death camps, with the population transfer after WW2! Cautious 15:06, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I've also rewritten the first paragraph to:

Expulsion of Germans after World War II refers to the expulsion policy, by some seen as ethnic cleansing, of all ethnic Germans from the eastern parts of Germany lost after World War II, agreed to at the Potsdam Conference and undertaken by the Soviet Union and its satellite governments in Central Europe.

Honestly, I like the Wikipedia:Avoid weasel terms policy, why I not at all like the "by some seen as" wording, but this is at least an attempt to solve the situation.

--Ruhrjung 22:24, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Personally, I think Nico is right on both these points.

That's however not to say that I think he behaves right.

I would rather suggest that we commit the issue of how to best word the introduction (i.e. ethnic cleansing or population transfer at this prominently visible position of the article) to a wider group of wikipedians. For instance by inviting them in the Village Pump or in Wikipedia:Requests for comments.

What do you say about that?
--Ruhrjung 19:25, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Nico is wrong here. First, the word ethnic cleansing was invented 50 years later and usually refers to policies of burning down houses and expelling Muslims or Catholics from their territories during the war. In the circumstances after the WW2, the word population transfer was used. I don't see, why we should change our vocabulary, because of the other word was in use in different circumstances of Yugoslav war? The second, the 4 powers decided to make a population transfer and this was committed. It is very important to state legal base (Potsdam Agreement) in the header, because it explains what was decided and by whome. It is basically the only NPOV in current article. Did they ordered ethnic cleansing? No, they decided to make population transfer. By the way, population transfer of Ukrainians from Poland to Ukraine, was completed during war famine in Ukraine (1945). Many fresh migrants immidiatelly died. Why there is no article about it? Do you think that only suffering of Germans matter? Cautious 15:00, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Shall this be understood as you not favoring going forward to the second step of wikipedia:dispute resolution?--Ruhrjung 20:58, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I like the way this paragraph looks now. Short, informative, unbiased.Halibutt 12:11, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I guess you mean:

Expulsion of Germans after World War II refers to the population transfer, of all remaining Germans, from outside post-WW2 border of Germany, agreed to at the Potsdam Conference.

Is this to be understood as NPOV, as a compromise or as an enforcement of Cautious' POV?

--Ruhrjung 12:27, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Population transfers

Like I explained many times before, my family suffered because of the "population transfer". They were forcefully expelled from Lwow to Upper Silesia. Compared to what they went through, the transfer of the german population was a "luxury ride". First of all only the lucky ones got to go west. Most were either sent to Siberia, slaughtered by UPA (Ukrainian Insurrection Army), or by NKVD. Then a month and a half train ride to the west, when two thirds died of starvation. Then, those "lucky ones" had to start their life from zero in the "no man's land" - lands stripped completely of anything of value by retreating Red Army, lands full of unmarked minefields and with Wehrwolf bands in the woods. Many expellees came to miss the UPA bands, who at least attacked the military targets first and only upon victory proceeded with slaughter of civilians. Wehrwolf NEVER attacked any military targets! Their only target was the defenseless civilian population, who was hoping for peace after six years of planned extermination. Then 40 years of comunism, with the Stalinist terror of 40'ties and 50'ties, when the "easterners" were constantly prosecuted for being the "enemies of the people", only because they remebered their homes on the wrong side of the Bug river.
It was still a POPULATION TRANSFER, not "ethnic cleansing". The idea was to avoid the horror of the ethnic cleansing of WW II when Nazi Germany conducted planned extermination of Jews, Gypsies, Poles, Ukrainians, Belarusians and Russians.
I've got much more to "say about that", but I could write for days.
Space Cadet 14:50, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Shall this be understood as you not favoring going forward to the second step of wikipedia:dispute resolution?--Ruhrjung 20:58, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Both population transfers were conducted by the Polish regime, so I'm not convinced, that they made it a 'living hell' for their own people, and a 'luxury ride' for Germans. Also, the freshly arrived Polish population of the so called 'Recovered Territories' was treated much better not worse than the rest of the country. Pay was higher, special funds were issued to those families, grants were issued to educational institutions, all this effort to reward those 'brave Poles' directly involved in 'repolonisation' of former Eastern Germany.

On the other hand, I agree that ethnic cleansing is totally inappropriate.Rübezahl 16:23, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Of course, the people resettled to the Recovered territories were awarded with special treatment, but all of this happened much later. At first it was really a desert, sort of a no-mans-land. The Soviets stole all that was left to steal and the Soviet army was the only law on the area. Polish adminstration wasn't really well-established until 1948 when the Soviets withdrew all the front-line troops. At first the only "pro" of moving to the West was that the forced parcellation and land reform law was slightly more liberal there to encourage settlement. ut the way people were transfered from Lwów or Wilno to Wroclaw or Szczecin was much worse than the transfer from Stettin to Rostock - note the distance.. Other than that both transfers were cruel, unjust and done in a brutal way.Halibutt 17:52, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I don't really feel for any comparisons. And my knowledge of that, which above is called population transfer of Poles is close to nil. However, I wonder if the way Poles in the east were treated by Ukrainians was equally harsh as how Germans were treated by Poles (at this point in history, n.b.!, before, it had been Germans, both many common Germans, German estate holders and German authorities, who'd treated Poles in a way we now must be ashamed over), if equally many Poles were beaten up, slayn and shot - or just simply died from the injuries after the neighbours having demonstrated their supremacy? It was also not any particularly short distance from East-Prussia to the internation camps on the other side of Oder, and it is a considerable difference between being chased away from one's farm, one's crofter's holding, one's house or one's flat without having anywhere to go to, or being transferred to a new farm, even if the latter is nothing but a piece of land.
--Ruhrjung 20:58, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"if equally many Poles were beaten up, slayn and shot - or just simply died from the injuries after the neighbours having demonstrated their supremacy?"

I think the way you try to attempt to the problem in inapropriate. Poland 1945-47 was rather the hell then paradise, not only for Germans. The country was just conquered by Red Army, after being demolished to ashes by German Nazis. The ongoing guerilla lasted, people were arrested by security policy, Polish UB and Soviet NKVD , some were deprted to Kazakhstan. The country was also devastated by criminal bands, formed by young people derailed in the course of war. New Police called Milicja Obywatelska was formed from randomly taken people, some of them were former criminals. Only on this background, you can claim, that Germans were sometimes victims of events. Your statements about persecutions of Germans is based on one-blind-eye view/nationalistcly screwed view, that see only persecution of Germans, without taking into account the whole picture. Cautious 09:01, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Of course you are right about situation in post-war Poland, but nevertheless Germans were in some sense "special" victims. When reading about poist-war ideas of some people (one soviet officer whose whole family and all friends perished in Leningrad decided that it would be best to sterilise all men and woman, Jewish survivors also soemtimes were seeking revenge (although in less scale that one could expect), Poles had special kind of satisfaction seeing former oppressors in the reversed role. Taking into account what _happened_ and thinking that Poles would not take some kind of revenge, while idealistic, is unrealistic and does not take into account human nature. Szopen

Szopen

However, informations about human suffering should be put with true background. Otherwise this is only propaganda. Cautious 11:40, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I believe you have to substantiate your claim of me having a nationalist agenda. I think this was an allegation aiming at no other purpose than making me disappointed in you.--Ruhrjung 10:51, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ruhrjung, I don't think you have a nationalist agenda, I suppose you are not well informed. Cautious 11:40, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

What do you mean "nil" ? I can't remember total numbers, but it was definetely few millions of people. Szopen

I mean: "I know nothing about".--Ruhrjung 10:51, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Copied from Talk:Gdansk

The following is copied from Talk:Gdansk:

    Djiekuje bardzo,

copied by: Ruhrjung 21:21, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Have you read those numbers above? They are all guesswork, based of some dubious statistical data. One of the very suspicious facts, about those calculations is they were written by German historians, in the period when W.Germany and Poland didn't recongnized each other. They fail minimal scrutiny as the historical proof. Cautious 09:05, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

(.No, of cours not! Why bother with reading? Isn't it enough to cause as much disturbance as possible?.)--Ruhrjung 10:51, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ruhrjung, I read all those numbers. I made a detail analysys of some historians findings. The problem with me is that I am a sceptical person. Those findings are very dubious and contradict each other. First of all, they are based on statistics that is not trustworthy. I am not denying, that there were some victims, but I doubt in milions. Do you know how complicate it is to actually kill 1 milion people?? It needs hard proof to make me believe. Cautious 11:47, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The numbers seem dubious indeed. The civilian losses during the war might've been really high, even as high as 2 millions (see: Soviet seizure of Danzig that was shelled for several days after the German troops withdrew). However, we need some proof of the existence of some policy of extermination of Germans after the war. There should be some mass graves, some mixed Polish-German commitee for taking care of those graves and German places of martyrdom.Halibutt 12:09, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia dispute resolution, the next step?

No, I'm fine with step two.Space Cadet 23:12, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Good, then let's see how long time it lasts until User:Cautious has considered the issue. Maybe a word from User:Nico and User:Darkelf would be best waiting for?--Ruhrjung 10:51, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I am in favour of step 2, meaning including the persons not involved in the current dispute. I agree on condition, those should be either Russians or Jews or Armenians. I propose users Mikkalai, Viki Rozenzweig and Danny. Cautious 11:47, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Accordingly, Nico should be banned from discussion. Cautious 11:57, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Accordingly to what? --Ruhrjung 16:02, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Incorrect Info

The following information is incorrect:

The remaining German minority in Poland (152,897 people according to the 2002 census) is granted full minority rights and the German language is the official language of several German-populated powiats, mostly in the Opole voivodship.

I propose the following instead:

The remaining German minority in Poland (152,897 people according to the 2002 census) is still awaiting formal recognition of minority rights as a minority law has not been introduced by the Polish parliament yet. There are German speakers throughout Poland, but only the vojvodship of Opole/Oppeln has a larger concentration. There are a few inofficial bilingual signs in some of the smaller towns of the Opole/Oppeln region. In addition there are some bilingual schools and in a few towns German can sometimes be used besides Polish in dealings with officials on a lower level at the discretion of local council officials. However Western European standards of minority protection including universal bilingual topography, use of the language in courts and in dealings with all government officials as well as bilingual education for the entire population remain unfulfilled.

The following information should be added for the "Czech Republic":

There are about 40 000 Germans remaining in the Czech Republic. Their number has been consistently decreasing since World War II. The Czech Republic has introduced a law in 2002 that guarantees the use of native minority languages (incl.German)as official languages in municipalities where autochthonous linguistic groups make up at least 10% of the population. Besides the use in dealings with officials and in courts the law also allows for bilingual signage and guarantees education in the native language. The law so far only exists on paper and has not been implemented anywhere, neither in the Polish speaking Tesin/Cieszyn area nor in Western and Northern Bohemia where a hand full of towns still have in excess of 10% German speakers.